Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Nighthawks is now open

2

Comments

  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,276
    Dave should sack Miller overnight to pre-empt any calls from Ed to sack her and allow the saga to continue. The expenses scandal had been kind to the Tories until now. It will become a toxic issue for them if Dave doesn't sack her.

    As always, it's never the crime but the cover up (or attempted in this case) that's the killer. Miller should not have been waving her control of the Levenson inquiry around like a chump to shut the press down on the story. If she hadn't she would have repaid the money and the country would have moved on by now. Instead it has dominated the agenda and drowned out a lot of genuinely good news like the IMF upgrades and the good manufacturing production figures.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    Lansley doing almost as well as his cheerleader Avery would against Paxo. Digging away furiously now. Great stuff. :)
  • Stuart_DicksonStuart_Dickson Posts: 3,557
    HYUFD said:

    StuartDickson Well Beyond Salmond who do the Nats have? John Swinney makes Alistair Darling look exciting

    Ho ho. You still think this is all about the SNP do you? Jeepers.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,409
    All this talk about BOT ignores the fact that even some SNP voters will vote No, while Labour voters will vote YES. Scottish Tories and LDs will be massively NO, and indeed Annabelle Goldie would be an effective NO spokesman too, Scottish Tories are probably campaigning harder for NO than Labour
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,267
    George Robertson on STV just now saying that he was right that devolution will kill 'the Nationalists', only it's going to take a bit longer than he thought. Was this guy always a fcuking idiot or has he been afflicted with some IQ destroying, neurological disease?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,087
    @SeanT and others.

    As a Conservative (and Unionist) I believe strongly in the Union but I recognise that if a majority of Scots want to secede then so be it. The Union is just past 300 years old, long enough but not since the dawn of time long. As for the different prospects for the Cons in rUK elections as you will be aware, it is a mixed bag with by no means a bolted on majority should the Scottish MPs disappear.

    So what's the issue? Why so keen on the Union? Isn't that over-ruled by the will of the people? I believe it is. If they want to go, then good luck to them. If Lab want not to work for the Union either, then of course there is the issue of giving up an advantage in electoral terms but if they have made that decision then fine.

    Of course putting my partisan hat on I would say that Lab are hopeless enough not to have thought this through or to have been complacent about it but it is what it is.
  • compouter2compouter2 Posts: 2,371
    Mick_Pork said:

    Lansley doing almost as well as his cheerleader Avery would against Paxo. Digging away furiously now. Great stuff. :)

    I don't think I was far off with my post that has since been deleted with this poor effort of defence.
  • old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,238
    And there is your problem. Eden and MacMillan who did well in Scotland during the 50s would not have suggested such a thing as a bedroom tax in a million years.

    If the vote is a narrow 'Yes' could a £50 million cut be the thing that scuppers the union?

    Do not forget the Tories and their little Lib Dem helpers have refused to transfer that power to the Scottish government despite it saying they would underwrite the cost.

    It looks to me that there are English Tories who would be quite happy to see the back of Scotland even if it means throwing their Scottish supporters under the bus.

    Evening all and just catching up.

    On Sean T's point, I should not insult my fellow countrymen but sadly a great many are "thick" and believe anything Eck says including that his money trees are more fruitful than those of the 2 Eds. He has already promised to abolish the "bedroom tax" and is currently using Scottish tax receipts to subsidise councils to prevent it. He is promising all sorts of benefits English people don't get and he is believed.

    On Rod' point about Peers, anyone appointed to the Peerage since 1800 holds a UK Peerage. Queen Anne was the last monarch to grant Scottish Peerages. Accordingly we already have had several Life Peers sit in Holyrood as MSPs. Baroness Bella is currently there on the Tory team as was Lord James Douglas-Hamilton aka the Earl of Selkirk aka Lord Selkirk of Douglas to use his courtesy, hereditary and life peerages. Lord Watson of Invergowrie, the Labour peer also sat as an MSP.

    Life Peers cannot sit in the House of Commons but they can sit in any of the other UK legislatures as far as I know.

    I would expect a great many Scots would elect to apply for Scottish passports AND keep their British citizenship. Apart from anything it would mean they would remain EU 'citizens'. There would be nothing to stop any of us holding joint nationality.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,409
    Easterross Your comments confirm the impact of Scottish YCs
  • Eh_ehm_a_ehEh_ehm_a_eh Posts: 552
    HYUFD said:

    Personally, I hope there is a mass Union rally a week or so before the vote as happened in Quebec in 1995 when 100,000 Canadians flocked to the province, it may have tipped the balance in a race which ended 51-49 against Quebec independence

    Singing O Canada in French and waving the Maple Leaf might have worked.

    Belting out God save the Queen and waving union flags? Hmm, happens once a fortnight in Govan and it's not well received by most scots.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Cor Blimey, those sweaty socks dah'nt know whats good for them

    etc

    The mockney is being an unusually useful idiot today. There are lots and lots of things he and his chums don't realise. Which is great for Scotland's chances of winning.
  • George Robertson on STV just now saying that he was right that devolution will kill 'the Nationalists', only it's going to take a bit longer than he thought. Was this guy always a fcuking idiot or has he been afflicted with some IQ destroying, neurological disease?

    That was a new low in a day when he's already made a complete tit of himself.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,409
    Sean T Indeed, though it seems Galloway would rather focus on his 'justsayNaw' tour than join the Tories and Labour in the official BOT camp, but every bit helps!
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,587



    I may be wrong but I'm sure he once said his pension from his five year spell in Goverment entitles him to a £20,000 pension, beyond the dreams of people who pay in for life let alone five years.

