Cameron isn't backtracking and the Tories need not worry.
Hasn't it been made abundantly clear that there will be NO legislation on either devox max or EV4EL this side of the election? What will happen is that, as promised in the vow, the three parties will agree the Scottish dimension in the form of a draft bill, but it will not become law as there simply isn't enough time. It will be enacted unananimously post May 2015 whoever wins the election.
Over the next few months the Hague Committee will deliberate on the EV4EL. It is possible that Labour and LibDems will concur, though unlikely by the former. I imagine it too will report in March and again no legislation will be forthcoming. Instead this issue, unlike Sotland will be hard fought between Cons and Lab as part of the election campaign and the voters will decide.
Exactly - so why are people getting so worked up about this on the Tory side?
The other point is that Crossrail is a strategic project which has effects from out as far as Swindon and right across London to beyond the city into Canary Wharf. The consequence of the very valid point you make is that Miliband's scheme (if it warrants being called that) will be riddled with inconcistencies and exceptions. We can imagine something like Crossrail being 'called in' and ruled on by a Transport Minister from a Scottish constituency.
And yet (unless things have changed since I last looked) HS2 phase 1 is being paid for in part by the Scots (because of its exclusion from the Barnett calculations) yet the Scots are at present likely to have to pay as well the full price for its extension in Scotland (or more precisely its growth from Glasgow and Edinburgh southwards and hopefully northwards) as transport is devolved. So in that case a Scot might well be the 'best 'person to decide ...
How much is Scotland paying?
Remember, that even without an extension into Scotland, HS2 will improve times from Scotland (Edinburgh or Glasgow) to London using the classic trains, from 4hr30 mins (standard time) to 3hr37/3hr39 (1). And the assumption that Scotland would have to pay for the full cost of any extension into Scotland is just that: an assumption, as it has not been fully planned yet.
A new high-speed route fully inside Scotland (such as some super-EGIP) might be another matter. After all, surely Scottish MPs can vote on HS2, whilst English MPs cannot vote on the Scottish network?
ON paying, wouldn't know offhand but a substantial sum of the order of 1 or 1.4 billion was mentioned IIRC, based on pro rata according to their tax input, I should think.
On future extension - assumption indeed. But the implication of recent discussions in Scotland was that it would be a DIY job if we were to get going on a decent timescale and build a HS2 link between Edinburgh and Glasgow as a nucleus for extensions north and south to the border. And the current discussions will deal with the MPs (I entirely concur with EV4EL when this is sensible).
I wasn't being too serious, admittedly, but just pointing out that the 'correct' solution might not be as obvious as expected!
On a completely different matter, ever heard of the Moat Pit at Culross? I was reading about it recently, and you might enjoy it. Academic paper here (free but limited access): www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/27917615?uid=3738032&uid=2&uid=4&sid=21104719021873
Cameron's decision on this could prompt some more tory defections to UKIP.
Maybe quite a few.
Sigh... Cameron is still proposing what he has always proposed - what will probably amount to EV4EL. There is to be a cabinet committee to take this latter issue forward. The timetable of all these events will take us past the next election. So its quite clear that further Scottish devolution and EV4EL will both be delivered by a Tory govt if it is re-elected. All UKIP intervention would achieve is to hand the issue to Labour who would - 1 - fail to delever a resolution to the WLQ (and give us labour prejudiced local govt reform instead 2 - fail to give a referendum on the EU.
Glad he has clarified his position that the pledge was not dependent on EV4EL even though the little Englander wing of his party will go nuts.
A very sensible arrangement. I don't even understand why his party will be getting angry at this one. There was no way they could get EV4EL before the GE, so they would have had to go into the GE promising a Conservative government alone would ensure it anyway, hit Labour hard with that attack, and they can still do that and without alienating the Scots at the same time. They promised a solution in their manifesto last time around about it, but this time it should be more prominent.
They get to campaign on an issue that should be pretty popular and is another of the many issues some Tories think will be a game changer for the GE, what more could actually be achieved? It just feels like another example of some Tories being furious Cameron did not win a majority and needs the agreement of other parties to get things done.
I think they're angry about the vow. EV4EL is just to try to placate them. They probably would have preferred Cameron take a stance where he actually refuses to vote through the new Scottish powers without EV4EL..
A solution which just hurts them more by making him look dishonest. It's fair enough they are angry about the vow, many people are not happy about it, but it's one of those situations where it's not worth backtracking on it now, it's too late.
he Tories are proposing EV4EL Which will be defeated.
And many tories will vote against more devolution for Scotland without it. The party will be hopelessly split...
Many Tories raised EV4EL during the leadership speeches. It's not unpopular. Cammo was wise to let it go until the Scot Indy had been addressed. Labour will not agree to it. The Tories will put it in their manifesto for GE 2015. Add that to the referendum on the EU..... "only a Conservative majority government can deliver this....."
Cameron isn't backtracking and the Tories need not worry.
Hasn't it been made abundantly clear that there will be NO legislation on either devox max or EV4EL this side of the election? What will happen is that, as promised in the vow, the three parties will agree the Scottish dimension in the form of a draft bill, but it will not become law as there simply isn't enough time. It will be enacted unananimously post May 2015 whoever wins the election.
Over the next few months the Hague Committee will deliberate on the EV4EL. It is possible that Labour and LibDems will concur, though unlikely by the former. I imagine it too will report in March and again no legislation will be forthcoming. Instead this issue, unlike Sotland will be hard fought between Cons and Lab as part of the election campaign and the voters will decide.
Exactly - so why are people getting so worked up about this on the Tory side?
I don't think they are! Who do you have in mind?
Well there's a lot of nebulous talk of 'Tory defections' and 'furious backbenchers' in a general sense is all.
Looks like Hiugh is right. Cameron has backed down.
He will now utterly shatter his party. Many tories will vote against this...and many more conservative voters will vote UKIP.
I'm a bit confused about this actually. Surely linking the two together was win/win for Cameron. Either it helped push through EV4EL which would be popular and hurt the Labour party, or it'd be blocked by Lib/Lab which would give some powerful ammunition in the election campaign. Not to mention give UKIP something to really attack Labour on. Why back down?
He made a vow, along with other party leaders and Gordon Brown, that he would give more devolution to the Scots. He did not say anything about making it conditional on devolution in England.
As usual a Cameron announcement designed to keep his party happy for a few hours has turned out to be an utter disaster. It's the EU referendum all over again. He's now in a much worse position than he would have been had he made a more measured and less partisan statement yesterday morning.
So? Let's say he stuck with his "interpretation" of the vow. What would have happened?
1. Scots would have been pissed off. Worst case for him is that this ire was entirely directed at the Tories, in which case they may risk losing some votes in Scotland. Who cares? Better case is the ire would have been more spread out against English parties, increasing SNP votes and losing Labour votes. So little risk, all upside there.
