politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Without Scotland Labour’s general election challenge would
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Without Scotland Labour’s general election challenge would be greater, but not by that much
Following the weekend’s ICM Scottish poll people have begun to look more closely at what the impact in a general election might be if the 59 Scottish MPs were removed.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
http://newstonoone.blogspot.hu/2014/04/where-is-ukip-support-coming-from.html
The current assumption on all sides is that they will be elected as usual in May 2015 before leaving the Commons after the post-referendum negotiations conclude and Scotland becomes an officially independent country (24 March 2016 is the date slated by the SNP, just in time for the Scottish Parliamentary election on 5 May 2016).
http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/if-scots-vote-for-independence-their-mps-should-all-quit-says-tory-peer.23268534
If there were a vote for independence on September 18, Scotland would not leave the UK immediately. First Minister Alex Salmond has announced Scotland would become officially independent on March 24, 2016, with elections to the new Holyrood Parliament in May of that year.
This means Scottish MPs would not only continue to represent their Westminster constituencies up to the May 2015 General Election but for the 10 months thereafter.
http://tinyurl.com/
Incidentally, that was much the most stressful post so far. I can see how a book was written on the subject.
As with everything else, the date will be subject to negotiation, and is not something solely within the gift of the SNP.
Salmond chose to hold the referendum in September 2014 - the UK Government could choose to set the independence date in May 2015 - it would concentrate minds wonderfully.....
Currency, oil, share of the debt, defence etc etc.
Early days, of course, but there's been a poll of New Hampshire primary voters - http://cola.unh.edu/survey-center/clinton-alone-top-nh-no-gop-frontrunner-41814
Most people haven't decided who they'll support yet, unsurprisingly, but Clinton is definitely the leader among the Democrats, while the Republican field is much tighter. Most of us probably expected as much, but confirmation is nice.
On topic: I doubt Scotland will become independent on the date dictated by the SNP. There's a lot of negotiating to do, not least around the currency.
http://labourlist.org/2014/04/axelrod-thats-what-i-call-a-reality-check/
I'd expect Madrid in particular to be oppose them joining.
The most recent Welsh poll (february) has them placing 2nd in the EU Parliament elections.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Parliament_election,_2014_(United_Kingdom)#Welsh_polls
Then of course we have Catalonia, where Madrid has already tried to do a Kiev and declare their independence referendum unconstitutional putting it on collision course if the Catalans vote to go. Most of the "Scotland can't" objections over the pound and EU membership have as much to with Catalonia - which would gut Spain if it left - as it does Scotland. Democracy is revolution when properly applied, and the elite don't want to see their empire dismantled by anything as silly as free will. Which is why when people vote the Wong way on EU treaties they get invited to vote again the right way.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26304842
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/13/ukraine-uprising-fascist-coup-grassroots-movement
This totally neglects the emotional impact. Voters south of the border will vote for the Conservatives to negotiate hard, voters north of the border for the SNP.
I'd be quite happy to axe Scotland from the General Election or just suspend them, so incumbents remain until separation. Whatever happens with those constituencies, the MPs must not be able to influence policy, especially around negotiations, in the UK (assuming Yes wins).
Vision is a word beloved of those with nothing much to say. Indeed, it merits an aphorism comparable to Ralph Waldo Emerson’s classic: “The louder he spoke of his honour, the faster we counted our spoons.”
Nationalists and their “I am not a Nationalist” associates are very keen on “vision”, which they claim to possess in great abundance. Their wretched opponents, in contrast, are mired in the dull old world-as-it-is without the perspicacity to conjure up a glittering future.
Visionaries, by the nature of their calling, are allowed to make it up as they go along, unburdened by anything as tedious as evidence. Every objection can be overcome with the chastisement: “But you have no vision.” At which point, we are meant to shuffle off, defeated, to ponder our intellectual inadequacy.
http://www.scotsman.com/news/brian-wilson-why-scots-should-beware-the-v-word-1-3381566
removing Scotland makes the election less skewed towards Labour. At some point the rest of the imbalance will also have to move through 20 odd boundary changes and 8 welsh seats for over representation.
You will get independence - but it will not be on your terms.
Project Fib is a classic case of overpromising followed by under delivery. You can pencil in a century of twisted chippiness as expectations aren't met.
Usual rubbish from you, self interest will be the order of the day and everybody will need to sort it out quick. If not done in the spirit of the Edinburgh agreement then the markets will force the issue. Their will be no tough guy routines from the defeated unionists, they will need to get on with it to save themselves.
Malcolm you are kidding yourself on. As soon as we vote YES, the wrath of English nationalism will be unleashed and every old chestnut about the 'ungrateful Scots' will fill column inches of the Daily Mail, Daily Express and possibly even the red tops. English Tory MPs will be bombarded with demands from constituents to "punish" us for inflicting Gordon Brown and the RBS/BoS meltdown on them. The most vociferous anti-Scots language will come from many of the Scots who have become long-term residents in the Home Counties.