    Yes, you're wrong, I'm afraid. You seem to be under the impression that I was only in Parliament for 5 years?



    So what actually is your position on Indy then Nick - yes, no, please don't ask me ?

    I hope they'll decide to stay British. But it doesn't actually seem to me my business, and to answer SeanT, I wouldn't campaign furiously purely on party grounds. If the Scots want to be separate, I'd be sorry, and obviously it makes life a bit harder for socialists in Britain, but ultimately people should belong where they want. If asked, I'd go up and put a unionist view, but essentially I think we should respect them doing whatever they decide they want.

  • EasterrossEasterross Posts: 1,915
    HYUFD said:

    Stuart Dickson, Galloway won Glasgow Hillhead off Roy Jenkins, and shock victories against Labour in Bradford and Bethnal Green, don't talk rubbish, yes he is not always successful, but neither have Salmonds election campaigns been successful either (and Salmond leads one of the big 2 parties in Scotland)

    Small point but George Galloway defeated Roy Jenkins in Glasgow Hillhead which was very different from the constituency Roy won at the 1982 by-election. The boundary changes added in 2 very solidly Labour wards to the 4 former Tory wards making the seat a marginal Labour one on paper having been a marginal Tory one in its former format. Galloway was the official Labour candidate and had been one of the most high profile Labour councillors in Scotland given his behaviour in Dundee.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,087

    Yes, you're wrong, I'm afraid. You seem to be under the impression that I was only in Parliament for 5 years? I hope they'll decide to stay British. But it doesn't actually seem to me my business, and to answer SeanT, I wouldn't campaign furiously purely on party grounds. If the Scots want to be separate, I'd be sorry, and obviously it makes life a bit harder for socialists in Britain, but ultimately people should belong where they want. If asked, I'd go up and put a unionist view, but essentially I think we should respect them doing whatever they decide they want.

    Oh no!

    Agreeing with you Nick....
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    SeanT said:



    But then, look at the comments underneath: all about the euros, nothing about indyref. That's the problem, the Labour movement at large still doesn't believe, or doesn't want to believe, that there is a large fire in their garden shed which could burn down the entire house.

    It's not that the Labour grassroots don't believe it. My sense is people very much are starting to believe Scotland might go independent. It's just we don't really care that much. As I and others have kept saying to you, the effect on Labour of Scotland going in purely political terms just wouldn't be that significant--again, the facts speak for themselves that, with the exception of the boost they got in 2010 with a Scottish leader, Scotland isn't particularly more Labour-inclined than the rest of the UK. And your argument that Scotland is historically the spiritual homeland or heartland of Labour doesn't really stand up either (Wales has much more of a case for that). While on balance most of us would probably prefer Scotland to stay (part of the reason for that is, yes, the fact it would make Labour MARGINALLY more likely to win elections), if they decide differently then good luck to them, and the world will keep turning.
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,754

    That is not what I was thinking of, but funnily enough you are on the right track. A TB entrance would be terrific, but what I'm hoping for is 100 times better. It could lead to a real rout for the BritNats. The chances of them doing it are slim, but there are precedents.

    Hmm, that's intriguing. The one person I can think of is Boris Johnson. From what I've seen of their propaganda, the Scots Nats do seem to have some bizarre obsession with the bloke that is utterly disproportionate to his relevance to Scotland - some sort of English/Tory bogeyman I guess.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530

    And there is your problem. Eden and MacMillan who did well in Scotland during the 50s would not have suggested such a thing as a bedroom tax in a million years.

    If the vote is a narrow 'Yes' could a £50 million cut be the thing that scuppers the union?

    Do not forget the Tories and their little Lib Dem helpers have refused to transfer that power to the Scottish government despite it saying they would underwrite the cost.

    It looks to me that there are English Tories who would be quite happy to see the back of Scotland even if it means throwing their Scottish supporters under the bus.

    Some of us do actually recall the somewhat curious circumstances under which Cammie's chosen one Ruth became SCON leader. You know who else probably remembers that? Murdo and Carlaw for a start. SLAB are not the only ones allowed little to no real autonomy.
  • Hmm, that's intriguing. The one person I can think of is Boris Johnson. From what I've seen of their propaganda, the Scots Nats do seem to have some bizarre obsession with the bloke that is utterly disproportionate to his relevance to Scotland - some sort of English/Tory bogeyman I guess.
    In so many ways, I would enjoy a BoJo entrance to indyref very much. I'd get the crisps in for BoJo v Salmond. Sadly unlikely.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,661
    Danny565 said:

    It's not that the Labour grassroots don't believe it. My sense is people very much are starting to believe Scotland might go independent. It's just we don't really care that much. As I and others have kept saying to you, the effect on Labour of Scotland going in purely political terms just wouldn't be that significant--again, the facts speak for themselves that, with the exception of the boost they got in 2010 with a Scottish leader, Scotland isn't particularly more Labour-inclined than the rest of the UK. And your argument that Scotland is historically the spiritual homeland or heartland of Labour doesn't really stand up either (Wales has much more of a case for that). While on balance most of us would probably prefer Scotland to stay (part of the reason for that is, yes, the fact it would make Labour MARGINALLY more likely to win elections), if they decide differently then good luck to them, and the world will keep turning.
    I find that even more depressing to be honest. I will wish the Scots well if they decide on independence (after my initial reaction of bitterness I imagine, in the immediate aftermath), but the idea that people just don't really care all that much, that they might prefer Scotland stay but if it doesn't it has no real effect, is upsetting to me. It shows how few genuine Unionists there are, apparently, because for me, the Union is an important part of my national identity, my dual identity as English and British, and while we can be successful, happy nations apart, emotionally Scotland splitting from rUk would strike to my core.

