FPT - Four hours sleep, knackered but over the moon. Being hopelessly wrong has never felt so good. God bless Scotland and the Scots. And sincere commiserations to all those on here - posters and lurkers - who wished for a Yes. I may have disagreed with you fundamentally, but I never doubted your sincerity. You will feel as bad today as I would have done if the result had been reversed. And I would have felt sick to the pit of my stomach. I hope the pain fades soon enough and that you return to the fray as determined as ever to hold all our political leaders to the maximum account. The Union has been a great thing and still can be - if our leaders rise to the occasion.
And there's a problem straight away. It is undoubtedly the case that with the extra powers that the Scottish parliament is rightly going to get there needs to be balancing measures for England. The logic of EV4EL is inarguable. But the devil is going to be in the detail. Nigel Farage is right - we need a constitutional convention to sort this out so that we get a final settlement that has cross-party support. The alternative is a dog's dinner, imposed for narrow party interest that will continually be revised depending on who is in power. That way lies ever-greater disconnect between voters and those who represent them.
I have always been a supporter of PR and if the argument is that the views of English voters have to be properly represented when decisions about England only issues are being made, then I cannot see how there can be any argument against it. After all, EV4EL is not about choosing a government - it is about ensuring that whoever is in government only passes legislation that affects England if they can persuade those representing the majority of English voters that it should pass. In other words, it is a blocking mechanism.
Nah, you don't get away with it that easily. You have now been persistently, haplessly, firmly and conclusively wrong with two extreme predictions - Romney and now indyref. If you'd called either right we'd be hailing you as a seer, but given that you got both wrong, I'm afraid you are revealed as a bit of a twit.
However, all yr other points are very articulate, blah blah, yadda yadda
He has bet me that Miliband gets over 50% in Doncaster North next year.... Draw your own betting conclusions!
Dave has really put Ed and Nick in the brown stuff today by proposing a proper version of EV4EL. I think the only other option would be a full blown English Parliament and a massive reduction in the number of Westminster MPs, maybe half of today's figure with defence, foreign policy, international aid and the annual spending envelope set by Westminster and pretty much everything else devolved to the EWNI&S Parliaments. The lazy solution would be to just have EV4EL at Westminster or to have English Parliament days where devolved matters for England are discussed with English MPs only and the leader of the party with an English majority would be the English PM.
I don't know how it would work if Labour had a UK majority but the Conservatives have an English majority though.
EVFEL is fine if there is a UK-wide Tory majority: the government would certainly have an English majority as well. But there are two problematic scenarios.
A minority Tory government may have an English majority. So it could pass English domestic legislation but may not be able to pass a budget or retain the confidence of the whole house. Equally there could be a Labour government which could command confidence and supply but be unable to pass any English domestic legislation for want of a majority.
Politicians would quickly have to learn that to function in this new paradigm will require compromise and consensus otherwise gridlock and chaos will be the result. It's how the American system often has to operate, but do we want to have that type of setup?
Mr. C. A government that could not command the confidence of the whole house would fall. How is that any different than now.
What it would mean is that no government, of whatever stripe, is able to pass laws on devolved matters that the English people have to obey without the majority of the representatives of those English people consenting. I struggle to see a problem with that principle.
That the likes of Hain and Alexander are already trotting out the same arguments as Labour have been using for years doesn't surprise me. I just find it rather sad.
Not surprising at all - there's still no party as self-interested and partisan as Labour. Personally I'd like to see Cameron take a very positive lead on this - it could yet be the making of him. Something he can hold onto in his dotage.
Well, it's only a god-awful mess if you try to use it as a way to shaft Labour in the UK chamber, rather than simply having a different Parliament for England.
If you have a different election for England, with different representatives, then Ed Miliband gets to be UK PM without worrying about his majority being reliant on Scottish MPs - but that doesn't suit Tory trouble-makers does it?
In that scenario, Ed Miliband might get to be 'UK PM' but it would be a position of relatively little power, with no say on education, health, law and order, justice, housing, and so on.
In other words, a completely different political structure, bearing very little relation to the UK government as we know it. Such a structure would indeed be logically coherent, but it's not just Tory trouble-makers who might not be entirely enamoured of it.
If that's the way the public votes then that's the way we voted. That's the entirely logical result of devolution.
The First Ministers of Scotland, NI and Wales are all from different parties than the PM of the UK. Why can't the UK have a Labour PM but England have a Tory First Minister and Tory control over health, education etc?
Dave has really put Ed and Nick in the brown stuff today by proposing a proper version of EV4EL. I think the only other option would be a full blown English Parliament and a massive reduction in the number of Westminster MPs, maybe half of today's figure with defence, foreign policy, international aid and the annual spending envelope set by Westminster and pretty much everything else devolved to the EWNI&S Parliaments. The lazy solution would be to just have EV4EL at Westminster or to have English Parliament days where devolved matters for England are discussed with English MPs only and the leader of the party with an English majority would be the English PM.
I don't know how it would work if Labour had a UK majority but the Conservatives have an English majority though.
It should work exactly the same as it works in Scotland etc - we don't worry about the fact that we have a Tory UK majority but a SNP Scottish majority. The Scottish government runs Scotland and the UK government runs the UK.
For devolved matters we should have an English government that can be either the same or different party.
If you want some good blog amusement, try Whinges Over Scotland.
They are on a hunt for conspiracy theories to clutch at, and I saw at least one proposal for revenge on SeanT, which seems to have vanished now.
2400 comments and counting.
Calgacus says: 19 September, 2014 at 6:34 am @geeo,completely agree with you, fuck them all from andy murray and his last minute conversion when it was no use whatever to bateman and his bbc aren’t biased and the snp wishy washy nicey nicey pish. Salmond’s speech just showed hes one of them another career trougher. This referendum is null and void due to interference from Westminster. Salmond should show some baws and fucking fight for Scotland instead of positioning his party for another cosy love in with the scum occupying our country.
Also interestingly, they were telling each other last night to use the 6:1 odds on Betfair against a Yes victory to recover their campaigning expenses (ouch).
And we now have a "Revote 'Cos It Was All Rigged" petition at 22000 sigs and counting.
And they are all going to stop watching the BBC and not pay for a TV License.
I've refrained from Ed is crap debates in the past but I couldn't help noticing whereas he is passable in the HoC he really quite ineffectual "on the stump". That's not to say he can't be PM in eight months time but his charisma by-pass will cost votes.
The Leader of the Labour party having to hide from Scottish voters is unprecedented; and not good news for Ed
And the Prime Minister? All parties accepted (wrongly imo) the SNP's contention that only Scots accents could be heard. Once more they were snookered by Alex Salmond.
If Eck snookered them how come he lost comprehensively. That argument may have carried water yesterday but not anymore.
Questions not being aired. What we now see in Scotland is a need for SLAB to be reinforced wth "talent". That "talent" is going to have to come from its Westminster MPs (Norman Smith BBC today). But how will they exit the HoC to be free to stand for the Scottish Assembly? Faced with Westminster becoming a place with limited opportunities for Scots MPs, some will jump ship. Will they still stand for election at GE 2015 and then stand down prior to the 2016 Scottish election? Or will there be a mass exodus at GE 2015, so that they can stand in 2016? Another option is a wave of SLAB by elections for the Scot Assembly to enable their Westminster "talent" to boost the Assembly as a matter of urgency.
I can only reiterate what I wrote at 6 this morning. The Union is out of intensive care butt here is little chance of being rehabilitated. Most Scots appear to think of themselves as primarily Scottish, with British merely an afterthought. The rest of the UK is starting to realise this now. The fact that the result came down to people being too afraid to leave will hardly have endeared Scotland to the English. They are quite entitled to feel that way, but increased immigration, the global elite and islamic extremism are raising big questions about identity in the UK. Britishness does not seem able to provide an answer to this The English will have to think more about their Englishness and the England they want to live in. Finally you have ondon. A global city that dominates an island over which many of its residents are plainly not very interested. If you've read Alistair Darling memoirs (more fun than you might think) he makes the point that when push came to shove, French bankers for all their faults were prepared to act for France. The national interest line could be used with them. British bankers? They could give a stuff. The future for a united Britain look bleak.
You can reiterate all you like it does not make it valid. It is far from valid and based on a range of bogus suppositions. Who says they were too afraid and having jumped to that conclusion you assume we English are not endeared. Large parts of the country both in terms of population and area do not have a Labour MP. So what? Does the US President become invalid simply bacuse the college votes in the east and California elect him?
And the Conservatives in Scotland poll just marginally behind the LDs but in terms of seats they are nowhere.
Don't worry, we can solve all this with my patent-pending new electoral system.
First, simply rank every constituency on how much they are "real Britain"- from good, salt-of the earth, honest UKIP voters at the top, to filthy metropolitan elitist Londoners at the bottom. I'm not exactly sure how to do this but it could probably be done with a poll of the comment section on the Telegraph.
Next, count up all the results as usual. If one party has more than 80% of the seats, you're done. Otherwise keep removing seats from the bottom of the list until one party reaches that share.
The downside is, of course, that some constituencies would be without representation, but the voters there would probably be too busy doing cocaine and promoting multiculturalism to care.