2. He'd have been able to hammer Labour (and Lib dems?) for opposing EV4EL. If asked why he wasn't fulfilling the vow, he could have said it was because it was common sense to tie it to EV4EL. This would have played well with English voters. They're hardly going to punish him for it.
3. His backbenchers who were angry about the vow would have been largely pacified, and UKIP's pro-EV4EL campaigning would have been entirely directed against Labour. Now both those groups are going to be setting their targets on him as much or more than Labour
4. The issue would have inevitably come to a head before the election. It may still be the case, but Labour's chance of kicking it into the long grass (or at least to the other side of the election, which is what they really care about) has now hugely increased
So kippers are now complaining that Cameron is a man of his word?
A change of attitude slightly!
Keeping unpopular promises, while not keeping popular promises, is the issue.
Except you are wrong. You are inventing stuff to suit yourself.
Cameron isn't backtracking and the Tories need not worry.
Hasn't it been made abundantly clear that there will be NO legislation on either devox max or EV4EL this side of the election? What will happen is that, as promised in the vow, the three parties will agree the Scottish dimension in the form of a draft bill, but it will not become law as there simply isn't enough time. It will be enacted unananimously post May 2015 whoever wins the election.
Over the next few months the Hague Committee will deliberate on the EV4EL. It is possible that Labour and LibDems will concur, though unlikely by the former. I imagine it too will report in March and again no legislation will be forthcoming. Instead this issue, unlike Sotland will be hard fought between Cons and Lab as part of the election campaign and the voters will decide.
Exactly - so why are people getting so worked up about this on the Tory side?
I don't think they are! Who do you have in mind?
Well there's a lot of nebulous talk of 'Tory defections' and 'furious backbenchers' in a general sense is all.
Much wiser to listen to a wizened old party hack...
he Tories are proposing EV4EL Which will be defeated.
And many tories will vote against more devolution for Scotland without it. The party will be hopelessly split...
Many Tories raised EV4EL during the leadership speeches. It's not unpopular. Cammo was wise to let it go until the Scot Indy had been addressed. Labour will not agree to it. The Tories will put it in their manifesto for GE 2015. Add that to the referendum on the EU..... "only a Conservative majority government can deliver this....."
And the voters will not take much notice. The election will be decided on economic and social issues and not constitutional ones.
Cameron's decision on this could prompt some more tory defections to UKIP.
Maybe quite a few.
Sigh... Cameron is still proposing what he has always proposed - what will probably amount to EV4EL. There is to be a cabinet committee to take this latter issue forward. The timetable of all these events will take us past the next election. So its quite clear that further Scottish devolution and EV4EL will both be delivered by a Tory govt if it is re-elected. All UKIP intervention would achieve is to hand the issue to Labour who would - 1 - fail to delever a resolution to the WLQ (and give us labour prejudiced local govt reform instead 2 - fail to give a referendum on the EU.
Kicking english devolution into the long grass while voting for more scottish powers and money will rock the Tory boat just like Maastricht.
You remember what happened? Major became a hero with his opt outs but only for a while, in the end the Tories shot him and berated him over europe anyway.
he Tories are proposing EV4EL Which will be defeated.
And many tories will vote against more devolution for Scotland without it. The party will be hopelessly split...
Many Tories raised EV4EL during the leadership speeches. It's not unpopular. Cammo was wise to let it go until the Scot Indy had been addressed. Labour will not agree to it. The Tories will put it in their manifesto for GE 2015. Add that to the referendum on the EU..... "only a Conservative majority government can deliver this....."
And the voters will not take much notice. The election will be decided on economic and social issues and not constitutional ones.
At last, you as Labour activist and I as a Tory can speak as one on that!
A key problem with Tory strategy is that they never do anything concrete while in power, they always promise that they will do it after the next election, like most governments. Because that happens so often, people never believe pre-election promises, so all that vote Tory and get a referendum and english powers but only after the next election will never be believed.
Glad he has clarified his position that the pledge was not dependent on EV4EL even though the little Englander wing of his party will go nuts.
A very sensible arrangement. I don't even understand why his party will be getting angry at this one. There was no way they could get EV4EL before the GE, so they would have had to go into the GE promising a Conservative government alone would ensure it anyway, hit Labour hard with that attack, and they can still do that and without alienating the Scots at the same time. They promised a solution in their manifesto last time around about it, but this time it should be more prominent.
They get to campaign on an issue that should be pretty popular and is another of the many issues some Tories think will be a game changer for the GE, what more could actually be achieved? It just feels like another example of some Tories being furious Cameron did not win a majority and needs the agreement of other parties to get things done.
I think they're angry about the vow. EV4EL is just to try to placate them. They probably would have preferred Cameron take a stance where he actually refuses to vote through the new Scottish powers without EV4EL. It's true that these votes may be happening on the other side of the election, but in a Tory/Lib Dem coalition or Tory minority, there'd probably be exactly the same issue.
Clearly then - Vote Conservative. We don't have a Tory majority now so the Tory Party alone cannot even now vote through EV4EL. Biut it can create the legislation and propose it even if the libdems and labour refuse to vote for it. There is no earthly reason why Scots or Englishn should not vote for a Tory UK govt. After all Scots can vote for who they like to govern them under their newly devolved powers and whats wrong with it coinciding with the next Scottish election in 2016.
he Tories are proposing EV4EL Which will be defeated.
And many tories will vote against more devolution for Scotland without it. The party will be hopelessly split...
Many Tories raised EV4EL during the leadership speeches. It's not unpopular. Cammo was wise to let it go until the Scot Indy had been addressed. Labour will not agree to it. The Tories will put it in their manifesto for GE 2015. Add that to the referendum on the EU..... "only a Conservative majority government can deliver this....."
And the voters will not take much notice. The election will be decided on economic and social issues and not constitutional ones.
At last, you as Labour activist and I as a Tory can speak as one on that!
I'm sure you're right, but given the economic arguments will consist of arguing over which bits each of you will cut, and there's not that much you can do differently in that regard, constitutional arguments are actually more interesting. And if someone were able to create the impression going into the campaign that they were better able to stick up for england, the economic and social arguments could gain more traction.
ON paying, wouldn't know offhand but a substantial sum of the order of 1 or 1.4 billion was mentioned IIRC, based on pro rata according to their tax input, I should think.
On future extension - assumption indeed. But the implication of recent discussions in Scotland was that it would be a DIY job if we were to get going on a decent timescale and build a HS2 link between Edinburgh and Glasgow as a nucleus for extensions north and south to the border. And the current discussions will deal with the MPs (I entirely concur with EV4EL when this is sensible).
I wasn't being too serious, admittedly, but just pointing out that the 'correct' solution might not be as obvious as expected!