    Boiling it down to electoral advantages, or a general sense of 'oh well it'd be nice to keep the UK, but if it breaks up then it's no big deal', should be worrisome for Unionists, as it demonstrates how little actual affection there is for the Union. Preference, perhaps, but not actual emotional connection.


  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,587
    Danny565 said:


    While on balance most of us would probably prefer Scotland to stay (part of the reason for that is, yes, the fact it would make Labour MARGINALLY more likely to win elections), if they decide differently then good luck to them, and the world will keep turning.

    Exactly.

    I'm a bit curious about the loathing I seem to engender in some here - not SeanT, who is an old sparring partner, but Nigel and the new chap who thinks I made a million quid when an MP. It's a blog, fellows, and we're having a friendly chat. Chill.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,661


    It looks to me that there are English Tories who would be quite happy to see the back of Scotland even if it means throwing their Scottish supporters under the bus.

    I suspect you are right about that. I'm not even a Tory and I find that mildly appalling, as Unionism seems like one of the few red lines that the parties, in ther ever evolving attitudes and attempts to occupy the centre ground by jumping all over the political spectrum, should not be crossed for Tories, but it takes all sorts to make a party I suppose.

    One argument I do despise is the 'I may support unionism but ultimately it's none of our business' one. It may not be as much of our business as those actually able to cast a vote, but we are still currently one nation made of other nations, and so it is also the business of everyone else, supporters or not. No-one need feel obliged to offer an opinion on the subject or attack or defend the Union, but that doesn't mean the decision of the Scottish people is not the business, that is to say of interest to and worthy of comment from, the rest of the nation.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,661
    SeanT said:

    Nope. This is not a friendly chat.
    A civilized chat then.
  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    A rabid rant?

    PB....always entertaining,seldom enlightening.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,087
    SeanT said:

    My blog is online, as is traditional with blogs. It is also link number 8 above.

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/seanthomas/100266761/if-scotland-leaves-we-can-blame-heath-letwin-cameron-and-labour/

    It now has 850 comments.

    My bit of this war is in the cybertrenches, I trust you unionist Scots to get out there and fight the ground war.

    But if NPXMP is anything to go by, today, this war is probably lost. Effete lefty europhiles like him have no love for Britain - or indeed Scotland or England - they drift happily from overpaid nonjob to overpaid nonjob, in Zurich or Munich, Manchester or Marseilles, it makes no difference to them; they are secure in their pensions, they can profitably fret about hamsters more than humans, windmills more than western prosperity.

    And it is our lot to be governed by these wretched, unutterable mediocrities. Perhaps we deserve it.
    You're losing it Sean, calm down. Or is there something in the NW water? The Scots want to be independent. Big deal. We are all free market capitalists here, let them have independence.
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    Brexit prize winner announced.

    http://www.iea.org.uk/in-the-media/press-release/iain-mansfield-named-winner-of-€100000-iea-brexit-prize
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,661
    TOPPING said:

    You're losing it Sean, calm down. Or is there something in the NW water? The Scots want to be independent. Big deal. We are all free market capitalists here, let them have independence.
    It is absolutely a big deal. They can have it if they want it, and I suspect a majority will vote that way, but the end of an era is still significant, and while those who would prefer the status quo do not have the right to deny a majority that which they desire, they do have the right to freak out about it.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    Smarmeron said:

    A rabid rant?

    PB....always entertaining,seldom enlightening.

    Gertcha! Mashed potatoes.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5BV8KfpE3BA
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    "George Galloway Makes Mincemeat Of Maria Miller on BBC Question":

    www.youtube.com/watch?v=wal6FNNEo4Y
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,087
    kle4 said:

    I suspect you are right about that. I'm not even a Tory and I find that mildly appalling, as Unionism seems like one of the few red lines that the parties, in ther ever evolving attitudes and attempts to occupy the centre ground by jumping all over the political spectrum, should not be crossed for Tories, but it takes all sorts to make a party I suppose.

    One argument I do despise is the 'I may support unionism but ultimately it's none of our business' one. It may not be as much of our business as those actually able to cast a vote, but we are still currently one nation made of other nations, and so it is also the business of everyone else, supporters or not. No-one need feel obliged to offer an opinion on the subject or attack or defend the Union, but that doesn't mean the decision of the Scottish people is not the business, that is to say of interest to and worthy of comment from, the rest of the nation.
    Sorry to espouse an argument you despise but the Union was established in 1707 for reasons that escape me. Some of the Scots really really really want to go it alone. I am part of a recently formed (300 years) nation and can see this point of view.

    I don't have much sympathy for the outcome but I have sympathy for the desire. Why are you getting so het up about it? Re-reading (god help me) your post it doesn't really make sense, I'm afraid:

    "that doesn't mean the decision of the Scottish people is not the business....of the rest of the nation..."

    Really?
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    From the Tele article about Skint Scotland..




    The economists have also poured more water on Alex Salmond’s plans to continue to share the pound with the rest of the UK. The NIESR argued that sterling is “inalienable to the UK government in the sense that it is part of its history and depends upon the ongoing support of the UK government”.

    The report adds: “Reputations are incomplete contracts because they can be partly shared but they cannot be transferred. It is simply not possible for the continuing UK government to transfer part of this reputational value to another government even if it were inclined to do so.”
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,087
    SeanT said:

    It is also delusional. Losing Scotland would be far more destructive to Labour than he realises. But if he wishes to delude himself, fair enough.