Our backs will be to the walls for several years and Eck will need to in effect create a national unity government for Scotland to handle things, failing which the international markets will turn us into a basket case.
However I suspect that talks have already begun, if only at a very low, un-attributable level between civil servants in Edinburgh and London to prepare the groundwork for the severance negotiations. If they haven't they will very soon as the polls continue to move towards YES.
We should now be looking for double-crossover. As soon as the Tories start taking the leads in the UK wide polls, we can expect YES to take the lead in the IndyRef ones.
After a Yes, the less influence either side has over the other during the negotiation phase the better.
I do fear a Yes win means an acrimonious breakup.
So how exactly would you just abolish Barnett?
I suspect part of the issue will be the practicalities . If Scotland votes Yes I'll be moving my pensions and investments SOTB. Not because of any desire for revenge but more for the security of knowing I won't have a currency risk and will have the backing of a bigger balance sheet. The City of London has a great opportunity to nobble a competitor in Financial Services and being the type of people they are I have no doubt they'll push it to the maximum.
We have a great capacity to make life a pain in the arse for one another (axing Faslane, no currency union, taking no debt, financial sector jobs shifting south, etc etc). We actually are better together.
I disagree on cross-over, though. If anything, I'd expect Yes to start leading first.
At the moment it almost seems as though BT are planning to force a NO through via the back door by making things so unpleasant and difficult that the Scots give up on the idea.
Which would be incredibly counter-productive and lead to two generations (at least) of rancour.
The political reality is that the Scots don't particularly want independence - a microbe that killed all and only the English, preferably slowly and painfully, would suit their "Yes" voters better.
It may be tempting to promise a short Parliament - 18 months to sort it out, then another election on a "Phew, that's over" wave of optimism. But will people vote for a promise to make them vote again a bit later? Tricky, eh?
Eck has already ruled out a referendum on a currency union in rUK and since in future he's going to decide where rUK builds it's warships, I guess that's that.....
If Yes wins the country separates into two. Scots cannot expect special treatment in such a circumstance, as it would be detrimental to Britain. They have no right to demand a currency union with a country they just voted to leave, and the British people (and politicians) have made it plain they have no plans to offer it.
Yes believe this is a negotiating position, but if the UK politicians renege on it the British will be pretty furious. If they don't, the Scots may consider it bullying (although that's a deranged position to hold).
However generous the final arrangements, you can rest assured that all of an independent Scotland's numerous ills over coming decades would be blamed on the English for imposing "the bastard Settlement....".
If you think the English, Welsh and Northern Irish, lumbered with a huge deficit and enormous debt, will welcome the Scots getting off scot-free, with no debt to speak of, you are entirely mistaken.
Scotland will be asked to take a share of the debt (presumably around 8%). One suspects Salmond will try and use the refusal of a currency union as a pretext to avoid it. And the 'best pals in the world' will resume their ancient dislike of one another.
Of course, that all assumes Yes wins. That remains far from certain.
We know that late last year opinion in rUK tended to be mildly in favour of a currency union. After the Tri-partite intervention it swung 2:1 against.
The Cardiff Univ study from 2012 showed English voters clearly think the Scots get the best deal out of the current set up. If the Scots have voted to leave it, I see no reason why the English should decide to continue that perceived munificence.
Add to that the grievances - real or perceived - published daily by the tabloids, and the sooner this gets resolved, the better for all concerned.
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/china-post-race-analysis.html
Not a great race, but the greenest so far. I'm considering running through the remaining races and working out (if Mercedes' dominance persists) who, based on last year's result, would win the title.
That might sound silly, but of 7 comparable sessions (4 qualifying and 3 races, discounting Australia where Hamilton retired due to reliability) the results (between the two Silver Arrows) have been identical so far.
If it is YES, then does the SNP have any good and realistic negotiators in its ranks as I view Salmond to be an emotional lightweight in that department.
Much is said about oil and gas, but that is declining and will the oil majors and minors continue to invest in times of political uncertainty - quite often they will sell up and get out - indeed some of the majors have already disinvested from much of the North Sea.
However, what has not been talked about is the IPR that has been built up in Subsea technology and is being used globally. Much of that activity is based around Aberdeen. Again, there is no reason to keep it there much longer and again political uncertainty could see it moving out of Scotland.
Politically, I do not see many or indeed any refuges in the England & Wales for any LD and LAB ex-MPs. The LDs will be squeezed in England and all Labour can do is to deselect some of the 'golden children' (e.g. Kinnock) for the best of their Scottish ex-MPs. Of course the LD Alexander may join the Cons.
Venice has declared independence. The media aren't reporting it much, and what coverage it gets portrays the separatists as eccentric. But in a free vote nearly 90% said they want away from Italy, and from what I read local authorities have ceased all cooperation with Rome. Regardless of the constitution these people have exercised their democratic rights and unless we are saying that people only have the right to vote in ways and in elections that suit the powers that be (in which case its not democracy at all) then we have to at least respect their opinion.