I've split my reply into two posts:
As I've said, Scotland will get some advantage from HS2, and their MPs have, and will, vote on it. I think it's arguable that Scotland would pay something towards it for those reasons alone. If all Scottish MPs abstain from the votes, you'd have a more persuasive case. The amount Scotland should pay is arguable though, and I've got no idea what it should be.
As for Edinburgh-Glasgow: transport's a devolved power. I'm not sure it's equitable to make the rest of the UK pay for a line that does not go into their territory and their MPs cannot vote for, or even make their views officially known on. If the line was to be made so it could form a spine for connection to the English high-speed network, then an argument can be made that we should pay something towards it.
Having said that, I'm not sure the market is there to justify the cost of an ultra high-speed Edinburgh to Glasgow line (I've said the same about the chancellor's (ahem) interesting proposals for a high-speed route for the north of England). Line speed improvements past EGIP is certainly an option; EGIP delivers Edinburgh to Glasgow in 35 minutes (from 50 atm). How long should it ideally take?
Anyone who wants to know how the Tory cabinet works,Downton Abbey is furthering the cause of Etonomics and cap-doffing peasants,a Pb Tory fetishfest.Watch tonight for your political education.1st episdoe is where the "Bullingdon Boys" come from.
Lord Sugar@Lord_Sugar·2m Mauricio: "We need to fix it and focus on the next game." ...... I've decided not to learn to pronounce your name you might be gone by Xmas
FPT:
Peter_the_Punter said: Has Poch learned to speak English yet? Or is he not bothering?
To which I replied:
He's still got the cab running!
Didn't rate him as much as so many pundits when at Saints, players not him from the games I saw, nothing 'game changing' in his tactics or substitutions. Hope I'll be proven wrong but don't expect to be. We could easily lose by 6 next weekend.
There may be a job at Manchester for him soon.
At 83 minutes the Leicester crowd was singing "We want six"
A game to savour. I hope PBers took my tip. I was a little worried when we were 2:0 down, but after Ulloa's first it was never in doubt. I have a few quid on him at 66/1 for top goal scorer.
Just saw the result.
Shows how far Man U has fallen that I was not overly surprised.
" A scandal-hit university which has already seen its vice chancellor suspended and its chairman of governors stand aside as part of a bitter boardroom feud, has spent £150,000 on seven designer chairs.
Plymouth University has commissioned the award-winning furniture designer John Makepeace to make seven handcrafted chairs to be used at graduation ceremonies.
The news follows revelations earlier this month that the university had spent more than £24,000 on sending six members of staff to a conference in Miami earlier this year.
This was despite threatened job losses which have prompted a series of protests by lecturers at the Plymouth University campus this summer. "
Austerity is only for the little people, never for the Fatcats.
A key problem with Tory strategy is that they never do anything concrete while in power, they always promise that they will do it after the next election, like most governments. Because that happens so often, people never believe pre-election promises, so all that vote Tory and get a referendum and english powers but only after the next election will never be believed.
True the same with airport capacity in the South East of England , this coalition government, seems to prefer to say after the next election, which is understandable now , but it happened from very early on.
Anyone who wants to know how the Tory cabinet works,Downton Abbey is furthering the cause of Etonomics and cap-doffing peasants,a Pb Tory fetishfest.Watch tonight for your political education.1st episdoe is where the "Bullingdon Boys" come from.
I think Jeeves & Wooster is closer to what goes on in the cabinet.
Interesting. Reports coming in that Tommy Sheridan has made a (personal) call on his FB page for all the various Yes elements to vote SNP in the next UKGE (I assume, on the principle that usually votes for minor parties are wasted and this is the best way to use them, etc. ). Caveat: I can't get at the FB page to check.
Early days yet but if other elements (Greens, etc.) agree this could impinge on the betting discussions here.
Kicking english devolution into the long grass while voting for more scottish powers
...is Ed's position, and will cause Cameron no problems on that basis.
It will if he votes for scottish powers while getting nothing in return before the election.
He's not able to get anything before then (and the Scottish powers are to be voted on afterward anyway). Best for him to accept that with grace than to throw a tantrum which achieves neither E4FEL or Scottish powers, and ruins any political advantage he might have gleaned from it ("sure, he promises he'll give us E4FEL, but he has gone back on what he promised Scotland already, so why believe him?")
What this thread shows is that Conservative policy is predicated on wrong-footing one of its opponents than on any serious belief in real devolution for England.
Devolution is about much more than EV4EL - it should be about the whole nature of the governance of England and that may mean repatriating powers from Westminster and Whitehall to local authorities.
Are the Conservatives serious about this - Tories are not known for their love of voluntarily giving up power and control - or is it all, as I fear, a sham whose sole aim is to win the 2015 GE after which, Scotland notwithstanding, it will be business as usual for England with real devolution shoved into the background.
JohnO - may I suggest to one and all that he is talking sense? Lets not get hung up on Salmonds self serving acccusations or the media's stupidity and their own self serving speculations. Camerons comments after the referendum result were clear and we should not lose sight of the horrendous reaction from Labour. Scotland will get its extra devolution to be delivered formally after the election, which provided it's terms are seen to be sensible will not harm the tories one jot in Scotland. England will get EV4EL after the election if the tories are returned. This will not harm the tories one jot in England. The spotlight is all on Labour.
Anyone who wants to know how the Tory cabinet works,Downton Abbey is furthering the cause of Etonomics and cap-doffing peasants,a Pb Tory fetishfest.Watch tonight for your political education.1st episdoe is where the "Bullingdon Boys" come from.
EV4EL will join the EU referendum as an election dividing line. It will be hammered home to the increasing disadvantage of Labour among the English WWC.
EV4EL - EU referendum - Rotherham...
Labour are increasingly toxic among this voting bloc - their results among the 10 million voters of the South and the East are every bit as bad as the Tories in Scotland.
It's only the Tory/Kipper split that is keeping hopeless Ed in the game.
What are the odds on the SNP outpolling Labour North of the Border on the popular vote?
To highlight some of the points made at the start of this thread about the uprising of support for the SNP at a grassroots level. Here in Perth (which is quite a conservative town, in nature if not by voting) there was a march of YES campaigners through the town centre today that had apparently been organised on facebook without any politcal party input. Several hundred seem to of taken part today in this which was not did not attract any policing with it being very much done by word of mouth. I do think that the SNP will benifit from a much more enthused membership at next year's election and it will be very surprising if they did not take several seats off both the LDs and LAB. If the Lib Dems get more than 2 seats in Scotland it would be quite surprising the moment with only the very northern seats looking possible (It would still be a shock for them to lose the seat of Shetland and Orkney)
On a completely different matter, ever heard of the Moat Pit at Culross? I was reading about it recently, and you might enjoy it. Academic paper here (free but limited access): www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/27917615?uid=3738032&uid=2&uid=4&sid=21104719021873
I'd vaguely heard of it, but knew nothing specific about it. Thanks for the link.