    Here are three examples.

    1. After a Scottish exit, Wales would swiftly follow, at least into autonomy, and the clamour for an English parliament would be irresistible. Does anyone doubt that an England, shorn of Scotland (and maybe Wales) would be totally dominated by London and the southeast, and would be significantly more rightwing? If they do doubt this, they are arrant fools.

    2 . rUK is much more likely to leave the EU. Scotland will have set the example: you can leave the 300 year old British Union! Leaving the 50 year old, much baggier EU will look like kids play by contrast. The threats of big business and the rest will be shrugged off - they said the same about Scotland. Is that what lefties want?

    3. Scotland isn't more Labour than Britain as a whole?? What is he on? Scotland provides 40+ MPs, reliably. Do the maths. If Scotland leaves, within 5-10 years England will be governed by a Tory-UKIP alliance which will take us out of the EU.




    How would you best like to organise the UK, Sean?
  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    If they had listened to my "Independence for the South East" campaign back in the seventies, none of this would be necessary.

    Apathetically yours....etc,
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited April 2014
    Fop triumph.


    Millie ‏@Millie_77 43m

    180,000 signatures... Maria Miller MP: Either pay back £45,000 in fraudulent expense claims or resign. http://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/maria-miller-mp-either-pay-back-45-000-in-fraudulent-expense-claims-or-resign/ via @UKChange

    Julia Hartley-Brewer ‏@JuliaHB1

    One for you, Maria Miller: a letter in today's @telegraph about MPs' expenses. Says it all. pic.twitter.com/GJAXtObfbH
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,409
    EhAhemEhAhem Generations of Scots have died fighting for the Union flag from the Napolenic wars on. The Queen is herself part Scottish, a direct descendant of the ancient Scot Kings, and her love for the country is evident from her stays at Balmoral
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,087
    kle4 said:

    It is absolutely a big deal. They can have it if they want it, and I suspect a majority will vote that way, but the end of an era is still significant, and while those who would prefer the status quo do not have the right to deny a majority that which they desire, they do have the right to freak out about it.
    I think you have answered your own question here.

    And as a matter of interest, have you been to Scotland (perhaps you live there?) to campaign to maintain the Union?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,661
    TOPPING said:

    Sorry to espouse an argument you despise but the Union was established in 1707 for reasons that escape me. Some of the Scots really really really want to go it alone. I am part of a recently formed (300 years) nation and can see this point of view.

    I don't have much sympathy for the outcome but I have sympathy for the desire. Why are you getting so het up about it? Re-reading (god help me) your post it doesn't really make sense, I'm afraid:

    "that doesn't mean the decision of the Scottish people is not the business....of the rest of the nation..."

    Really?
    Yes, really. I do not see what was unclear in my post in trhe slightest, and I make rambling unclear posts all the time. I will attempt to make it clearer.

    I do not begrudge the wishes of many (possibly a majority) of Scots for independence, nor those who do not feel the same affinity for the Union that I do.

    When I say the decision of the Scottish people is still the business (that is, of interest to) the rest of the nation, I mean that, currently, we still live in a United Kingdom, of which the events in one are very much of interest to the rest.

    Perhaps I can put it even simpler than that? A decision to end the union between Scotland the rest of the UK, is self evidently and appropriately of interest to everyone in the UK.

    To say that the Scottish referendum result of not the business of anyone but the Scots is absurd, because the impact of the result, either way, hits every part of the UK.

    That is why I despise the argument that it is not 'our business' and so who cares? Because it is untrue. You may personally not care about the outcome, or you may have a preference, either way you are entitled to that view, but the idea that a significant event in one part of the UK is not the business of the rest of the UK is logical I cannot get my head around.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,409
    SeanT As I posted yesterday Labour's vote ROSE in Scotland in 2010 due to Brown's home advantage, under Miliband yougov shows Labour's vote has fallen 6% in Scotland since 2010, with most going to the SNP, but the Tories also rising 2%. With Cameron more Scottish than Miliband (his ancestors fought with the Bruce) Scotland should swing slightly to the Tories in 2015, even as the rest of the UK swings to Labour, and Labour's advantage would be clearly less than 40 seats if it stays in the union
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,409
    As I also post
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,409
    As I also posted several times Labour would still have wom most of its postwar victories in England alone
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    Tom Copley ‏@tomcopley 52m

    Betty Boothroyd "disagreeably surprised" that Maria Miller has not resigned - a "matter of honour" http://tinyurl.com/n35pq55
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,661
    TOPPING said:

    Sorry to espouse an argument you despise but the Union was established in 1707 for reasons that escape me. Some of the Scots really really really want to go it alone. I am part of a recently formed (300 years) nation and can see this point of view.

    I don't have much sympathy for the outcome but I have sympathy for the desire. Why are you getting so het up about it? Re-reading (god help me) your post it doesn't really make sense, I'm afraid:

    I take no issue that some Scots want to go it alone. I wish the Union were not unfit for purpose, or that it is perceived as such, but I don't believe I have given any indication I do not understand why many Scots want independence, or why many other Brits may support that. I would be interested in seeing which of my words gave you an indication i could not see this point of view or have sympathy for the desire, as that would be unclear language on my point. evidently.