If that's the way the public votes then that's the way we voted. That's the entirely logical result of devolution.
The First Ministers of Scotland, NI and Wales are all from different parties than the PM of the UK. Why can't the UK have a Labour PM but England have a Tory First Minister and Tory control over health, education etc?
No reason, and I agree that in a sense it is the logical result of devolution. The fact that the architects of devolution didn't want that logical result is why I say devolution was an awful bosh-up.
However, we are where we are, and we start from a dreadful constitutional mess inherited from Labour. Going to a fully devolved, federal structure with a proper English parliament is certainly one possible solution in theory, but unlikely to get support in practice, not least from Labour who got us into this mess. In any case there are genuine reasons, beyond Labour partisan self-interest, for thinking that a federal structure with one of the constituents being so dominant wouldn't work terribly well.
I don't think there is a clean, neat solution which will satisfy everyone, but perhaps we can at least address the worst aspects of the WLQ in some ad-hoc fashion.
'Second, English Labour needs it’s own voice in this process, unrestrained by Labour from other parts of the union. I’d argue that devolution with England has been held back by a UK Labour Party not convinced that England needs change as much as Wales and Scotland'
I see Dan Hodges has found the time for two separate pieces, one bigging up Cameron's chances in 2015, the other, of course, slamming Ed M. Could he not have just combined the two into one or something? Man's obsessed.
I see Dan Hodges has found the time for two separate pieces, one bigging up Cameron's chances in 2015, the other, of course, slamming Ed M. Could he not have just combined the two into one or something? Man's obsessed.
Well what he was saying about the Scottish referendum was mostly vindicated (though it was probably closer than his articles would lead you to believe). So he's probably going to be over-inflated all the way up until GE2015 pops his bubble for good.
Doug Fridlund @douglasfridlund 1m If I saw a slightly dejected looking Alex Salmond right now just walking around I'd put my arm around him and be like "U k?
Just heard Salmond’s speech in full – he’s as ungracious in defeat as he is in life.
In view of Scotland’s response yesterday, the SNP need to take a good, hard look at themselves, they really don’t know the majority of Scots as well as they think .
Well, it's only a god-awful mess if you try to use it as a way to shaft Labour in the UK chamber, rather than simply having a different Parliament for England.
If you have a different election for England, with different representatives, then Ed Miliband gets to be UK PM without worrying about his majority being reliant on Scottish MPs - but that doesn't suit Tory trouble-makers does it?
In that scenario, Ed Miliband might get to be 'UK PM' but it would be a position of relatively little power, with no say on education, health, law and order, justice, housing, and so on.
In other words, a completely different political structure, bearing very little relation to the UK government as we know it. Such a structure would indeed be logically coherent, but it's not just Tory trouble-makers who might not be entirely enamoured of it.
The UK government as we know is a mess, because it is simultaneously the UK government and the English government. Everyone agrees this has to change.
Under your proposal of English Votes for English Laws, the UK Chancellor still has to double up as the English finance minister, which would make it impossible for a Scottish MP to take that position, and similarly with the other dual roles - such as PM. That completely destroys the Union.
So if you want to have English Laws voted on by only English MPs then you need to create an English Parliament for them to vote in.
You're right that it leaves the UK Parliament with relatively little to do, but if you want to preserve the Union and you want to stop Scottish MPs voting on English tuition fees, then you have to go the whole hog.
If you want some good blog amusement, try Whinges Over Scotland.
They are on a hunt for conspiracy theories to clutch at, and I saw at least one proposal for revenge on SeanT, which seems to have vanished now.
2400 comments and counting.
Calgacus says: 19 September, 2014 at 6:34 am @geeo,completely agree with you, fuck them all from andy murray and his last minute conversion when it was no use whatever to bateman and his bbc aren’t biased and the snp wishy washy nicey nicey pish. Salmond’s speech just showed hes one of them another career trougher. This referendum is null and void due to interference from Westminster. Salmond should show some baws and fucking fight for Scotland instead of positioning his party for another cosy love in with the scum occupying our country.
Also interestingly, they were telling each other last night to use the 6:1 odds on Betfair against a Yes victory to recover their campaigning expenses (ouch).
And we now have a "Revote 'Cos It Was All Rigged" petition at 22000 sigs and counting.
And they are all going to stop watching the BBC and not pay for a TV License.
Comments can be summarised into -
"Ooh, we don't like the results of a democratic vote. Whinge. Whine. Moan"
Bernard Jenkins... We should have an English first minister Diane Abbot... Gordon brown drew up the concessions off the cuff when he thought Scots were going to vote yes
So following last night, how do we think Scotland will vote in May?
Are the long-short seats which have been weigh the vote Labour, but voted Yes last night worth a small punt? (West Dunbartonshire, Cumbernauld etc., selected Glasgae seats). Or do the SNP disappear back into the mists of the North-East? Does a TUSC / Scottish Socialist type party actually start up effectively in such places with an alternative offering to Ed Milibland or the SNP? Or do they all revert to Labour on shockingly low turnouts?
If you want some good blog amusement, try Whinges Over Scotland.
They are on a hunt for conspiracy theories to clutch at, and I saw at least one proposal for revenge on SeanT, which seems to have vanished now.
2400 comments and counting.
Calgacus says: 19 September, 2014 at 6:34 am @geeo,completely agree with you, fuck them all from andy murray and his last minute conversion when it was no use whatever to bateman and his bbc aren’t biased and the snp wishy washy nicey nicey pish. Salmond’s speech just showed hes one of them another career trougher. This referendum is null and void due to interference from Westminster. Salmond should show some baws and fucking fight for Scotland instead of positioning his party for another cosy love in with the scum occupying our country.
Also interestingly, they were telling each other last night to use the 6:1 odds on Betfair against a Yes victory to recover their campaigning expenses (ouch).
And we now have a "Revote 'Cos It Was All Rigged" petition at 22000 sigs and counting.
And they are all going to stop watching the BBC and not pay for a TV License.
One of the more frustrating themes that seemed to pop up over and over during this campaign was that a lot of people supposedly should not involved themselves, and also that the No side sticking up for the status quo (and then Devo Plus or whatever they end up calling it) and putting its point across was unfair. A silly, minority theme, but still annoying.
On the English question, it will be interesting to see if there is further appetite for it. Previous measures have been unappealing to the electorates and in any case did not seem to command much enthusiasm even from those proposing them, but with MPs breaking ranks and not waiting for their leaders to set a proposal, clearly they are feeling the question more acutely, and so chances are more of the general public are as well, at the least in this politically heightened moment.
BBC reporting rumour from Dundee Courier that Eck 'considering his position'
Given that many commentators have opined that Salmond "won " the referendum even with the No vote I would be surprised if he didn't at least stick around to see in whatever form of enhanced devolution is agreed upon. Perhaps he's simply knackered.
EVFEL is fine if there is a UK-wide Tory majority: the government would certainly have an English majority as well. But there are two problematic scenarios.
A minority Tory government may have an English majority. So it could pass English domestic legislation but may not be able to pass a budget or retain the confidence of the whole house. Equally there could be a Labour government which could command confidence and supply but be unable to pass any English domestic legislation for want of a majority.
Politicians would quickly have to learn that to function in this new paradigm will require compromise and consensus otherwise gridlock and chaos will be the result. It's how the American system often has to operate, but do we want to have that type of setup?
Mr. C. A government that could not command the confidence of the whole house would fall. How is that any different than now.
Without getting into the merits of this one key difference is that since you now have two different numbers and need both for a workable majority that can both pick a PM and pass legislation, you could have the votes to bring down a government without having the votes to form a government. This happens in other European countries quite a bit because they have extreme-right parties that nobody will work with, so a chunk of MPs can effectively only oppose governments and never support them. They normally resolve this by making a Grand Coalition, but that's probably a bit harder in the British system, with two main parties whose relationship is almost zero-sum. In that respect SO may be onto something when he says EVfEL would work better if you did PR as well.
Anyhow the obvious way to tidy this up is that even if you don't have a separate building and separate MPs, you have a separate English PM, with powers that are clearly separate from the UK PM's powers. That way they can disagree with each other but still get things done in their own domains. Obviously if the numbers were right then Parliament and English-Subset-Parliament could both choose the same person as their PM.
"Countless evidences of fraud during the recent Scottish Referendum have come to light, including two counts of votes being moved in bulk into a No pile, Yes votes clearly being seen in no piles and strange occurences with dual fire alarms and clear cut fraud in Glasgow. We demand a revote be taken of said referendum, where each vote shall be counted by two individuals, one of whom should be an international impartial party without a stake in the vote."
This is the Vid. Does anyone know procedures well enough to explain it? I don't.
Also what probability would people place on Dave being in place at GE2015 ?
Worth taking 1-10 ?
You can actually get slightly better odds (from Paddy, if you can get anything on with them) on Ed being in place at GE2015: 1/7. Both strike me as pretty much nailed-on, but of the two Ed is nailed more firmly.
The 2/7 on Nick Clegg surviving might not be a bad bet as well, if you're in the mood for this kind of bet.
I'm already on all of these at much better odds from a while back, so I won't be topping up at these odds.