I'm more familiar with the Cornish 'mine in the sea' where, like at the Moat Pit, the shaft was actually on the seabed below the high water mark. The mine's name, and that of it's eccentric owner, sadly escapes me, and I can't find my notes.
ON paying, wouldn't know offhand but a substantial sum of the order of 1 or 1.4 billion was mentioned IIRC, based on pro rata according to their tax input, I should think.
On future extension - assumption indeed. But the implication of recent discussions in Scotland was that it would be a DIY job if we were to get going on a decent timescale and build a HS2 link between Edinburgh and Glasgow as a nucleus for extensions north and south to the border. And the current discussions will deal with the MPs (I entirely concur with EV4EL when this is sensible).
I wasn't being too serious, admittedly, but just pointing out that the 'correct' solution might not be as obvious as expected!
I've split my reply into two posts:
As I've said, Scotland will get some advantage from HS2, and their MPs have, and will, vote on it. I think it's arguable that Scotland would pay something towards it for those reasons alone. If all Scottish MPs abstain from the votes, you'd have a more persuasive case. The amount Scotland should pay is arguable though, and I've got no idea what it should be.
As for Edinburgh-Glasgow: transport's a devolved power. I'm not sure it's equitable to make the rest of the UK pay for a line that does not go into their territory and their MPs cannot vote for, or even make their views officially known on. If the line was to be made so it could form a spine for connection to the English high-speed network, then an argument can be made that we should pay something towards it.
Having said that, I'm not sure the market is there to justify the cost of an ultra high-speed Edinburgh to Glasgow line (I've said the same about the chancellor's (ahem) interesting proposals for a high-speed route for the north of England). Line speed improvements past EGIP is certainly an option; EGIP delivers Edinburgh to Glasgow in 35 minutes (from 50 atm). How long should it ideally take?
Thanks. Some good points/issues there. It will be interesting to see if HS2 (at its London end) is regarded as a EV4EL issue, on the grounds of devolution to Scotland of transport.
I assume - but may be wrong - that the logic for the E-G link is not so much as a link in itself but because it forms the two upper arms of the Y needed to connect to HS2, 3, 4, ... - equivalent to the WCML electrification of Carlisle to Carstairs and then Edin and Glasgow. The use of a HS2 grade route for E-G transport may not be worthwhile given the perfectly good links on other routes and the need to serve intermediate stations. However, as I recall, it was for a time used for fast trains between E and G nevertheless even in recent years, so perhaps using HS grade trains on this line would be useful like those commuter trains on HS1 from Ashford.
May I point on the survation poll, that almost half of the people questioned in scotland were undecided, while only 1/7th were undecided in england and wales. That I believe is a reason to be cautious with the scottish part of the poll.
What this thread shows is that Conservative policy is predicated on wrong-footing one of its opponents than on any serious belief in real devolution for England.
Devolution is about much more than EV4EL - it should be about the whole nature of the governance of England and that may mean repatriating powers from Westminster and Whitehall to local authorities.
Are the Conservatives serious about this - Tories are not known for their love of voluntarily giving up power and control - or is it all, as I fear, a sham whose sole aim is to win the 2015 GE after which, Scotland notwithstanding, it will be business as usual for England with real devolution shoved into the background.
Precisely. Although if the Tories think they are going to win the election on the basis of esoteric constitutional issues and an appeal to English nationalism then are even more deluded than I thought.
he Tories are proposing EV4EL Which will be defeated.
And many tories will vote against more devolution for Scotland without it. The party will be hopelessly split...
Many Tories raised EV4EL during the leadership speeches. It's not unpopular. Cammo was wise to let it go until the Scot Indy had been addressed. Labour will not agree to it. The Tories will put it in their manifesto for GE 2015. Add that to the referendum on the EU..... "only a Conservative majority government can deliver this....."
And the voters will not take much notice. The election will be decided on economic and social issues and not constitutional ones.
At last, you as Labour activist and I as a Tory can speak as one on that!
Constitutional affairs starts on -10 points as far as doorsteps go. But add to that it is fairly easy to grasp (unlike, say, the voting system), appeals to a general sense of fairness and a national identity, and it has some distance. But Cameron is also in need of some policies which imbue activists and show the Conservatives as the party of doers (re UKIP) - hence why he should press on.
On a completely different matter, ever heard of the Moat Pit at Culross? I was reading about it recently, and you might enjoy it. Academic paper here (free but limited access): www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/27917615?uid=3738032&uid=2&uid=4&sid=21104719021873
I'd vaguely heard of it, but knew nothing specific about it. Thanks for the link.
I'm more familiar with the Cornish 'mine in the sea' where, like at the Moat Pit, the shaft was actually on the seabed below the high water mark. The mine's name, and that of it's eccentric owner, sadly escapes me, and I can't find my notes.
So at the next election Tories are going to be droning on about Europe, and some stuff about giving politicians more power in England. It won't happen before then. Oh and some tractor stats.
Meanwhile Labour will be talking about the disastrous Tory privatisation of the NHS and the worsening Cost of Living Crisis.
if the Tories think they are going to win the election on the basis of esoteric constitutional issues and an appeal to English nationalism then are even more deluded than I thought.
They don't
They think they will win on the economy, while Labour are running in circles trying to defend Scottish Votes for English laws.
"Control" over income tax is the ultimate poisoned chalice. It's at best meaningless without control of the other revenue streams and mostly damaging.
Between 2010-11 and 2011-12 Scottish Income Tax take decreased by 110 million pounds. National Insurance Contributions increased by 470 million pounds Geographic Share of oil increased by 1.7 billion pounds
Overall Tax Receipts for Scotland were up 3.4 billion pounds but Income Tax was down. In a world where Scotland gets "control" over income tax that could see a reduction in Scotland's budget despite an overall increase in tax take.
And it goes both ways, from 11-12 to 12-13 overall Tax Receipts were down but income tax was up - should that really result in a budget increase?
Giving control of income tax without control of other revenue streams result in perverse incentives for governance.
You might be right, however the optics will be convincing enough. Income tax is the ONE tax we all feel very personally. For a government to be given significant control over that will be perceived as a major devolution of power. Only policy anoraks will share your viewpoint.
That's why SNP messaging over the coming months has to be precise and on target.
A friend of mine lives in the neighbouring constituency of Bury and says the Labour campaign there is in turmoil. Something to do with Simon Danczuk. Apparently Danczuk kept attacking the old MP and the locals hate him for it.He and his friends are runing the campaign for the candidate. She said the local members are boycotting it and refusing to help and the voters are up in arms.Not good for us leftys.
if the Tories think they are going to win the election on the basis of esoteric constitutional issues and an appeal to English nationalism then are even more deluded than I thought.
They don't
They think they will win on the economy, while Labour are running in circles trying to defend Scottish Votes for English laws.
The economy is in the crap, Scott. Foodbank queues are massive, people are struggling all the way from the bottom to the middle.