    As for why I am getting so het up about it, now I am confused because I do not believe I could have been any clearer. I support the Union. I feel my dual identity as English and British to be very important to me personally. Therefore, I care about the result of the Scottish referendum. I do not argue I should have a vote, and I do not begrudge the Yes side for fighting it out with all their hearts, and I do not bedgrudge those who do not have love for the Union and so will not fight to defend it. I wish they thought differently, but it's a valid opinion

    What I object to, and continue to object to, is the claim that the referendum result is not the business of anyone besides the Scots. The vote is their business alone, their responsibility, but the rest of the UK can choose to be very emotionally invested in the result if they want. I choose to be, you choose not to be. Equally valid choices, but the argument put forth by several people here tonight that it is not the business of anyone besides the Scots indirectly says that my opinion is therefore not valid.
  • old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,238
    He is trending on twitter. Not a good sign.

    George Robertson on STV just now saying that he was right that devolution will kill 'the Nationalists', only it's going to take a bit longer than he thought. Was this guy always a fcuking idiot or has he been afflicted with some IQ destroying, neurological disease?

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,409
    If Scotland leaves, what about Wales, then Cornwall? Where next. Internationally too separatist movements would get a boost. Quebec could well get new momentum to split from Canada. Catalonia, the Basque country, Venice, Flanders, Bavaria all would get ideas, even Texas. Parts of China and Russia too, and the Crimea would be just the start, never mind the Middle East. What about Zulu and Afrikaans nations in South Africa ?
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    edited April 2014
    SeanT said:

    Here are three examples.

    (snip)

    1. I definitely do doubt it, for the very reason that Scotland isn't particularly more Labour-inclined than the rest of the UK (of which, more later...)

    2. I don't really care about the EU either, or think being in the EU or not makes any real difference either way. I have the same kind of opinion on that as on Scottish independence -- on balance, I would probably prefer the status quo purely so as not to take a risk when it doesn't seem to me that there's even any real advantages on offer from the alternative, but I wouldn't lose much sleep if it went the other way.

    3. Scotland isn't MUCH more Labour than the rest of the UK, usually. You're taking the 2010 result as the norm, when it's anything but. As I said the other day, look at the 1997,2001 and 2005 elections -- in all of them, Labour's share of the vote in Scotland was only a few % above their UK-wide share, and it was LOWER than their shares in Wales, every part of northern England, and even the Midlands.

    To take your point about Scotland being Labour's spiritual heartland, you seem to be assuming that (Red) Clydeside is representative of the whole of Scotland. Actually, there's quite a lot of culturally conservative parts (they might have stopped voting Tory since Thatcher, but before that, the "One Nation" Tories who offered compassionate economic policies along with social conservatism were quite a good fit), and the trade union movement and heavy industry never really embedded itself in large parts of rural Scotland. Compare that to Wales, where the trade union movement virtually swept through everywhere, which meant Labour's advantage was much more entrenched there than it ever was in Scotland.

    So, losing Wales would be a bigger psychological blow to Labour than Scotland I think (I take your point that the demand for Welsh independence COULD possibly follow on from Scottish independence). I mean, just look at the election history: in Wales, Labour have won EVERY election of any kind since WW1 bar ONE, the Euro elections in '09 when at their absolute nadir when they were marginally shaded by the Tories. Compare that to Scotland, where they were getting beaten by the Tories in general elections up until the 1950s and where they've been regularly losing non-general elections to the SNP in recent years.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Yes, where would Scotland be, if it were not for the South Sudanese, Eritreans and Montenegrins?


    HYUFD said:

    If Scotland leaves, what about Wales, then Cornwall? Where next. Internationally too separatist movements would get a boost. Quebec could well get new momentum to split from Canada. Catalonia, the Basque country, Venice, Flanders, Bavaria all would get ideas, even Texas. Parts of China and Russia too, and the Crimea would be just the start, never mind the Middle East. What about Zulu and Afrikaans nations in South Africa ?

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,409
    Easterross Maybe, but Woy was one of the biggest heavyweights of the early eighties
  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @HYUFD

    Smaller countries are more easily maneuvered by big companies....Capitalism, "you know it makes sense"
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530

    He is trending on twitter. Not a good sign.

    But hilarious nonetheless.

    PeatWorrier ‏@PeatWorrier 1h

    On #Scotnight, George Robertson warns militant, drilled & well-armed Clangers may brutalise our lowland towns after a Yes vote.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,409
    One thing that also should not be forgotten is that passion will not win the referendum. 35-40% of Scots are passionately for independence, 45% generally against, it is the 15-20% in the middle who will decide the election, and at the moment they lean NO
  • Eh_ehm_a_ehEh_ehm_a_eh Posts: 552
    HYUFD said:

    EhAhemEhAhem Generations of Scots have died fighting for the Union flag from the Napolenic wars on. The Queen is herself part Scottish, a direct descendant of the ancient Scot Kings, and her love for the country is evident from her stays at Balmoral

    When older relatives of mine recalled their wartime memories, not one mentioned the King or a flag.
    Don't believe the dewy eyed stories of King/Queen and country.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,661
    edited April 2014
    TOPPING said:

    My father used to live there, but no I have not been there to campaign. Quite aside from the practicalities of doing so, I take no issue with arguments that those on the ground there, the parties and groups within Scotland, are the best placed to convince the public there, if they start being more positive at least.

    For my part, were I to hope that my efforts in anything would have an effect, it would be to counter the apathy for the Union in my own neck of the woods, England, as apathy for it in the largest nation, or hostility to the union in it, hardly bodes well for encouraging the rest of the nations to remain together. If more people in each nation desire the UK to remain together, it would happen. That few care in England is therefore a big problem.Many people in England might wish for Scottish Independence, not for the positive reasons of thinking it's good for Scotland (though many in England also support that view), but because they want to get rid of it. I would hope to challenge that, but I do not anticipate that, as obviously commenting on the internet has no impact. Nevertheless, I try to express my support for the Union in whatever small way I can.