In view of Scotland’s response yesterday, the SNP need to take a good, hard look at themselves, they really don’t know the majority of Scots as well as they think .
And yet will still try to present as the only party properly fighting for and speaking for Scotland, I have no doubt. I think Lord Ashcroft's polling show's most of Yes think another vote should happen within 10 years, and in the meantime they can still push the Team Scotland vs Team Westminster angle, despite last night's result. Weird, but there you go.
Doug Fridlund @douglasfridlund 1m If I saw a slightly dejected looking Alex Salmond right now just walking around I'd put my arm around him and be like "U k?
Just heard Salmond’s speech in full – he’s as ungracious in defeat as he is in life.
In view of Scotland’s response yesterday, the SNP need to take a good, hard look at themselves, they really don’t know the majority of Scots as well as they think .
A great result for UK - Rule Britannia. ; )
Yet that cretin Andrew Marr was describing his speech as "especially gracious"
I keep thinking about this for the SLab talent. We lost a shed load of quite good frontbench Labour MPs at GE2010. They knew the game was up and didn't fancy being in Opposition career wise.
Can see the same thing happening again. Only it's EV4EL keeping them out instead. If I didn't have serious leadership ambitions post GE2015 - I'd be wondering what the point was - no Big Westminster jobs on the horizon...
Questions not being aired. What we now see in Scotland is a need for SLAB to be reinforced wth "talent". That "talent" is going to have to come from its Westminster MPs (Norman Smith BBC today). But how will they exit the HoC to be free to stand for the Scottish Assembly? Faced with Westminster becoming a place with limited opportunities for Scots MPs, some will jump ship. Will they still stand for election at GE 2015 and then stand down prior to the 2016 Scottish election? Or will there be a mass exodus at GE 2015, so that they can stand in 2016? Another option is a wave of SLAB by elections for the Scot Assembly to enable their Westminster "talent" to boost the Assembly as a matter of urgency.
As an aside, a Scottish acquaintance of mine was so convinced last week that the vote would be yes that he said he would shave his beard off if it was No.
This morning, I open FB to see a beardless man I do not recognise ...
He's the sort of Yes supporter I feel most sorry for. A good man, who wanted the best for his country and was always humorous, polite and intelligent when discussing it. He is truly hurt this morning.
The UK government as we know is a mess, because it is simultaneously the UK government and the English government. Everyone agrees this has to change.
Under your proposal of English Votes for English Laws, the UK Chancellor still has to double up as the English finance minister, which would make it impossible for a Scottish MP to take that position, and similarly with the other dual roles - such as PM. That completely destroys the Union.
So if you want to have English Laws voted on by only English MPs then you need to create an English Parliament for them to vote in.
You're right that it leaves the UK Parliament with relatively little to do, but if you want to preserve the Union and you want to stop Scottish MPs voting on English tuition fees, then you have to go the whole hog.
Don't blame me, address your complaints to Tony Blair.
Just heard Salmond’s speech in full – he’s as ungracious in defeat as he is in life.
In view of Scotland’s response yesterday, the SNP need to take a good, hard look at themselves, they really don’t know the majority of Scots as well as they think .
I said before here on PB that Dave can have a majority if he: 1. Does the right thing by England in a serious way and goes hard on Labour re setting this whole sorry mess off with their deeply cynical self serving devolution plans (and resistance to EVFEL / horseshit regional alternatives). 2. Goes hard on Labour and Rotherham / multiculti / rotten boroughs / cover-ups and their deeply cynical and self serving immigration policies, vote buying and PC agenda. 3. Bigs up the UK's economic performance and 'don't let these muppets screw it all up again'.
He's doing stuff in 1 and 3. I suspect 2 will start soon (and Farage will anyway be firing shells at Labour). Dave may have the killer instincts of a dodo - but Crosby and Osborne and others do. Labour is in for a torrid few months and very gritty election. They're going to get absolutely monstered all the way up to the GE campaign and then we'll see Ed on the telly alot. Omens looking positive. ;-)
Also what probability would people place on Dave being in place at GE2015 ?
Worth taking 1-10 ?
You can actually get slightly better odds (from Paddy, if you can get anything on with them) on Ed being in place at GE2015: 1/7. Both strike me as pretty much nailed-on, but of the two Ed is nailed more firmly.
The 2/7 on Nick Clegg surviving might not be a bad bet as well, if you're in the mood for this kind of bet.
I'm already on all of these at much better odds from a while back, so I won't be topping up at these odds.
Thanks, taken the full whack available on Ed Miliband 1-7.
I'd have thought Dave was more nailed on, but then again the Labour party is so terrible at stabbings that if a coup came up he'd likely survive.
As an aside, a Scottish acquaintance of mine was so convinced last week that the vote would be yes that he said he would shave his beard off if it was No.
This morning, I open FB to see a beardless man I do not recognise ...
He's the sort of Yes supporter I feel most sorry for. A good man, who wanted the best for his country and was always humorous, polite and intelligent when discussing it. He is truly hurt this morning.
It's all very wanting the best for your country but if this coupled with naivete, poor judgement or executive ineptitude you end with, eg, Rotherham and Mid Staffs under Labour. I'm sure they all meant well too.
Meanwhile kudos to the bloke who put £800k on No! What did he make, about a hundred grand?
Very happy with the result. Slightly less so with some of the post match analysis.
Instead of focusing on policy implications of the vote everyone seems obsessed with the mechanics of voting/constitutional issues.
Mass turnouts are a result of dissatisfaction with policies, not process. If the Scots lived in a booming economy with opportunity for all (like that utopia promised by the SNP) then Yes would have struggled to get 40%.
I wonder how many people will be delighted to see their English MP banging on for months about an English Parliament? If you are struggling to afford to buy a new house or haven't had a decent pay rise then constitutional affairs are not likely to be top of your agenda.
Regrettably it just makes the political elite look like all they want to talk about is themselves, again.
I keep thinking about this for the SLab talent. We lost a shed load of quite good frontbench Labour MPs at GE2010. They knew the game was up and didn't fancy being in Opposition career wise.
Can see the same thing happening again. Only it's EV4EL keeping them out instead. If I didn't have serious leadership ambitions post GE2015 - I'd be wondering what the point was - no Big Westminster jobs on the horizon...
Questions not being aired. What we now see in Scotland is a need for SLAB to be reinforced wth "talent". That "talent" is going to have to come from its Westminster MPs (Norman Smith BBC today). But how will they exit the HoC to be free to stand for the Scottish Assembly? Faced with Westminster becoming a place with limited opportunities for Scots MPs, some will jump ship. Will they still stand for election at GE 2015 and then stand down prior to the 2016 Scottish election? Or will there be a mass exodus at GE 2015, so that they can stand in 2016? Another option is a wave of SLAB by elections for the Scot Assembly to enable their Westminster "talent" to boost the Assembly as a matter of urgency.
Scottish Parliament, please - Assembly is Welsh, of course. The problem is that the SLAB seem to have made their candidate selections for 2016 in advance of indyref, before MPs could know whether or not to jump ship for Holyrood. This was reportedly a deliberate move to concentrate minds. I am not sure of the current status but if so then there is no scope for mass movement from Westmisnter till the end of the decade. Shame we don't have a Slabber to give us an informed view.
As an aside, a Scottish acquaintance of mine was so convinced last week that the vote would be yes that he said he would shave his beard off if it was No.
This morning, I open FB to see a beardless man I do not recognise ...
He's the sort of Yes supporter I feel most sorry for. A good man, who wanted the best for his country and was always humorous, polite and intelligent when discussing it. He is truly hurt this morning.
This puzzles me; what's stopping those who wanted a 'Yes' throwing all their energy and enthusiasm into changing Scotland for the better, as would presumably have happened if they'd won?
Instead, it's wave after wave of whinging, whining, and 'I'm leaving the country to get away from my treacherous and disloyal neighbours'.
Salmond will surely resign now, or soon after the next GE? He looked a broken man in that car.
Sturgeon is ready and able to replace.
If he quite shortly he can retire with honour, having nearly done the inconceivable, and while he is still revered by his disciples; or he can trundle on, gradually earning more resentment.
If he's got any political sense (which he has, in spades) he will go, and go soon.
To take the 9-4 on him going before the 22nd though, that's the betting question.
It's hard to tell if people are trolling or serious when they say ukip will do terribly in GE 2015, but for those who genuinely believe it,
paddy power are now EVEN money that ukip get less than three seats Coral are 3/1 ukip get zero seats Ladbrokes are 5/4 lib dem to outpoll ukip Ladbrokes are 15/8 ukip 5-10%
Very happy with the result. Slightly less so with some of the post match analysis.
Instead of focusing on policy implications of the vote everyone seems obsessed with the mechanics of voting/constitutional issues.
Mass turnouts are a result of dissatisfaction with policies, not process. If the Scots lived in a booming economy with opportunity for all (like that utopia promised by the SNP) then Yes would have struggled to get 40%.
I wonder how many people will be delighted to see their English MP banging on for months about an English Parliament? If you are struggling to afford to buy a new house or haven't had a decent pay rise then constitutional affairs are not likely to be top of your agenda.
Regrettably it just makes the political elite look like all they want to talk about is themselves, again.