Loads of words tonight btw. Did you spill coffee on your Ctrl button or something?
People like Scott are so desperate for a win or two in life that they vicariously try and live through things - in this case the Tory party. The sadness of his own life dulls him from real political insight.
But he feels better copying and pasting tweets as you know its making a difference.
The electorate will be looking at Miliband and treating him the same way Scotland did.
It's there in all the soft polling information, it's there in Labour's under-performance to poll in real elections and it's there in the sizeable drop off in voting intention between March and May the last two years.
Only the Tory/Kipper thing is keeping him in the game.
So there might be some marginal change in favour of UKIP, mind you the 7 point gap between UKIP and the Tories might make for some interesting times just after the Clacton by-election. Historically if a minor party (like the Liberals or LD's) won a by-election, they get a surge of around 6 points in the polls, UKIP might get close to the Tories post Clacton.
To highlight some of the points made at the start of this thread about the uprising of support for the SNP at a grassroots level. Here in Perth (which is quite a conservative town, in nature if not by voting) there was a march of YES campaigners through the town centre today that had apparently been organised on facebook without any politcal party input. Several hundred seem to of taken part today in this which was not did not attract any policing with it being very much done by word of mouth. I do think that the SNP will benifit from a much more enthused membership at next year's election and it will be very surprising if they did not take several seats off both the LDs and LAB. If the Lib Dems get more than 2 seats in Scotland it would be quite surprising the moment with only the very northern seats looking possible (It would still be a shock for them to lose the seat of Shetland and Orkney)
My 2p worth – frustrations are still running high amongst the disappointed YES campaigners, after all it has only been three days since the result – I suspect as things cool over time in the lead up to the next election, and so too will support for the SNP. - They may well retain a small bounce from all this, but on the back of a single poll, it is far too early to know how much.
Anyone who wants to know how the Tory cabinet works,Downton Abbey is furthering the cause of Etonomics and cap-doffing peasants,a Pb Tory fetishfest.Watch tonight for your political education.1st episdoe is where the "Bullingdon Boys" come from.
I think Jeeves & Wooster is closer to what goes on in the cabinet.
Except they don't have a Jeeves.
And while Bertie, Gussie, Bingo and the others are still likeable in their inept cluelessness Cammy, Ozzy and Ollie aren't.
Thanks. Some good points/issues there. It will be interesting to see if HS2 (at its London end) is regarded as a EV4EL issue, on the grounds of devolution to Scotland of transport.
I assume - but may be wrong - that the logic for the E-G link is not so much as a link in itself but because it forms the two upper arms of the Y needed to connect to HS2, 3, 4, ... - equivalent to the WCML electrification of Carlisle to Carstairs and then Edin and Glasgow. The use of a HS2 grade route for E-G transport may not be worthwhile given the perfectly good links on other routes and the need to serve intermediate stations. However, as I recall, it was for a time used for fast trains between E and G nevertheless even in recent years, so perhaps using HS grade trains on this line would be useful like those commuter trains on HS1 from Ashford.
We're getting way off-topic, but HS2 trains would really need a new route as they are built to a much larger loading gauge, and the terminal stations would also need to be rebuilt to support them. The lower-speed (although still high-speed 'Classic UK compatible' trains would be able to run on normal lines, though.
I'm not sure what the answer is for Edinburgh to Glasgow. It'll be interesting to see if the extra capacity given by EGIP (13 trains per hour, I think, up from five or six) is filled in the next few years.
As a way of going even further off-topic, I see Salmond recently called for regular steam excursions on the Waverley Line when it opened. It's a shame the line wasn't designed for 'regular' such services. At least that's the way it's been reported down here. Any view on it?
No, I just had some information which I posted below for those thinking of having a bet (I do not bet). She also said UKIP nearly took a seat in both sections of the ward in May. As I said, bad news for leftys.
To highlight some of the points made at the start of this thread about the uprising of support for the SNP at a grassroots level. Here in Perth (which is quite a conservative town, in nature if not by voting) there was a march of YES campaigners through the town centre today that had apparently been organised on facebook without any politcal party input. Several hundred seem to of taken part today in this which was not did not attract any policing with it being very much done by word of mouth. I do think that the SNP will benifit from a much more enthused membership at next year's election and it will be very surprising if they did not take several seats off both the LDs and LAB. If the Lib Dems get more than 2 seats in Scotland it would be quite surprising the moment with only the very northern seats looking possible (It would still be a shock for them to lose the seat of Shetland and Orkney)
My 2p worth – frustrations are still running high amongst the disappointed YES campaigners, after all it has only been three days since the result – I suspect as things cool over time in the lead up to the next election, and so too will support for the SNP. - They may well retain a small bounce from all this, but on the back of a single poll, it is far too early to know how much.
I agree. The proof will be in the coming months, year. See how many stick around.
I wonder how many will also get a shock should they look at SNP policy. I dare say it won't be left enough for what many would hope.
Does Cameron's floundering increase anyone's confidence that he could achieve his much vaunted EU renegotiation - the 'great undertaking but nobody to know what it is'.
Does Cameron's floundering increase anyone's confidence that he could achieve his much vaunted EU renegotiation - the 'great undertaking but nobody to know what it is'.
So at the next election Tories are going to be droning on about Europe, and some stuff about giving politicians more power in England. It won't happen before then. Oh and some tractor stats.
Meanwhile Labour will be talking about the disastrous Tory privatisation of the NHS and the worsening Cost of Living Crisis.
Gideon's a strategic genius.
The Tories' lines to take on the NHS will be:
a) we've sacked X thousand managers and hired Y thousand nurses (NHS England, which is partly a commissioner and partly a rule-maker) is about to embark on a big restructure, cutting a lot of posts. That will help them with that line.
b) We've kept spending flat but weathered the storm in winter unlike the doom-mongers in Labour said (they have been shovelling short-term monies into local areas on the basis that they clear up their waiting lists so there's capacity going into winter. Expect Hunt to be on the phone to Chief Executives if things go south... also, they're keeping track of all the schemes that have been set up with that money, likely so they can say "we invested X amount in extra winter pressure monies and saved Y amount of money")
So at the next election Tories are going to be droning on about Europe, and some stuff about giving politicians more power in England. It won't happen before then. Oh and some tractor stats.
Meanwhile Labour will be talking about the disastrous Tory privatisation of the NHS and the worsening Cost of Living Crisis.
Gideon's a strategic genius.