    We shall be strong, friendly nations when we are apart, but it's a shame it has apparently become necessary to split because either the Union is not fit for purpose, or no-one can see the benefit of it (in which case it is also not fit for purpose).

    Really I am just annoyed at the idea that the decision is not a big deal. It very much is. Even if people do not care one way or another about the outcome, if Yes is successful it is a major change, a major change to the whole of the UK, therefore to suggest because some/many outside Scotland do not mind which way it goes it is not a big deal makes no sense. People can choose to be interested and/or emotionally invested or not, but either way it is still a big deal.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    Mike Smithson ‏@MSmithsonPB 1h

    It's been confirmed that the @ConHome Tory member survey on Maria Miller has 82% saying she should go. PMQs could be interesting tomorrow

    Sunny Hundal ‏@sunny_hundal 1h

    On #Newsnight, Andrew Lansley implies Maria Miller didn't understand the rules set for MPs. Amazing.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    Could anybody tell me, is the yes and no vote at all split regionally in Scotland? If there is a Northern or Southern bias toward either option couldn't that be problematic post vote whatever the outcome?
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    The Maria Miller e-petition is fast approaching its 200,000 signatures target:

    https://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/maria-miller-mp-either-pay-back-45-000-in-fraudulent-expense-claims-or-resign
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    It's ironic really — 20 years ago everyone thought Quebec might become independent but certainly not Scotland. Now it's the other way round.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited April 2014
    isam said:

    Could anybody tell me, is the yes and no vote at all split regionally in Scotland? If there is a Northern or Southern bias toward either option couldn't that be problematic post vote whatever the outcome?

    The southern 20% of Scotland (in terms of population not area) is much more pro-Union than the rest of the country. And then you have Orkney & Shetland which are likely to vote No rather heavily.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,661
    Night all. Not sure how I ended up vainly flying the Union banner with SeanT, but that's politics for you. I think I'll try to avoid referendum debates in future, it's one of the few topics that gets me riled up and depressed. Either it's supremely confident Yes supporters, the don't care brigade, the purportedly unionist but not that concerned by the end of the union crowd, but the No side seems in trouble.

    Passion may not win the day alone, but it may tip the balance. HYUFD talks about those passionately in favour and those 'generally against', well the former seems a firmer group than the latter. And apparently many supposed Union supporters, even English Tories apparently, are not actually that concerned about the outcome, they are relaxed about it. A valid choice for someone to make, but it bodes ill for a No victory.

    I just hope the negotiations do not end up as bitter as they could be, and that an Independent Scotland and rUK can get through it with as little acrimony as can be achieved.
  • old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,238
    edited April 2014
    Funny that, but someone with a learning disability who makes a mistake on a benefits form can be slapped with a civil penalty.
    Mick_Pork said:

    Mike Smithson ‏@MSmithsonPB 1h

    It's been confirmed that the @ConHome Tory member survey on Maria Miller has 82% saying she should go. PMQs could be interesting tomorrow

    Sunny Hundal ‏@sunny_hundal 1h

    On #Newsnight, Andrew Lansley implies Maria Miller didn't understand the rules set for MPs. Amazing.

  • isam said:

    Could anybody tell me, is the yes and no vote at all split regionally in Scotland? If there is a Northern or Southern bias toward either option couldn't that be problematic post vote whatever the outcome?

    The overall vote will decide but in the '97 devo referendum, full breakdown by local authority was reported.
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    @kle4

    'Perhaps I can put it even simpler than that? A decision to end the union between Scotland the rest of the UK, is self evidently and appropriately of interest to everyone in the UK.

    To say that the Scottish referendum result of not the business of anyone but the Scots is absurd, because the impact of the result, either way, hits every part of the UK.'

    What proportion of the English (especially the Southern English) have ever set foot in Scotland? 10%?

    What mechanism do you propose to express this supposed 'interest'? A veto? A simultaneous vote valid if only both parts vote the same way? A loudhailer?
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    As a non-resident Yorkshireman married to an equally non-resident Glaswegian lass, we both feel that the UK without Scotland would be sad and unfortunate, but if that's what Scotland wants, then it should be free to secede from the union.
  • old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,238
    There have been questions about members of the Labour Party in Scotland not pounding the streets for 'No'. I think the answer might be that many of them are not too enamoured of the 'No' campaign themselves.
  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @old_labour

    We are all in it together though?
    It's just that the poorest are at the bottom of the cesspit.
  • old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,238
    I remember her on TV defending cutting off disability benefits to people with cancer after a year.
    Smarmeron said:

    @old_labour

    We are all in it together though?
    It's just that the poorest are at the bottom of the cesspit.

  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    AndyJS said:

    The southern 20% of Scotland (in terms of population not area) is much more pro-Union than the rest of the country. And then you have Orkney & Shetland which are likely to vote No rather heavily.
    Could there be a case for the uk govt offering uk citizenship to Scots that voted no to independence if yes wins? Personally I find it hard to understand why a Scottish person would vote no myself
  • Eh_ehm_a_ehEh_ehm_a_eh Posts: 552
    The biggest problem for the pro union camp is they cannot see the problem.
    It's Westminster. Not the tories,libdems or labour parties themselves.

    Westminster takes in mp's and detaches them from the rest of us.
    They forget who sent them in the first place.
    A system that creates Baron Martin of Springburn, beggars belief.

    Look up Springburn and see what Westminster has created.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,661
    edited April 2014
    RodCrosby said:

    @kle4

    'Perhaps I can put it even simpler than that? A decision to end the union between Scotland the rest of the UK, is self evidently and appropriately of interest to everyone in the UK.