Not sure why you think its ok for the Scots to go on about constitutional affairs (look at the turnout!!) but not the English
But while we’re all patting our fellow PBers on the back for their part in saving the Union, I’d also like to add Roger, to the list.
He may only have played a small part in the great scheme of things, but who would have thought this time last year, he’d actually venture north, joining the foot soldiers on the ground and reporting back as the ‘man on the spot’ – bravo Roger.
Dave has really put Ed and Nick in the brown stuff today by proposing a proper version of EV4EL. I think the only other option would be a full blown English Parliament and a massive reduction in the number of Westminster MPs, maybe half of today's figure with defence, foreign policy, international aid and the annual spending envelope set by Westminster and pretty much everything else devolved to the EWNI&S Parliaments. The lazy solution would be to just have EV4EL at Westminster or to have English Parliament days where devolved matters for England are discussed with English MPs only and the leader of the party with an English majority would be the English PM.
I don't know how it would work if Labour had a UK majority but the Conservatives have an English majority though.
It should work exactly the same as it works in Scotland etc - we don't worry about the fact that we have a Tory UK majority but a SNP Scottish majority. The Scottish government runs Scotland and the UK government runs the UK.
For devolved matters we should have an English government that can be either the same or different party.
I meant if both the English Parliament and UK Parliament sat at Westminster, could lead to some quirks in the system.
On another note, if the Tories are clever enough to attach Scottish devomax to EV4EL could they get it through with 305 Tories and 6 SNP? Putting Labour on the wrong side of both arguments if they vote against it giving the SNP the upper hand in Scotland and the Tories the upper hand in England.
I don't see how Ed could win the most seats in 2015 if he opposes Scottish devomax and EV4EL in early 2015.
The UK government as we know is a mess, because it is simultaneously the UK government and the English government. Everyone agrees this has to change.
Under your proposal of English Votes for English Laws, the UK Chancellor still has to double up as the English finance minister, which would make it impossible for a Scottish MP to take that position, and similarly with the other dual roles - such as PM. That completely destroys the Union.
So if you want to have English Laws voted on by only English MPs then you need to create an English Parliament for them to vote in.
You're right that it leaves the UK Parliament with relatively little to do, but if you want to preserve the Union and you want to stop Scottish MPs voting on English tuition fees, then you have to go the whole hog.
Don't blame me, address your complaints to Tony Blair.
Yes, well, that noted election winner, Tony Blair, is in hiding. I guess he's a bit busy bringing peace to the Middle East.
In view of Scotland’s response yesterday, the SNP need to take a good, hard look at themselves, they really don’t know the majority of Scots as well as they think .
It's hard to tell if people are trolling or serious when they say ukip will do terribly in GE 2015, but for those who genuinely believe it,
paddy power are now EVEN money that ukip get less than three seats Coral are 3/1 ukip get zero seats Ladbrokes are 5/4 lib dem to outpoll ukip Ladbrokes are 15/8 ukip 5-10%
As an aside, a Scottish acquaintance of mine was so convinced last week that the vote would be yes that he said he would shave his beard off if it was No.
This morning, I open FB to see a beardless man I do not recognise ...
He's the sort of Yes supporter I feel most sorry for. A good man, who wanted the best for his country and was always humorous, polite and intelligent when discussing it. He is truly hurt this morning.
This puzzles me; what's stopping those who wanted a 'Yes' throwing all their energy and enthusiasm into changing Scotland for the better, as would presumably have happened if they'd won?
Instead, it's wave after wave of whinging, whining, and 'I'm leaving the country to get away from my treacherous and disloyal neighbours'.
I think that's a little unfair. In this case, the gent says he wants to work to press the UK government to keep the promises they made during the campaign. Which is fair enough, and positive. I also think he'd have been keeping Salmond to his promises if he'd won, which would have been much harder.
Another poster has said that they feel 'bereaved' by the result. That I find harder to understand.
Mr. Observer, it's not about cocking up the electoral system for no good reason.
Nobody linked devolution to PR. Nobody linked DevoMax to PR. But when it looks like the English might finally get an equal say you claim we need PR. We don't. English votes for English laws or an English Parliament will suffice.
No, I have always supported PR. If you believe that laws for England should reflect the views of the English electorate then I do not see how you can justify excluding millions of English people from that process by denying parties they voted for representation.
Er? I can't understand that. We don't have PR at the moment, so you can make the argument that at the moment, the UK parliament doesn't reflect the views of the UK electorate.
But PR and EV4EL are mutually exclusive. You can have both, you can have neither (like now), or you can have one or the other.
The question is would EV4EL be fairer than it is now...answer YES. Would PR be fairer than it is now..maybe. But the two aren't directly linked,and certainly not joined at the hip.
EV4EL surely means that the wishes of the majority of English voters are respected when it comes to legislating on English-only matters. A situation in which a minority can block the wishes of a majority is not sustainable.
I keep thinking about this for the SLab talent. We lost a shed load of quite good frontbench Labour MPs at GE2010. They knew the game was up and didn't fancy being in Opposition career wise.
Can see the same thing happening again. Only it's EV4EL keeping them out instead. If I didn't have serious leadership ambitions post GE2015 - I'd be wondering what the point was - no Big Westminster jobs on the horizon...
Questions not being aired. What we now see in Scotland is a need for SLAB to be reinforced wth "talent". That "talent" is going to have to come from its Westminster MPs (Norman Smith BBC today). But how will they exit the HoC to be free to stand for the Scottish Assembly? Faced with Westminster becoming a place with limited opportunities for Scots MPs, some will jump ship. Will they still stand for election at GE 2015 and then stand down prior to the 2016 Scottish election? Or will there be a mass exodus at GE 2015, so that they can stand in 2016? Another option is a wave of SLAB by elections for the Scot Assembly to enable their Westminster "talent" to boost the Assembly as a matter of urgency.
Scottish Parliament, please - Assembly is Welsh, of course. The problem is that the SLAB seem to have made their candidate selections for 2016 in advance of indyref, before MPs could know whether or not to jump ship for Holyrood. This was reportedly a deliberate move to concentrate minds. I am not sure of the current status but if so then there is no scope for mass movement from Westmisnter till the end of the decade. Shame we don't have a Slabber to give us an informed view.
While I'm righteously laughing at all the suddenly-invisible pb Nats, I want to make an exception for you, Carnyx.
You have been nothing but civil, enlightened, informative and witty, even when occasional idiots like, say, me, were boorish and abusive.
If there were more Nats like you and fewer like malcolmg (and if you'd sorted out the whole currency thing!) you might have won.
Finally before I do some work, I was in the Yes camp in the run up to the election because I didn't think Westminster or Dave had the cojones to push through EV4EL in the event of a No and devomax. Clearly I was wrong. Being able to hold onto the Union and ensure England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have real representation both on a UK level and on a national level is something that is now within sight, so thank you Mr Salmond for getting us on this path.
Mr. Observer, it's not about cocking up the electoral system for no good reason.
Nobody linked devolution to PR. Nobody linked DevoMax to PR. But when it looks like the English might finally get an equal say you claim we need PR. We don't. English votes for English laws or an English Parliament will suffice.
No, I have always supported PR. If you believe that laws for England should reflect the views of the English electorate then I do not see how you can justify excluding millions of English people from that process by denying parties they voted for representation.
Er? I can't understand that. We don't have PR at the moment, so you can make the argument that at the moment, the UK parliament doesn't reflect the views of the UK electorate.
But PR and EV4EL are mutually exclusive. You can have both, you can have neither (like now), or you can have one or the other.
The question is would EV4EL be fairer than it is now...answer YES. Would PR be fairer than it is now..maybe. But the two aren't directly linked,and certainly not joined at the hip.
EV4EL surely means that the wishes of the majority of English voters are respected when it comes to legislating on English-only matters. A situation in which a minority can block the wishes of a majority is not sustainable.
It's been sustained for a long time so far! Why is it any less sustainable under EV4EL? That's the problem, you keep making these extremely vauge statements to try to conflate the two issues, but you haven't drawn any kind of clear concrete link
I keep thinking about this for the SLab talent. We lost a shed load of quite good frontbench Labour MPs at GE2010. They knew the game was up and didn't fancy being in Opposition career wise. Can see the same thing happening again. Only it's EV4EL keeping them out instead. If I didn't have serious leadership ambitions post GE2015 - I'd be wondering what the point was - no Big Westminster jobs on the horizon...
Questions not being aired. What we now see in Scotland is a need for SLAB to be reinforced wth "talent". That "talent" is going to have to come from its Westminster MPs (Norman Smith BBC today). But how will they exit the HoC to be free to stand for the Scottish Assembly? Faced with Westminster becoming a place with limited opportunities for Scots MPs, some will jump ship. Will they still stand for election at GE 2015 and then stand down prior to the 2016 Scottish election? Or will there be a mass exodus at GE 2015, so that they can stand in 2016? Another option is a wave of SLAB by elections for the Scot Assembly to enable their Westminster "talent" to boost the Assembly as a matter of urgency.