The Tories' lines to take on the NHS will be:
a) we've sacked X thousand managers and hired Y thousand nurses (NHS England, which is partly a commissioner and partly a rule-maker) is about to embark on a big restructure, cutting a lot of posts. That will help them with that line.
b) We've kept spending flat but weathered the storm in winter unlike the doom-mongers in Labour said (they have been shovelling short-term monies into local areas on the basis that they clear up their waiting lists so there's capacity going into winter. Expect Hunt to be on the phone to Chief Executives if things go south... also, they're keeping track of all the schemes that have been set up with that money, likely so they can say "we invested X amount in extra winter pressure monies and saved Y amount of money")
Thanks. Some good points/issues there. It will be interesting to see if HS2 (at its London end) is regarded as a EV4EL issue, on the grounds of devolution to Scotland of transport.
I assume - but may be wrong - that the logic for the E-G link is not so much as a link in itself but because it forms the two upper arms of the Y needed to connect to HS2, 3, 4, ... - equivalent to the WCML electrification of Carlisle to Carstairs and then Edin and Glasgow. The use of a HS2 grade route for E-G transport may not be worthwhile given the perfectly good links on other routes and the need to serve intermediate stations. However, as I recall, it was for a time used for fast trains between E and G nevertheless even in recent years, so perhaps using HS grade trains on this line would be useful like those commuter trains on HS1 from Ashford.
We're getting way off-topic, but HS2 trains would really need a new route as they are built to a much larger loading gauge, and the terminal stations would also need to be rebuilt to support them. The lower-speed (although still high-speed 'Classic UK compatible' trains would be able to run on normal lines, though.
I'm not sure what the answer is for Edinburgh to Glasgow. It'll be interesting to see if the extra capacity given by EGIP (13 trains per hour, I think, up from five or six) is filled in the next few years.
As a way of going even further off-topic, I see Salmond recently called for regular steam excursions on the Waverley Line when it opened. It's a shame the line wasn't designed for 'regular' such services. At least that's the way it's been reported down here. Any view on it?
Building a High Speed line would cost an awful lot of money and fares would inevitably be high than a standard train. How many will be prepared to pay a premium to save fifteen minutes? I am not sure even the ardent HS supporter could write a business case that stood scrutiny.
She also said that with the fact that the local party has more or less refused to help out because of Danczuk, she thinks it is more than likely that UKIP will win than Labour, and she is in the Labour Party.So I am more resigned to deafeat than actually nervous.
So at the next election Tories are going to be droning on about Europe, and some stuff about giving politicians more power in England. It won't happen before then. Oh and some tractor stats.
Meanwhile Labour will be talking about the disastrous Tory privatisation of the NHS and the worsening Cost of Living Crisis.
Gideon's a strategic genius.
Therein lies the post of a rattled Labour supporter who has finally realized the game is up.
I expect the number of SNP MPs to increase in the next Parliament but not by much and mainly at the expense of the Lib Dems who are in melt down. This is very unlikely to make any difference to the SNP.
Of much, much greater importance to the SNP is the next Scottish elections. If there is to be any chance of a re-match on the referendum whilst those active in politics now are still about a whole series of bricks have to fall into place. The first, and by far the most important, of these is going to be seeking another Holyrood majority.
I think it is unlikely they will achieve this but that will be their focus. After the huge expenditure on the referendum I seriously doubt they will want to be wasting too much money on getting more irrelevant back benchers in 2015.
If Labour are to stop them they need some new heavyweight management which will involve either Gordon Brown, Jim Murphy or both. The current leadership is just embarrassing and it is very important that Labour start to take the Scottish Parliament a bit more seriously.
So at the next election Tories are going to be droning on about Europe, and some stuff about giving politicians more power in England. It won't happen before then. Oh and some tractor stats.
Meanwhile Labour will be talking about the disastrous Tory privatisation of the NHS and the worsening Cost of Living Crisis.
Gideon's a strategic genius.
Therein lies the post of a rattled Labour supporter who has finally realized the game is up.
About as rattled as a Romanian builder living next door to a cowering UKIP racist pensioner.
To highlight some of the points made at the start of this thread about the uprising of support for the SNP at a grassroots level. Here in Perth (which is quite a conservative town, in nature if not by voting) there was a march of YES campaigners through the town centre today that had apparently been organised on facebook without any politcal party input. Several hundred seem to of taken part today in this which was not did not attract any policing with it being very much done by word of mouth. I do think that the SNP will benifit from a much more enthused membership at next year's election and it will be very surprising if they did not take several seats off both the LDs and LAB. If the Lib Dems get more than 2 seats in Scotland it would be quite surprising the moment with only the very northern seats looking possible (It would still be a shock for them to lose the seat of Shetland and Orkney)
My 2p worth – frustrations are still running high amongst the disappointed YES campaigners, after all it has only been three days since the result – I suspect as things cool over time in the lead up to the next election, and so too will support for the SNP. - They may well retain a small bounce from all this, but on the back of a single poll, it is far too early to know how much.
I agree. The proof will be in the coming months, year. See how many stick around.
I wonder how many will also get a shock should they look at SNP policy. I dare say it won't be left enough for what many would hope.
SNP policy? – As we have seen with the recent referenda, for many it was all about hearts over minds, I don’t think policy per se, really comes into it .
The SNP have always been a totem for independence imho, the question is now, how does it continue to appeal, now that independence is off the agenda for the foreseeable future?
So kippers are now complaining that Cameron is a man of his word?
A change of attitude slightly!
Can't speak for kippers, but there's been an on-the-hoof flavour to it - EV4EL suddenly became an essential ancillary to Scottish devolution, reinforced by the utterances of the Chief Whip in his exciting new job, then 24 hours later it equally suddenly wasn't. Cameron is a man of his word, when other alternatives fail.
So kippers are now complaining that Cameron is a man of his word?
A change of attitude slightly!
Can't speak for kippers, but there's been an on-the-hoof flavour to it - EV4EL suddenly became an essential ancillary to Scottish devolution, reinforced by the utterances of the Chief Whip in his exciting new job, then 24 hours later it equally suddenly wasn't. Cameron is a man of his word, when other alternatives fail.
So, Mr Palmer, are you in favour of English votes for English laws, or do you want Scots MPs to continue to tell the English what to do...
So at the next election Tories are going to be droning on about Europe, and some stuff about giving politicians more power in England. It won't happen before then. Oh and some tractor stats.
Meanwhile Labour will be talking about the disastrous Tory privatisation of the NHS and the worsening Cost of Living Crisis.
Gideon's a strategic genius.
Therein lies the post of a rattled Labour supporter who has finally realized the game is up.
About as rattled as a Romanian builder living next door to a cowering UKIP racist pensioner.
"Hugh" was the name given to a member of the Borg collective who had to discover life after being a series of 0's and 1's.
We're getting way off-topic, but HS2 trains would really need a new route as they are built to a much larger loading gauge, and the terminal stations would also need to be rebuilt to support them. The lower-speed (although still high-speed 'Classic UK compatible' trains would be able to run on normal lines, though.
I'm not sure what the answer is for Edinburgh to Glasgow. It'll be interesting to see if the extra capacity given by EGIP (13 trains per hour, I think, up from five or six) is filled in the next few years.