I dislike Salmond enormously. But he's doing a hell of a job selling a vision for Scotland's future. Which is more than can be said for the pro-union politicians up there. Or indeed any of the party leaders down here.
You cannot seriously believe it is legitimate for an independent Scotland to demand that the English, Welsh and Northern Irish act as lender of last resort for Scottish financial institutions.
I am not a radical Englander. I support the union.
I wonder what will happen regarding Venice. We may be seeing a new political phase in Europe as some countries break up.
So far the possibilities (Scotland, Catalonia, Venice) appear to be along historical lines. Will Burgundy be reborn?
An amicable divorce is as rare as rocking horse dung. The mentality of malcolmg shows the way the negotiations will go. Once the bluff of abandoning Scotland's debts is shown to be worthless, Salmond will be left floundering and fibbing again.
I know many Scots who have spent most of their adult lives in England and I don't mean titled distant cousins who visit their country estates in August. I well remember my own uncle launching into a tirade some years ago about how lazy and workshy the Scots were, living as he did near Birmingham and surrounded by fellow Scots exiles in the engineering world he inhabited. I think of those I know who chase the £ or $ in the London marketplaces or "gone native" MPs like James Gray whose family stayed with me when I nominated him to oppose Charles Kennedy in 1992. Few if any have time for most of their fellow countrymen.
Morris Dancer my dear colleague, there is virtually nothing left to devolve to Scotland. That is why for 99% of Scots, independence will make no difference to their daily lives. Excluding law which largely comes from Europe, there is only general taxation, social security, defence and foreign affairs remaining which is not already devolved. We already have our own education and legal systems, both of which have remained independent since 1707. We have our own NHS as has been pointed out, our own planning and transport systems, our own institutions including our own sports governing bodies, our own political system, the Tory party being the oldest party by far. We could revert to the Scottish pound but our last experience of that was not a happy one so I favour returning to the groat, pending us joining the Euro as we would have to do within 10 years of joining the EU, assuming we get to join the EU and the euro lasts that long.
The currency is not an asset. Oil is an asset. An individual pound is an asset. The currency is a monetary system.
Just answer this: do you believe it correct that an independent Scotland could force by right England, Wales and Northern Ireland to be lender of last resort for Scottish financial institutions?
I know you're a decent chap, and hopefully the feeling is mutual. The very fact we're arguing about so fundamental a matter is, I fear, indicative of how unpleasant potential negotiations would be.
1. Why does Mercedes have a better energy conversion ratio?
2. Why is Alonso almost always the best starter - notwithstanding what car he is driving - does he anticipate the lights?
I really don't understand why the Left are still peddling their old Cold War view that Western imperialism is wrong and Russian imperialism is er, somehow, OK. (I don't understand why they held that view during the Cold War either for that matter).
The truth is that Russian irredentism is a threat to the West and some countries in particular (e.g. the Baltic States), and while some of the post-Soviet borders are a bit iffy, having started out as no more than internal borders in the USSR and being of little consequence, the Ukraine is an internationally recognised Westphalian nation state and Russia ought to recognise that.
So my reckoning is we will walk away with no debt and no currency union which would be the best deal in my opinion. Question is what huge give will UK have to provide to keep Trident at Faslane for more than a few months.
That's certainly a likely option in the medium and long term if a deal cannot be done. If you look at the Clydeside yards, they've not exactly been buzzing with activity since 2000. Remove the military ships, and they'd be in even more trouble. For this reason alone the SNP government would be very keen to do a deal to ensure military work does continue on the Clyde. Contrary to this, English MPs will be under pressure to get it moved in the medium term to Portsmouth or elsewhere.
Clydeside commercial shipbuilding is nearly dead.
http://www.clydeships.co.uk/list.php?a1Page=1&a1PageSize=50&vessel=&official_number=&imo=&builder=&builder_eng=&year_built=&launch_after=01/01/2000&launch_before=01/01/2015&role=&propulsion=&category=&owner=&port=&flag=&disposal=&lost=
Defence-Pros; have already suggested that Scotstoun should close (due to the surrounding housing limiting further development; c.f. http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/navy-maritime/royal-navy-discussions-updates-5679/ ). Relocating an unbuilt frigate-factory should not be rocket-science (even for BAe Systems)...!
At the start most cars on the odd side seemed to have a better start (Vettel passed Ricciardo into second), Massa excepted. I think Alonso just has a daring approach as opposed to some other drivers, and he has a very good head on his shoulders for wheel-to-wheel racing.
The engineering is beyond me, I am afraid, but the Mercedes 'power unit' has a different component setup which, if you can make it work, essentially makes it much better:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/26946444
The other Mercedes-powered cars do not have that, I think.
'Sorry luv, I've pissed in your underwear drawer, but it's nothing personal, honest.'