For the SLAB MPs they have decisions on when and how to jump ship. Brown looks to be favourite to take over (some how) from the awful Lamont. But since he probably has one term in him, Alexander, Murphy and Curran etc along with the non-shadow cabinet Scots, need to decide how long they can stay in Westminster. If EdM starts to look unlikely to win, that could be the deciding factor on jumping ship.
Nick Robinson made a bit of a prat of himself this morning on Radio 4 when he interjected an interview to loudly proclaim the vote on Syria would have been different without Scottish MPs (in relation to the WLQ). Errr well Syria votes would always be a UK vote Nick given a shared foreign policy
Very happy with the result. Slightly less so with some of the post match analysis.
Instead of focusing on policy implications of the vote everyone seems obsessed with the mechanics of voting/constitutional issues.
Mass turnouts are a result of dissatisfaction with policies, not process. If the Scots lived in a booming economy with opportunity for all (like that utopia promised by the SNP) then Yes would have struggled to get 40%.
I wonder how many people will be delighted to see their English MP banging on for months about an English Parliament? If you are struggling to afford to buy a new house or haven't had a decent pay rise then constitutional affairs are not likely to be top of your agenda.
Regrettably it just makes the political elite look like all they want to talk about is themselves, again.
Not sure why you think its ok for the Scots to go on about constitutional affairs (look at the turnout!!) but not the English
This entire debate surrounding the referendum focused on the evil policies pursued by those nasty Tories, threats to NHS, Trident etc etc. This was the SNP narrative - set yourself free from the Tories and we'll throw in a new country as well.
Thankfully enough Scots didn't believe the "moon on a stick" promises.
SNP deputy leader Nicola Sturgeon tweets: Scotland has changed forever as a result of #indyref. There is no going back to business as usual. The demand for change must be heeded.
It's correct, but my gods the tone of this and other comments - without a moment of hesitation they have seamlessly switched gears to position themselves as being the only ones making sure change happens. There may be a lot of despondency out there, but the SNP are already up and running for the new plans. Impressive, if a little disconcerting.
Well, it's only a god-awful mess if you try to use it as a way to shaft Labour in the UK chamber, rather than simply having a different Parliament for England.
If you have a different election for England, with different representatives, then Ed Miliband gets to be UK PM without worrying about his majority being reliant on Scottish MPs - but that doesn't suit Tory trouble-makers does it?
In that scenario, Ed Miliband might get to be 'UK PM' but it would be a position of relatively little power, with no say on education, health, law and order, justice, housing, and so on.
In other words, a completely different political structure, bearing very little relation to the UK government as we know it. Such a structure would indeed be logically coherent, but it's not just Tory trouble-makers who might not be entirely enamoured of it.
The UK government as we know is a mess, because it is simultaneously the UK government and the English government. Everyone agrees this has to change.
Under your proposal of English Votes for English Laws, the UK Chancellor still has to double up as the English finance minister, which would make it impossible for a Scottish MP to take that position, and similarly with the other dual roles - such as PM. That completely destroys the Union.
So if you want to have English Laws voted on by only English MPs then you need to create an English Parliament for them to vote in.
You're right that it leaves the UK Parliament with relatively little to do, but if you want to preserve the Union and you want to stop Scottish MPs voting on English tuition fees, then you have to go the whole hog.
I disagree. EV4EL within the current Parliamentary system is a means to block legislation, not to introduce it. The executive would thus remain UK-wide, but MPs representing English constituencies would have the ability to prevent England-only legislation introduced by the government from becoming law if they so wished. Economic, fiscal, defence and foreign policy would be UK wide and so the PM/Chancellor/Foreign Secretary/Defence Secretary could have a seat in any part of the UK.
The scenario you envisage may pertain if there were a separate English parliament. But I don't think any of the major parties are proposing that, are they?
As an aside, a Scottish acquaintance of mine was so convinced last week that the vote would be yes that he said he would shave his beard off if it was No.
This morning, I open FB to see a beardless man I do not recognise ...
He's the sort of Yes supporter I feel most sorry for. A good man, who wanted the best for his country and was always humorous, polite and intelligent when discussing it. He is truly hurt this morning.
This puzzles me; what's stopping those who wanted a 'Yes' throwing all their energy and enthusiasm into changing Scotland for the better, as would presumably have happened if they'd won?
Instead, it's wave after wave of whinging, whining, and 'I'm leaving the country to get away from my treacherous and disloyal neighbours'.
I think that's a little unfair. In this case, the gent says he wants to work to press the UK government to keep the promises they made during the campaign. Which is fair enough, and positive. I also think he'd have been keeping Salmond to his promises if he'd won, which would have been much harder.
Another poster has said that they feel 'bereaved' by the result. That I find harder to understand.
That's great, but he's one versus thousands who will simply slump back into their armchairs, and carry on as if nothing happened.
All that energy, drive and determination - why not use it now?
Salmond will surely resign now, or soon after the next GE? He looked a broken man in that car. Sturgeon is ready and able to replace. If he quits shortly he can retire with honour, having nearly done the inconceivable, and while he is still revered by his disciples; or he can trundle on, gradually earning more resentment. If he's got any political sense (which he has, in spades) he will go, and go soon.
I disagree. if Salmond sits back and watches the Vow unravel into the shambles it surely will become, Salmond can then have another referendum by gaining MPs at the GE and then keeps power in Scotland in 2016. He is the SNP's best asset and having forced the main 3 westminster parties into a hasty offer, Salmond can sit back and chuck smelly stuff on it saying "you were duped" to the No voters. After all, his main opponent at present is Johan Lamont! Smile please?
I keep thinking about this for the SLab talent. We lost a shed load of quite good frontbench Labour MPs at GE2010. They knew the game was up and didn't fancy being in Opposition career wise.
Can see the same thing happening again. Only it's EV4EL keeping them out instead. If I didn't have serious leadership ambitions post GE2015 - I'd be wondering what the point was - no Big Westminster jobs on the horizon...
Questions not being aired. What we now see in Scotland is a need for SLAB to be reinforced wth "talent". That "talent" is going to have to come from its Westminster MPs (Norman Smith BBC today). But how will they exit the HoC to be free to stand for the Scottish Assembly? Faced with Westminster becoming a place with limited opportunities for Scots MPs, some will jump ship. Will they still stand for election at GE 2015 and then stand down prior to the 2016 Scottish election? Or will there be a mass exodus at GE 2015, so that they can stand in 2016? Another option is a wave of SLAB by elections for the Scot Assembly to enable their Westminster "talent" to boost the Assembly as a matter of urgency.
Scottish Parliament, please - Assembly is Welsh, of course. The problem is that the SLAB seem to have made their candidate selections for 2016 in advance of indyref, before MPs could know whether or not to jump ship for Holyrood. This was reportedly a deliberate move to concentrate minds. I am not sure of the current status but if so then there is no scope for mass movement from Westmisnter till the end of the decade. Shame we don't have a Slabber to give us an informed view.
While I'm righteously laughing at all the suddenly-invisible pb Nats, I want to make an exception for you, Carnyx.
You have been nothing but civil, enlightened, informative and witty, even when occasional idiots like, say, me, were boorish and abusive.
Claire Durand gave everyone the heads-up.I will post this again.Anyone following her conclusions would have been well rewarded.The Quebec experience was the only baseline to determine probabilities so it deserved a little experiential research as the opposite was reductionist,and panic.
Dave has really put Ed and Nick in the brown stuff today by proposing a proper version of EV4EL. I think the only other option would be a full blown English Parliament and a massive reduction in the number of Westminster MPs, maybe half of today's figure with defence, foreign policy, international aid and the annual spending envelope set by Westminster and pretty much everything else devolved to the EWNI&S Parliaments. The lazy solution would be to just have EV4EL at Westminster or to have English Parliament days where devolved matters for England are discussed with English MPs only and the leader of the party with an English majority would be the English PM.
I don't know how it would work if Labour had a UK majority but the Conservatives have an English majority though.
It should work exactly the same as it works in Scotland etc - we don't worry about the fact that we have a Tory UK majority but a SNP Scottish majority. The Scottish government runs Scotland and the UK government runs the UK.
For devolved matters we should have an English government that can be either the same or different party.
I meant if both the English Parliament and UK Parliament sat at Westminster, could lead to some quirks in the system.
On another note, if the Tories are clever enough to attach Scottish devomax to EV4EL could they get it through with 305 Tories and 6 SNP? Putting Labour on the wrong side of both arguments if they vote against it giving the SNP the upper hand in Scotland and the Tories the upper hand in England.
I don't see how Ed could win the most seats in 2015 if he opposes Scottish devomax and EV4EL in early 2015.
You're underestimating the flexibility of the Great British Constitution. He doesn't have to oppose them to kill them. Hell, his MPs can vote unanimously in favour of whatever Cameron cooks up and he (and other sundry progressives and conservatives) can still make sure they don't get passed into law.
But in practice he'll presumably be able to come up with some good objections to whatever Cameron comes up with, since it'll be: 1) Trying to solve a bunch of basically impossible problems that nobody's been able to solve since 1707 when somebody decided to weld a motorbike onto the side of a bus and call it a car. 2) Designed for maximum Tory political advantage, and probably not very cleverly, as Cameron seems to be a bit clumsy with this stuff.
If you want some good blog amusement, try Whinges Over Scotland.