As a way of going even further off-topic, I see Salmond recently called for regular steam excursions on the Waverley Line when it opened. It's a shame the line wasn't designed for 'regular' such services. At least that's the way it's been reported down here. Any view on it?
Quite so: the HS train would not use the same track as the [edit] WCML but a different (though not I suspect hugely different) line. What would be interesting is if it came from the south, through the Biggar Gap and up the Midlothian basin, but that would need massive engineering at the Edinburgh end - on the other hand, an underground station would solve some problems there. But that is diverging even further ...
On the Waverley Line I recall reading that the first problem was that the line was designed to a budget and that it did not initially have long enough platforms even at the terminus to cope with long trains (steam or otherwise). A check on the current situation [edit: now sorted, it seems] confirms this and adds that another issue is the single/double track arrangement for long passing loops for economy, but which limits additional train paths. ( I believe the construction provides for latr 100% doubling, like the original, but could be wrong.) http://www.rail.co.uk/rail-news/2014/steam-trains-to-launch-borders-railway-next-year/
Note the proposal for a turntable, and for extension.
One obvious connection (ouch) is with cruise ships calling at Leith - though there is no longer any passenger station there. But there are plenty of tourists in Edinburgh anyway. One thinks of the Mallaig Line excursions fed from Fort William as a tourist honeypot; but where the literary connection there is Harry Potter (or so I am told), Scott and of course Hogg are the main lit connexions in Tweeddale. I can imagine coaches going from Tweedbank to Abbotsford, Scott's pad, and Traquair House and the Borders abbeys. Could well work very nicely, esp. if tourists did a triangular route, partly by coach.
So kippers are now complaining that Cameron is a man of his word?
A change of attitude slightly!
Can't speak for kippers, but there's been an on-the-hoof flavour to it - EV4EL suddenly became an essential ancillary to Scottish devolution, reinforced by the utterances of the Chief Whip in his exciting new job, then 24 hours later it equally suddenly wasn't. Cameron is a man of his word, when other alternatives fail.
Nick, As you know I loathe Cameron, but I am not sure he said what people are claiming. Did he actually make the link between the Vow and reform in England conditional upon each other or did he say to paraphrase, "The additional devolution to Scotland needs to be accompanied by reform in England and I have asked Hague to look at how this should best be done"?
So kippers are now complaining that Cameron is a man of his word?
A change of attitude slightly!
Can't speak for kippers, but there's been an on-the-hoof flavour to it - EV4EL suddenly became an essential ancillary to Scottish devolution, reinforced by the utterances of the Chief Whip in his exciting new job, then 24 hours later it equally suddenly wasn't. Cameron is a man of his word, when other alternatives fail.
Whilst you were a communist until it suited you not to be.
So kippers are now complaining that Cameron is a man of his word?
A change of attitude slightly!
Can't speak for kippers, but there's been an on-the-hoof flavour to it - EV4EL suddenly became an essential ancillary to Scottish devolution, reinforced by the utterances of the Chief Whip in his exciting new job, then 24 hours later it equally suddenly wasn't. Cameron is a man of his word, when other alternatives fail.
Nick, As you know I loathe Cameron, but I am not sure he said what people are claiming. Did he actually make the link between the Vow and reform in England conditional upon each other or did he say to paraphrase, "The additional devolution to Scotland needs to be accompanied by reform in England and I have asked Hague to look at how this should best be done"?
So kippers are now complaining that Cameron is a man of his word?
A change of attitude slightly!
Can't speak for kippers, but there's been an on-the-hoof flavour to it - EV4EL suddenly became an essential ancillary to Scottish devolution, reinforced by the utterances of the Chief Whip in his exciting new job, then 24 hours later it equally suddenly wasn't. Cameron is a man of his word, when other alternatives fail.
So, Mr Palmer, are you in favour of English votes for English laws, or do you want Scots MPs to continue to tell the English what to do...
I suspect he wants Danish MP's to vote on English laws.
So kippers are now complaining that Cameron is a man of his word?
A change of attitude slightly!
Can't speak for kippers, but there's been an on-the-hoof flavour to it - EV4EL suddenly became an essential ancillary to Scottish devolution, reinforced by the utterances of the Chief Whip in his exciting new job, then 24 hours later it equally suddenly wasn't. Cameron is a man of his word, when other alternatives fail.
Nick, As you know I loathe Cameron, but I am not sure he said what people are claiming. Did he actually make the link between the Vow and reform in England conditional upon each other or did he say to paraphrase, "The additional devolution to Scotland needs to be accompanied by reform in England and I have asked Hague to look at how this should best be done"?
So, just as Scotland will vote separately in the Scottish Parliament on their issues of tax, spending and welfare so too England, as well as Wales and Northern Ireland, should be able to vote on these issues and all this must take place in tandem with, and at the same pace as, the settlement for Scotland. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29271765
Cameron: - "It is time for our United Kingdom to come together and to move forward. A vital part of that will be a balanced settlement fair to people in Scotland and importantly to everyone in England, Wales and Northern Ireland as well.
"Just as Scotland will vote separately in a Scottish parliament on their issues of tax, spending and welfare, so too England as well as Wales and Northern Ireland should be able to vote on these issues, and all this must take place in tandem with and at the same pace as the settlement for Scotland. I hope this is going to take place on a cross-party basis. I hope the Labour party will contribute."
To highlight some of the points made at the start of this thread about the uprising of support for the SNP at a grassroots level. Here in Perth (which is quite a conservative town, in nature if not by voting) there was a march of YES campaigners through the town centre today that had apparently been organised on facebook without any politcal party input. Several hundred seem to of taken part today in this which was not did not attract any policing with it being very much done by word of mouth. I do think that the SNP will benifit from a much more enthused membership at next year's election and it will be very surprising if they did not take several seats off both the LDs and LAB. If the Lib Dems get more than 2 seats in Scotland it would be quite surprising the moment with only the very northern seats looking possible (It would still be a shock for them to lose the seat of Shetland and Orkney)
My 2p worth – frustrations are still running high amongst the disappointed YES campaigners, after all it has only been three days since the result – I suspect as things cool over time in the lead up to the next election, and so too will support for the SNP. - They may well retain a small bounce from all this, but on the back of a single poll, it is far too early to know how much.
I agree. The proof will be in the coming months, year. See how many stick around.
I wonder how many will also get a shock should they look at SNP policy. I dare say it won't be left enough for what many would hope.
SNP policy? – As we have seen with the recent referenda, for many it was all about hearts over minds, I don’t think policy per se, really comes into it .
The SNP have always been a totem for independence imho, the question is now, how does it continue to appeal, now that independence is off the agenda for the foreseeable future?
The Referndum was, as you say, devoid of Policy but, there are plenty of this '45' who are signing up who are quoting the 'Yes-Alliance' will give hem the socialist country they want. As such, if//when some look at SNP policy will be in for a shock. They are so caught up in their '45' tripe, they can't see past it - currently.