    To say that the Scottish referendum result of not the business of anyone but the Scots is absurd, because the impact of the result, either way, hits every part of the UK.'

    What proportion of the English (especially the Southern English) have ever set foot in Scotland? 10%?

    What mechanism do you propose to express this supposed 'interest'? A veto? A simultaneous vote valid if only both parts vote the same way? A loudhailer?

    I really do not know why people seem to have trouble grasping my point. I am clearly worse at communication that I had feared.

    Several people were suggesting the outcome was not their business, be they pro-union or not, as it is a decision to be made by the Scots. I was merely pointing out that what happens in one part of the nation is relevant to the other and its citizens (yes, whether they have set foot in the other parts or not - though that will obviously inform how relevant a point they are able to make), so while the vote is for the Scots alone, it is still of interest to anyone in the rest of the nation who chooses to be interested in it. They can use a loudhailer if they want, they can stay silent, they can do what they want, but whichever way one falls on the side of the debate, be it yes, no, I don't care or not my place to say, it is simply not true to say it is not the business of anyone who is not a Scot. People may involve themselves as little or as much as they want, they may be really invested despite not being a Scot or they may not be invested at all despite being a Scot, but the outcome still affects everyone in the UK.

    I'll try again. Affects everyone in UK regardless of their opinion on the debate = means it is everyone's business to involve themselves as little or as much as they want, recognising that the views of the Scots who can vote is the most important part of the debate.
  • isam said:

    Could anybody tell me, is the yes and no vote at all split regionally in Scotland? If there is a Northern or Southern bias toward either option couldn't that be problematic post vote whatever the outcome?

    I suspect the split will be more East/West. The East will take the "I'm all right, Jack" position of not wanting to share its wealth with the West.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530

    There have been questions about members of the Labour Party in Scotland not pounding the streets for 'No'. I think the answer might be that many of them are not too enamoured of the 'No' campaign themselves.

    Hard to believe after Cammie and Osbrowne piling in so very helpfully. Maybe Eddie Izzard will do the trick.
  • SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    I see dozens of stories in the papers about "benefits" cheats. Nothing about the unfair "sanctions" imposed mainly on the most vulnerable (young kids,people with autism,etc).
    And as an afterthought, where exactly do they appear in those nice yellow boxes Avery posts? Unemployed, or just......missing?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,409
    SeanT It may be funny, but home advantage helps, eg Hague got an above average swing in Yorkshire, Howard and Kinnock in Wales. Miliband is a Jewish north London intellectual, hardly likely to appeal to the average Jock. Also, In 2005 without Scotland Labour's majority would only have fallen from 60 to 40, much less than the net benefit it got in 2010
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    It's pretty shocking what's happened to Hungary:

    http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-04-07/is-hungary-the-eu-s-only-dictatorship

    They basically fixed the election to get themselves back into power. And now this undemocratic government can issue an arrest warrant to get any Briton extradited there, without having to provide evidence to UK courts. Thanks to the EU.

    Seriously, Hungary, Italy, Greece. There's so many political basket cases in Europe. Why would we want to integrate with them?
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,320
    edited April 2014
    Nick, reading that post, I wouldn't bother if I was you as it doesn't really seem like your heart is in it. But your post has also clearly backed up Sean's point about the Westminster Labour party and its less than stellar performance in this debate. If you as a former elected MP to the Westminster Government of the United Kingdom don't think that part of the country breaking away isn't any of your business, then I have to wonder about your genuine commitment to that Parliament and what it represents at all.

    I hope they'll decide to stay British. But it doesn't actually seem to me my business, and to answer SeanT, I wouldn't campaign furiously purely on party grounds. If the Scots want to be separate, I'd be sorry, and obviously it makes life a bit harder for socialists in Britain, but ultimately people should belong where they want. If asked, I'd go up and put a unionist view, but essentially I think we should respect them doing whatever they decide they want.

  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    One of the problems my patients have is accessing benefits, and very often the same people are appalled at others getting the same benefits more easily. So the terminally ill denied benefits see someone else being signed off work for obesity, and indeed are much harder on the issue. Sadly, this happens all the time.
    Smarmeron said:

    I see dozens of stories in the papers about "benefits" cheats. Nothing about the unfair "sanctions" imposed mainly on the most vulnerable (young kids,people with autism,etc).
    And as an afterthought, where exactly do they appear in those nice yellow boxes Avery posts? Unemployed, or just......missing?

  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    SeanT said:

    Why don't you get your friends to beat them up until they realise they aren't Londoners, or Pakistanis, or whatever it was.
    Ah the old lefty smear tactics... So boring

    Are we working class Cornish or effete Londoner tonight?
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    HYUFD said:

    Miliband is a Jewish north London intellectual, hardly likely to appeal to the average Jock.

    You been drinking REALLY heavily have you? Get a f****ing grip for christ's sake. Dear, oh dear. When even SeanT is laughing at you take that as a sign you're getting hysterical.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,409
    KLE4 Those leaning No will vote with heads not hearts, which is where Yes still needs to make its case
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    edited April 2014
    @kle4

    I hope you haven't forgotten that The Union was the union of two independent, sovereign nations...

    It is surely incumbent on either of them to say "Well that was an interesting experiment, wasn't it? Now it's time to do our own thing again..."
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,409
    EhAhemEhAhem That would be the same in England, does not mean it was not a factor
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    fitalass said:

    Nick, reading that post, I wouldn't bother if I was you as it doesn't really seem like your heart is in it. But your post has also clearly backed up Sean's point about the Westminster Labour party and its less than stellar performance in this debate. If you as a former elected MP to the Westminster Government of the United Kingdom don't think that part of the country breaking away isn't any of your business, then I have to wonder about your genuine commitment to that Parliament and what it represents at all.