They are on a hunt for conspiracy theories to clutch at, and I saw at least one proposal for revenge on SeanT, which seems to have vanished now.
2400 comments and counting.
Calgacus says: 19 September, 2014 at 6:34 am @geeo,completely agree with you, fuck them all from andy murray and his last minute conversion when it was no use whatever to bateman and his bbc aren’t biased and the snp wishy washy nicey nicey pish. Salmond’s speech just showed hes one of them another career trougher. This referendum is null and void due to interference from Westminster. Salmond should show some baws and fucking fight for Scotland instead of positioning his party for another cosy love in with the scum occupying our country.
Also interestingly, they were telling each other last night to use the 6:1 odds on Betfair against a Yes victory to recover their campaigning expenses (ouch).
And we now have a "Revote 'Cos It Was All Rigged" petition at 22000 sigs and counting.
And they are all going to stop watching the BBC and not pay for a TV License.
One of the more frustrating themes that seemed to pop up over and over during this campaign was that a lot of people supposedly should not involved themselves, and also that the No side sticking up for the status quo (and then Devo Plus or whatever they end up calling it) and putting its point across was unfair. A silly, minority theme, but still annoying.
On the English question, it will be interesting to see if there is further appetite for it. Previous measures have been unappealing to the electorates and in any case did not seem to command much enthusiasm even from those proposing them, but with MPs breaking ranks and not waiting for their leaders to set a proposal, clearly they are feeling the question more acutely, and so chances are more of the general public are as well, at the least in this politically heightened moment.
I keep thinking about this for the SLab talent. We lost a shed load of quite good frontbench Labour MPs at GE2010. They knew the game was up and didn't fancy being in Opposition career wise.
Can see the same thing happening again. Only it's EV4EL keeping them out instead. If I didn't have serious leadership ambitions post GE2015 - I'd be wondering what the point was - no Big Westminster jobs on the horizon...
Questions not being aired. What we now see in Scotland is a need for SLAB to be reinforced wth "talent". That "talent" is going to have to come from its Westminster MPs (Norman Smith BBC today). But how will they exit the HoC to be free to stand for the Scottish Assembly? Faced with Westminster becoming a place with limited opportunities for Scots MPs, some will jump ship. Will they still stand for election at GE 2015 and then stand down prior to the 2016 Scottish election? Or will there be a mass exodus at GE 2015, so that they can stand in 2016? Another option is a wave of SLAB by elections for the Scot Assembly to enable their Westminster "talent" to boost the Assembly as a matter of urgency.
Scottish Parliament, please - Assembly is Welsh, of course. The problem is that the SLAB seem to have made their candidate selections for 2016 in advance of indyref, before MPs could know whether or not to jump ship for Holyrood. This was reportedly a deliberate move to concentrate minds. I am not sure of the current status but if so then there is no scope for mass movement from Westmisnter till the end of the decade. Shame we don't have a Slabber to give us an informed view.
While I'm righteously laughing at all the suddenly-invisible pb Nats, I want to make an exception for you, Carnyx.
You have been nothing but civil, enlightened, informative and witty, even when occasional idiots like, say, me, were boorish and abusive.
I'll second that.
Time for us all to move on, graciously. There's more betting to be done after all...
Salmond will surely resign now, or soon after the next GE? He looked a broken man in that car.
Sturgeon is ready and able to replace.
If he quits shortly he can retire with honour, having nearly done the inconceivable, and while he is still revered by his disciples; or he can trundle on, gradually earning more resentment.
If he's got any political sense (which he has, in spades) he will go, and go soon.
I've heard the rumbles he'll hold Office until at least the GE in May and handover to Sturgeon then.
Dave has really put Ed and Nick in the brown stuff today by proposing a proper version of EV4EL. I think the only other option would be a full blown English Parliament and a massive reduction in the number of Westminster MPs, maybe half of today's figure with defence, foreign policy, international aid and the annual spending envelope set by Westminster and pretty much everything else devolved to the EWNI&S Parliaments. The lazy solution would be to just have EV4EL at Westminster or to have English Parliament days where devolved matters for England are discussed with English MPs only and the leader of the party with an English majority would be the English PM.
I don't know how it would work if Labour had a UK majority but the Conservatives have an English majority though.
It should work exactly the same as it works in Scotland etc - we don't worry about the fact that we have a Tory UK majority but a SNP Scottish majority. The Scottish government runs Scotland and the UK government runs the UK.
For devolved matters we should have an English government that can be either the same or different party.
I meant if both the English Parliament and UK Parliament sat at Westminster, could lead to some quirks in the system.
On another note, if the Tories are clever enough to attach Scottish devomax to EV4EL could they get it through with 305 Tories and 6 SNP? Putting Labour on the wrong side of both arguments if they vote against it giving the SNP the upper hand in Scotland and the Tories the upper hand in England.
I don't see how Ed could win the most seats in 2015 if he opposes Scottish devomax and EV4EL in early 2015.
You're underestimating the flexibility of the Great British Constitution. He doesn't have to oppose them to kill them. Hell, his MPs can vote unanimously in favour of whatever Cameron cooks up and he (and other sundry progressives and conservatives) can still make sure they don't get passed into law.
But in practice he'll presumably be able to come up with some good objections to whatever Cameron comes up with, since it'll be: 1) Trying to solve a bunch of basically impossible problems that nobody's been able to solve since 1707 when somebody decided to weld a motorbike onto the side of a bus and call it a car. 2) Designed for maximum Tory political advantage, and probably not very cleverly, as Cameron seems to be a bit clumsy with this stuff.
amazing how much you're pro-political reform, until it's a change you don't like...
SNP deputy leader Nicola Sturgeon tweets: Scotland has changed forever as a result of #indyref. There is no going back to business as usual. The demand for change must be heeded.
It's correct, but my gods the tone of this and other comments - without a moment of hesitation they have seamlessly switched gears to position themselves as being the only ones making sure change happens. There may be a lot of despondency out there, but the SNP are already up and running for the new plans. Impressive, if a little disconcerting.
Yes, I think it would be good if the SNP acknowledged more clearly that they lost (instead of all this 1.7 mill voted for independence piffle, which reminds me a little of Tony Benn's 8 million voted for socialism in 1983). Now would be a good time for them to reflect a little on the reasons why they lost.
Very happy with the result. Slightly less so with some of the post match analysis.
Instead of focusing on policy implications of the vote everyone seems obsessed with the mechanics of voting/constitutional issues.
Mass turnouts are a result of dissatisfaction with policies, not process. If the Scots lived in a booming economy with opportunity for all (like that utopia promised by the SNP) then Yes would have struggled to get 40%.
I wonder how many people will be delighted to see their English MP banging on for months about an English Parliament? If you are struggling to afford to buy a new house or haven't had a decent pay rise then constitutional affairs are not likely to be top of your agenda.
Regrettably it just makes the political elite look like all they want to talk about is themselves, again.
Resolving England's democratic deficit is not 'mechanics' its at the very heart of our political system and the English question undermines the credibility of our politics as does the absurd Barnett Formula which has seen the same regions get an excessively large share of the pie for 40 years whilst other regions are underfunded.
So whilst it may not immediately resolve someones Housing needs it may in time provide the cash to reduce tuition fees meaning future generations can raise the deposit for their home or improve public services in parts of the country that have suffered the shortfall for decades or indeed by withholding that money Cameron could provide tax cuts. Its not just some 'mechanics'. it goes to the very heart of Government!
Oh and according to Mori Immigration is the issue that most vexes those voters they asked Housing attracted barely one third of that number. I'm sure many people would be happy to have Immigration resolved with all its economic implications but that would mean we would have to address the 'mechanics' of our constitutional settlement with Brussels.
So whether it an English Parliament or the EU that MPs bang on about they are not issues in isolation but relate to the issues that most perplex people!
Also interesting that I'm seeing comments from some Yes pundits on TV about how the Westminster elites rushing up to Scotland and offering things seems to have swung things, as I'm sure we were told in no uncertain terms that it would be counter productive, weren't we?
Scottish Parliament, please - Assembly is Welsh, of course. The problem is that the SLAB seem to have made their candidate selections for 2016 in advance of indyref, before MPs could know whether or not to jump ship for Holyrood. This was reportedly a deliberate move to concentrate minds. I am not sure of the current status but if so then there is no scope for mass movement from Westmisnter till the end of the decade. Shame we don't have a Slabber to give us an informed view.
While I'm righteously laughing at all the suddenly-invisible pb Nats, I want to make an exception for you, Carnyx.
You have been nothing but civil, enlightened, informative and witty, even when occasional idiots like, say, me, were boorish and abusive.
I'll second that.
Time for us all to move on, graciously. There's more betting to be done after all...
Quite so. Clacton is a pretty sure result, but there's another by-election to consider.
Also interestingly, they were telling each other last night to use the 6:1 odds on Betfair against a Yes victory to recover their campaigning expenses (ouch).
And we now have a "Revote 'Cos It Was All Rigged" petition at 22000 sigs and counting.
And they are all going to stop watching the BBC and not pay for a TV License.
One of the more frustrating themes that seemed to pop up over and over during this campaignt.
Hope you are feeling better this morning Kle. A little, thank you. Still coughing and spluttering (such suffering that has never been known, I am sure), but my head is clear and certainly I've full of positive cheer at least!
SNP deputy leader Nicola Sturgeon tweets: Scotland has changed forever as a result of #indyref. There is no going back to business as usual. The demand for change must be heeded.
It's correct, but my gods the tone of this and other comments - without a moment of hesitation they have seamlessly switched gears to position themselves as being the only ones making sure change happens. There may be a lot of despondency out there, but the SNP are already up and running for the new plans. Impressive, if a little disconcerting.
Yes, I think it would be good if the SNP acknowledged more clearly that they lost (instead of all this 1.7 mill voted for independence piffle, which reminds me a little of Tony Benn's 8 million voted for socialism in 1983). Now would be a good time for them to reflect a little on the reasons why they lost.
Good luck with that . The SNP do not do humility. Nothing is ever their fault (usually its Westminster aka the English)
After Dave's triumph overnight, it's good to see the Tories storming back into the lead according to Stephen Fisher's latest GE 2015 projection. Based on UKPR's latest average polling figures, he sees the major parties winning the following number of seats next May (also showing last week's comparatives) :
Mr. Observer, it's not about cocking up the electoral system for no good reason.
Nobody linked devolution to PR. Nobody linked DevoMax to PR. But when it looks like the English might finally get an equal say you claim we need PR. We don't. English votes for English laws or an English Parliament will suffice.
No, I have always supported PR. If you believe that laws for England should reflect the views of the English electorate then I do not see how you can justify excluding millions of English people from that process by denying parties they voted for representation.
Er? I can't understand that. We don't have PR at the moment, so you can make the argument that at the moment, the UK parliament doesn't reflect the views of the UK electorate.
But PR and EV4EL are mutually exclusive. You can have both, you can have neither (like now), or you can have one or the other.
The question is would EV4EL be fairer than it is now...answer YES. Would PR be fairer than it is now..maybe. But the two aren't directly linked,and certainly not joined at the hip.
EV4EL surely means that the wishes of the majority of English voters are respected when it comes to legislating on English-only matters. A situation in which a minority can block the wishes of a majority is not sustainable.
It's been sustained for a long time so far! Why is it any less sustainable under EV4EL? That's the problem, you keep making these extremely vauge statements to try to conflate the two issues, but you haven't drawn any kind of clear concrete link.
Once you raise fairness for English voters as an issue - and it is absolutely right that it should be raised - then people start looking in a lot more detail at what constitutes fairness.
In 2005 Labour won less votes than the Tories in England, but more seats. It could easily happen again.
After Dave's triumph overnight, it's good to see the Tories storming back into the lead according to Stephen Fisher's latest GE 2015 projection. Based on UKPR's latest average polling figures, he sees the major parties winning the following number of seats next May (also showing last week's comparatives) :
That projection has nothing at all to do with last night. You're a fantastic bettor but I feel it's a little misleading to link last night and Mr Fisher's GE projection !
Labour is layable at 1.75 for most seats on the exchanges btw right now.
Anyone know what the final turnover figures totted up to,one Glasgow bookmaker told me turnover was low up there? I imagine Shadsy and his gang of Dick Turpins hoisted many mug Yes punters who didn't get their brains in gear.
"This was a vote for solidarity and social justice. It was a vote for our NHS, for the welfare state, and for unity — because we are better together.
But whether people voted Yes or No, this was also a vote for change.
We must change the way the UK is governed and who it is run for. And that thirst for change is not just in Scotland but across the whole of the UK.
We need more good jobs and job security. We need decent wages and an end to poverty pay. We need a better future for our young people so they can believe they can have a better life than their parents.
The last few weeks have been about keeping our country together. The next eight months will be about showing how we can change our country together.
There is only one party that can do it — and that is our party."
Afternoon all, there are comments appearing on Twitter about Alex Salmond's future. Apparently he was due to make a TV appearance a short time ago and has delayed. May be for a completely unrelated reason. He may be on the phone to HM at Balmoral checking she has the latest betting tips, given his other great passion as a tipster.
After Dave's triumph overnight, it's good to see the Tories storming back into the lead according to Stephen Fisher's latest GE 2015 projection. Based on UKPR's latest average polling figures, he sees the major parties winning the following number of seats next May (also showing last week's comparatives) :
That projection has nothing at all to do with last night. You're a fantastic bettor but I feel it's a little misleading to link last night and Mr Fisher's GE projection !
Labour is layable at 1.75 for most seats on the exchanges btw right now.
I think you missed his tongue - twas in his cheek!
"This was a vote for solidarity and social justice. It was a vote for our NHS, for the welfare state, and for unity — because we are better together.
But whether people voted Yes or No, this was also a vote for change.
We must change the way the UK is governed and who it is run for. And that thirst for change is not just in Scotland but across the whole of the UK.
We need more good jobs and job security. We need decent wages and an end to poverty pay. We need a better future for our young people so they can believe they can have a better life than their parents.
The last few weeks have been about keeping our country together. The next eight months will be about showing how we can change our country together.
There is only one party that can do it — and that is our party."
It was a vote that ensures SLAB won't die, that's for sure.
Comments
High unemployment
High immigration
High % of Catholic votes
All great news for Labour (not)
I don't know how it would work if Labour had a UK majority but the Conservatives have an English majority though.
A referendum on an English parliament after next GE? More betting opportunities.
Lab+Tory in 2010 = 42%
The First Ministers of Scotland, NI and Wales are all from different parties than the PM of the UK. Why can't the UK have a Labour PM but England have a Tory First Minister and Tory control over health, education etc?
For devolved matters we should have an English government that can be either the same or different party.
John Denham says England 'held back by a UK Lab party' more interested in Scottish + Welsh devolution http://www.theoptimisticpatriot.co.uk/post/97875896668/the-english-question …
John Denham gets it...
Pandora's box is open and (ironically) it's thanks to Brown and Salmond.
They are on a hunt for conspiracy theories to clutch at, and I saw at least one proposal for revenge on SeanT, which seems to have vanished now.
2400 comments and counting. http://wingsoverscotland.com/us-now-or-never/comment-page-4/#comments
Also interestingly, they were telling each other last night to use the 6:1 odds on Betfair against a Yes victory to recover their campaigning expenses (ouch).
And we now have a "Revote 'Cos It Was All Rigged" petition at 22000 sigs and counting.
And they are all going to stop watching the BBC and not pay for a TV License.
His lack of answers on currency and other matters is wot lost it - he was badly prepared on this and numerous other matters such as EU membership.
Serious Nats should be pressurising him to stand aside.
Brilliant.
However, we are where we are, and we start from a dreadful constitutional mess inherited from Labour. Going to a fully devolved, federal structure with a proper English parliament is certainly one possible solution in theory, but unlikely to get support in practice, not least from Labour who got us into this mess. In any case there are genuine reasons, beyond Labour partisan self-interest, for thinking that a federal structure with one of the constituents being so dominant wouldn't work terribly well.
I don't think there is a clean, neat solution which will satisfy everyone, but perhaps we can at least address the worst aspects of the WLQ in some ad-hoc fashion.
'Second, English Labour needs it’s own voice in this process, unrestrained by Labour from other parts of the union. I’d argue that devolution with England has been held back by a UK Labour Party not convinced that England needs change as much as Wales and Scotland'
In other words, Hain/Alexander etc, STFU.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100286990/ed-miliband-clearly-has-no-idea-what-he-thinks-the-united-kingdom-should-actually-look-like/
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100286973/david-cameron-is-now-poised-to-win-in-2015/
Worth taking 1-10 ?
Doug Fridlund @douglasfridlund 1m
If I saw a slightly dejected looking Alex Salmond right now just walking around I'd put my arm around him and be like "U k?
In view of Scotland’s response yesterday, the SNP need to take a good, hard look at themselves, they really don’t know the majority of Scots as well as they think .
A great result for UK - Rule Britannia. ; )
Under your proposal of English Votes for English Laws, the UK Chancellor still has to double up as the English finance minister, which would make it impossible for a Scottish MP to take that position, and similarly with the other dual roles - such as PM. That completely destroys the Union.
So if you want to have English Laws voted on by only English MPs then you need to create an English Parliament for them to vote in.
You're right that it leaves the UK Parliament with relatively little to do, but if you want to preserve the Union and you want to stop Scottish MPs voting on English tuition fees, then you have to go the whole hog.
Also interestingly, they were telling each other last night to use the 6:1 odds on Betfair against a Yes victory to recover their campaigning expenses (ouch).
And we now have a "Revote 'Cos It Was All Rigged" petition at 22000 sigs and counting.
And they are all going to stop watching the BBC and not pay for a TV License.
Comments can be summarised into -
"Ooh, we don't like the results of a democratic vote. Whinge. Whine. Moan"
Diane Abbot... Gordon brown drew up the concessions off the cuff when he thought Scots were going to vote yes
Are the long-short seats which have been weigh the vote Labour, but voted Yes last night worth a small punt? (West Dunbartonshire, Cumbernauld etc., selected Glasgae seats). Or do the SNP disappear back into the mists of the North-East? Does a TUSC / Scottish Socialist type party actually start up effectively in such places with an alternative offering to Ed Milibland or the SNP? Or do they all revert to Labour on shockingly low turnouts?