    For many it represents salaries that the majority of the electorate can only dream about, expenses, subsidised bars and restaurants, and for the fortunate few, power. Land a safe seat, and you can get away with doing bugger all, whilst lining your pockets and building up a portfolio of juicy and potentially lucrative contacts.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    Becoming a bit of a nuisance now, isn't it?



    Mark Russell ‏@markrusselluk 1h

    82% of Tory voters believe #MariaMiller should go according to @ConHome http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2014/04/four-out-of-five-tory-members-believe-that-maria-miller-should-quit-the-cabinet.html


    david white ‏@davidwhite020 1h

    A poll in Maria Miller's local paper is currently running 96% to 4% in favour of her resigning or being sacked. > http://www.basingstokegazette.co.uk/news/11129715.display/?ref=twtrec

    Trev Burnip ‏@trevburnip 10m

    Maria Miller used expenses to pay parents' council tax | via @Telegraph http://fw.to/6Tj6w1b > is there anything she hasn't claimed for?

    John Richards ‏@AWordIfIMay 1m

    @UKIPBexley: Nearly 200,000 people have signed the petition for Maria Miller MP to resign, have you? http://www.change.org/petitions/maria-miller-mp-either-pay-back-45-000-in-fraudulent-expense-claims-or-resign …”


    Winifred Okocha ‏@BroadcastBelle 2h

    "@TimMontgomerie: In a @ConHome poll for @TheTimes, 4 out of 5 Tory members say time is up for Maria Miller" really interesting poll
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,587
    isam said:

    Ah the old lefty smear tactics... So boring

    Are we working class Cornish or effete Londoner tonight?
    You guys are well confused. SeanT thinks HYUFD is a Labour supporter. isam accuses SeanT of lefty smear tactics. Go to bed - it'll maybe make sense in the morning...

  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    Here you go. When europhiles say, I'd like a clear plan for what an EU exit would look like, well here it is:

    http://www.iea.org.uk/in-the-media/press-release/iain-mansfield-named-winner-of-€100000-iea-brexit-prize

    Your go, Tory europhiles. What does renegotiation look like? I've heard sweet FA so far.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    I've got a bad feeling the referendum could end up being 50/50 with endless recounts going on for weeks.
  • old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,238
    George Robertson interview on Newsnight Scotland about NATO and Scottish independence. All I can say is, judge for yourself.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b040r0d3/Newsnight_Scotland_08_04_2014/
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    AndyJS said:

    I've got a bad feeling the referendum could end up being 50/50 with endless recounts going on for weeks.

    Better still, just give the English the casting vote...
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,409
    NP Indeed, I have never voted Labour in my life (although I did once vote LD locally and for Plaid Cymru when they stood most of the candidates), and was chairman of Warwick Uni Tories, but I do support the union, and the idea that Scotland is Labour's only lifeline from Tory rule is ridiculous and not borne out by the facts, Labour would still have won most of its victories even without any Scottish seats
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,409
    MickPork Well the polling evidence is clear, Miliband has lost 6% of Labour's vote in Scotland compared to what Brown won, even if it sounds laughable
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530

    George Robertson interview on Newsnight Scotland about NATO and Scottish independence. All I can say is, judge for yourself.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b040r0d3/Newsnight_Scotland_08_04_2014/

    Wee Georgie always was overfond of a tipple. I'm impressed he managed to stay upright with some of that swaying on camera. He also seems to have had some amusing form of memory loss whereby he has somehow forgotten he used to be against Trident. A "cataclysmic" memory loss even.

    LOL
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    HYUFD said:

    Labour would still have won most of its victories even without any Scottish seats.

    In an era when Labour were winning dozens of seats in the South, and the Tories dozens in Scotland...
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    HYUFD said:

    MickPork Well the polling evidence is clear, Miliband has lost 6% of Labour's vote in Scotland compared to what Brown won, even if it sounds laughable

    It doesn't sound laughable it sounds witless and hysterical.
    HYUFD said:

    Miliband is a Jewish north London intellectual, hardly likely to appeal to the average Jock.

    Where you get that cretinous stupidity from a general unpopularity that Miliband has everywhere I think we'd better leave to your own somewhat peculiar fixations.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    You guys are well confused. SeanT thinks HYUFD is a Labour supporter. isam accuses SeanT of lefty smear tactics. Go to bed - it'll maybe make sense in the morning...

    People that passively aggressively make accusations of racism to try and win arguments are generally lefties In my experience
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    RodCrosby said:

    In an era when Labour were winning dozens of seats in the South, and the Tories dozens in Scotland...
    No. In that long-gone era of 2005...
  • old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,238
    I feel a real idiot for failing to realise that Al Qaeda will be glued around a TV in some cave in Afghanistan waiting with bated breath for the Auchtermuchty result coming in.
    Mick_Pork said:

    Wee Georgie always was overfond of a tipple. I'm impressed he managed to stay upright with some of that swaying on camera. He also seems to have had some amusing form of memory loss whereby he has somehow forgotten he used to be against Trident. A "cataclysmic" memory loss even.

    LOL
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    BBC News (UK) ‏@BBCNews 21m

    Former Speaker Betty Boothroyd says Maria Miller should resign as a "question of honour" http://bbc.in/1k0Kw99 pic.twitter.com/xvb8rLbxnB
This discussion has been closed.