Also interestingly, they were telling each other last night to use the 6:1 odds on Betfair against a Yes victory to recover their campaigning expenses (ouch).
And we now have a "Revote 'Cos It Was All Rigged" petition at 22000 sigs and counting.
And they are all going to stop watching the BBC and not pay for a TV License.
One of the more frustrating themes that seemed to pop up over and over during this campaign was that a lot of people supposedly should not involved themselves, and also that the No side sticking up for the status quo (and then Devo Plus or whatever they end up calling it) and putting its point across was unfair. A silly, minority theme, but still annoying.
On the English question, it will be interesting to see if there is further appetite for it. Previous measures have been unappealing to the electorates and in any case did not seem to command much enthusiasm even from those proposing them, but with MPs breaking ranks and not waiting for their leaders to set a proposal, clearly they are feeling the question more acutely, and so chances are more of the general public are as well, at the least in this politically heightened moment.
And Osborne.
And everyone else.
Anyhow the obvious way to tidy this up is that even if you don't have a separate building and separate MPs, you have a separate English PM, with powers that are clearly separate from the UK PM's powers. That way they can disagree with each other but still get things done in their own domains. Obviously if the numbers were right then Parliament and English-Subset-Parliament could both choose the same person as their PM.
https://www.change.org/p/alex-salmond-we-the-undersigned-demand-a-revote-of-the-scottish-referendum-counted-by-impartial-international-parties
"Countless evidences of fraud during the recent Scottish Referendum have come to light, including two counts of votes being moved in bulk into a No pile, Yes votes clearly being seen in no piles and strange occurences with dual fire alarms and clear cut fraud in Glasgow. We demand a revote be taken of said referendum, where each vote shall be counted by two individuals, one of whom should be an international impartial party without a stake in the vote."
This is the Vid. Does anyone know procedures well enough to explain it? I don't.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRWWilODlsc
The 2/7 on Nick Clegg surviving might not be a bad bet as well, if you're in the mood for this kind of bet.
I'm already on all of these at much better odds from a while back, so I won't be topping up at these odds.
Can see the same thing happening again. Only it's EV4EL keeping them out instead. If I didn't have serious leadership ambitions post GE2015 - I'd be wondering what the point was - no Big Westminster jobs on the horizon...
This morning, I open FB to see a beardless man I do not recognise ...
He's the sort of Yes supporter I feel most sorry for. A good man, who wanted the best for his country and was always humorous, polite and intelligent when discussing it. He is truly hurt this morning.
Golly, was he irked.
1. Does the right thing by England in a serious way and goes hard on Labour re setting this whole sorry mess off with their deeply cynical self serving devolution plans (and resistance to EVFEL / horseshit regional alternatives).
2. Goes hard on Labour and Rotherham / multiculti / rotten boroughs / cover-ups and their deeply cynical and self serving immigration policies, vote buying and PC agenda.
3. Bigs up the UK's economic performance and 'don't let these muppets screw it all up again'.
He's doing stuff in 1 and 3. I suspect 2 will start soon (and Farage will anyway be firing shells at Labour). Dave may have the killer instincts of a dodo - but Crosby and Osborne and others do. Labour is in for a torrid few months and very gritty election. They're going to get absolutely monstered all the way up to the GE campaign and then we'll see Ed on the telly alot. Omens looking positive. ;-)
I'd have thought Dave was more nailed on, but then again the Labour party is so terrible at stabbings that if a coup came up he'd likely survive.
Meanwhile kudos to the bloke who put £800k on No! What did he make, about a hundred grand?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29219165
Instead of focusing on policy implications of the vote everyone seems obsessed with the mechanics of voting/constitutional issues.
Mass turnouts are a result of dissatisfaction with policies, not process. If the Scots lived in a booming economy with opportunity for all (like that utopia promised by the SNP) then Yes would have struggled to get 40%.
I wonder how many people will be delighted to see their English MP banging on for months about an English Parliament? If you are struggling to afford to buy a new house or haven't had a decent pay rise then constitutional affairs are not likely to be top of your agenda.
Regrettably it just makes the political elite look like all they want to talk about is themselves, again.
Instead, it's wave after wave of whinging, whining, and 'I'm leaving the country to get away from my treacherous and disloyal neighbours'.
paddy power are now EVEN money that ukip get less than three seats
Coral are 3/1 ukip get zero seats
Ladbrokes are 5/4 lib dem to outpoll ukip
Ladbrokes are 15/8 ukip 5-10%
*its fewer than three isn't it?
But while we’re all patting our fellow PBers on the back for their part in saving the Union, I’d also like to add Roger, to the list.
He may only have played a small part in the great scheme of things, but who would have thought this time last year, he’d actually venture north, joining the foot soldiers on the ground and reporting back as the ‘man on the spot’ – bravo Roger.
(I’m feeling very generous today) ; )
On another note, if the Tories are clever enough to attach Scottish devomax to EV4EL could they get it through with 305 Tories and 6 SNP? Putting Labour on the wrong side of both arguments if they vote against it giving the SNP the upper hand in Scotland and the Tories the upper hand in England.
I don't see how Ed could win the most seats in 2015 if he opposes Scottish devomax and EV4EL in early 2015.
UKIP layable at 6-1 for 0 seats. Worth £60 liability or so I reckon. Clacton is surely nailed on.
Another poster has said that they feel 'bereaved' by the result. That I find harder to understand.
Diane Abbott on the Daily Politics:
“Labour MPs will unite behind Ed Miliband, once we find out what our policies are.”
http://order-order.com/2014/09/19/quote-of-the-day-922/
Thankfully enough Scots didn't believe the "moon on a stick" promises.
It's correct, but my gods the tone of this and other comments - without a moment of hesitation they have seamlessly switched gears to position themselves as being the only ones making sure change happens. There may be a lot of despondency out there, but the SNP are already up and running for the new plans. Impressive, if a little disconcerting.
The scenario you envisage may pertain if there were a separate English parliament. But I don't think any of the major parties are proposing that, are they?
All that energy, drive and determination - why not use it now?
http://ahlessondages.blogspot.ca/2014/08/one-month-before-scottish-independence.html?dm_i=DCJ,2THCP,93NF5X,A8LMI,1
But in practice he'll presumably be able to come up with some good objections to whatever Cameron comes up with, since it'll be:
1) Trying to solve a bunch of basically impossible problems that nobody's been able to solve since 1707 when somebody decided to weld a motorbike onto the side of a bus and call it a car.
2) Designed for maximum Tory political advantage, and probably not very cleverly, as Cameron seems to be a bit clumsy with this stuff.
On the English question, it will be interesting to see if there is further appetite for it. Previous measures have been unappealing to the electorates and in any case did not seem to command much enthusiasm even from those proposing them, but with MPs breaking ranks and not waiting for their leaders to set a proposal, clearly they are feeling the question more acutely, and so chances are more of the general public are as well, at the least in this politically heightened moment.
Hope you are feeling better this morning Kle.
Just rumblings mind.
Same as it ever was.
So whilst it may not immediately resolve someones Housing needs it may in time provide the cash to reduce tuition fees meaning future generations can raise the deposit for their home or improve public services in parts of the country that have suffered the shortfall for decades or indeed by withholding that money Cameron could provide tax cuts. Its not just some 'mechanics'. it goes to the very heart of Government!
Oh and according to Mori Immigration is the issue that most vexes those voters they asked Housing attracted barely one third of that number. I'm sure many people would be happy to have Immigration resolved with all its economic implications but that would mean we would have to address the 'mechanics' of our constitutional settlement with Brussels.
So whether it an English Parliament or the EU that MPs bang on about they are not issues in isolation but relate to the issues that most perplex people!
Designers everywhere thank Scotland. Long live the Union Jack, a true design masterpiece http://wrd.cm/1wMynfO
Damn straight....
A little, thank you. Still coughing and spluttering (such suffering that has never been known, I am sure), but my head is clear and certainly I've full of positive cheer at least!
Pip pip!
Based on UKPR's latest average polling figures, he sees the major parties winning the following number of seats next May (also showing last week's comparatives) :
Con ............. 303 (+ 8 seats)
Lab .............. 292 (- 7 seats)
Lib Dem ......... 26 (- 1 seat)
Others ........... 29 (unchanged)
Total ............ 650
In 2005 Labour won less votes than the Tories in England, but more seats. It could easily happen again.
Labour is layable at 1.75 for most seats on the exchanges btw right now.
Not much about EVEL
"This was a vote for solidarity and social justice. It was a vote for our NHS, for the welfare state, and for unity — because we are better together.
But whether people voted Yes or No, this was also a vote for change.
We must change the way the UK is governed and who it is run for. And that thirst for change is not just in Scotland but across the whole of the UK.
We need more good jobs and job security. We need decent wages and an end to poverty pay. We need a better future for our young people so they can believe they can have a better life than their parents.
The last few weeks have been about keeping our country together. The next eight months will be about showing how we can change our country together.
There is only one party that can do it — and that is our party."
I think you missed his tongue - twas in his cheek!