I'd wager, to answer your second point, that if Sturgeon et al don't push for it immediately, the appeal for the bulk will wear off. Not all, but the bulk. Problem is, most of this lot genuinely seem to believe that by boycotting business and signing up to the SNP, will get them a referendum in 2016.
Aaaaah IOS, Ed's a disaster and was again in the media today, but the ground war will win it for Ed despite everything eh.......
Just like it did for the YeSNP...
Aaah...but Gordon saved the world with his speech...... the one no one paid any attention to.... the one that moved no polls at all save in the mind of the deluded
So kippers are now complaining that Cameron is a man of his word?
A change of attitude slightly!
Can't speak for kippers, but there's been an on-the-hoof flavour to it - EV4EL suddenly became an essential ancillary to Scottish devolution, reinforced by the utterances of the Chief Whip in his exciting new job, then 24 hours later it equally suddenly wasn't. Cameron is a man of his word, when other alternatives fail.
It's on the hoof, but not unreasonable that the issue has sudden importance. It would have been unhelpful to start that debate while the IndyRef was still ongoing, but it was bound to stir up the issue and so best to start talking about it as soon as possible. Yes tying it to the Scottish powers was stupid, but it seemed like an opening gambit more than anything else - trying to get the other parties to back something in a ridiculously short timespan if he could, and if he couldn't, as he cannot, then he wasn't going to risk not adhereing to the timeline agreed. They called his bluff, but he never said he was going to delay things, so he never indicated he would not keep his word, he just dared the others to back him up or also be condemned for not keeping their word. They didn't fall for it.
It's a minor distinction, but I don't think it can be said he went back on his word at any point - he just attempted to tack something extra onto what was agreed, but couldn't manage it.
So kippers are now complaining that Cameron is a man of his word?
A change of attitude slightly!
Can't speak for kippers, but there's been an on-the-hoof flavour to it - EV4EL suddenly became an essential ancillary to Scottish devolution, reinforced by the utterances of the Chief Whip in his exciting new job, then 24 hours later it equally suddenly wasn't. Cameron is a man of his word, when other alternatives fail.
Nick, As you know I loathe Cameron, but I am not sure he said what people are claiming. Did he actually make the link between the Vow and reform in England conditional upon each other or did he say to paraphrase, "The additional devolution to Scotland needs to be accompanied by reform in England and I have asked Hague to look at how this should best be done"?
So, just as Scotland will vote separately in the Scottish Parliament on their issues of tax, spending and welfare so too England, as well as Wales and Northern Ireland, should be able to vote on these issues and all this must take place in tandem with, and at the same pace as, the settlement for Scotland. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29271765
Cameron: - "It is time for our United Kingdom to come together and to move forward. A vital part of that will be a balanced settlement fair to people in Scotland and importantly to everyone in England, Wales and Northern Ireland as well.
"Just as Scotland will vote separately in a Scottish parliament on their issues of tax, spending and welfare, so too England as well as Wales and Northern Ireland should be able to vote on these issues, and all this must take place in tandem with and at the same pace as the settlement for Scotland. I hope this is going to take place on a cross-party basis. I hope the Labour party will contribute."
But look at the dates, the day after indyref. Those are not the vow. They are statements made after the vow and after the indyref was over. Insofar as they differ from the vow they are backtracking, modification, etc.
THIS is what the Scots were shown and what some of them voted No to gain. The link did not exist there, did it?
Comments
On future extension - assumption indeed. But the implication of recent discussions in Scotland was that it would be a DIY job if we were to get going on a decent timescale and build a HS2 link between Edinburgh and Glasgow as a nucleus for extensions north and south to the border. And the current discussions will deal with the MPs (I entirely concur with EV4EL when this is sensible).
I wasn't being too serious, admittedly, but just pointing out that the 'correct' solution might not be as obvious as expected!
On a completely different matter, ever heard of the Moat Pit at Culross? I was reading about it recently, and you might enjoy it. Academic paper here (free but limited access): www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/27917615?uid=3738032&uid=2&uid=4&sid=21104719021873
Cameron is still proposing what he has always proposed - what will probably amount to EV4EL. There is to be a cabinet committee to take this latter issue forward. The timetable of all these events will take us past the next election. So its quite clear that further Scottish devolution and EV4EL will both be delivered by a Tory govt if it is re-elected.
All UKIP intervention would achieve is to hand the issue to Labour who would -
1 - fail to delever a resolution to the WLQ (and give us labour prejudiced local govt reform instead
2 - fail to give a referendum on the EU.
....like me.
Though you were actually more insightful when you just copy and pasted dull Tory Party tweets.
You remember what happened?
Major became a hero with his opt outs but only for a while, in the end the Tories shot him and berated him over europe anyway.
Tories to rule England forever? Stop worrying.
Because that happens so often, people never believe pre-election promises, so all that vote Tory and get a referendum and english powers but only after the next election will never be believed.
Clearly then - Vote Conservative. We don't have a Tory majority now so the Tory Party alone cannot even now vote through EV4EL. Biut it can create the legislation and propose it even if the libdems and labour refuse to vote for it.
There is no earthly reason why Scots or Englishn should not vote for a Tory UK govt. After all Scots can vote for who they like to govern them under their newly devolved powers and whats wrong with it coinciding with the next Scottish election in 2016.
As I've said, Scotland will get some advantage from HS2, and their MPs have, and will, vote on it. I think it's arguable that Scotland would pay something towards it for those reasons alone. If all Scottish MPs abstain from the votes, you'd have a more persuasive case. The amount Scotland should pay is arguable though, and I've got no idea what it should be.
As for Edinburgh-Glasgow: transport's a devolved power. I'm not sure it's equitable to make the rest of the UK pay for a line that does not go into their territory and their MPs cannot vote for, or even make their views officially known on. If the line was to be made so it could form a spine for connection to the English high-speed network, then an argument can be made that we should pay something towards it.
Having said that, I'm not sure the market is there to justify the cost of an ultra high-speed Edinburgh to Glasgow line (I've said the same about the chancellor's (ahem) interesting proposals for a high-speed route for the north of England). Line speed improvements past EGIP is certainly an option; EGIP delivers Edinburgh to Glasgow in 35 minutes (from 50 atm). How long should it ideally take?
Shows how far Man U has fallen that I was not overly surprised.
" A scandal-hit university which has already seen its vice chancellor suspended and its chairman of governors stand aside as part of a bitter boardroom feud, has spent £150,000 on seven designer chairs.
Plymouth University has commissioned the award-winning furniture designer John Makepeace to make seven handcrafted chairs to be used at graduation ceremonies.
The news follows revelations earlier this month that the university had spent more than £24,000 on sending six members of staff to a conference in Miami earlier this year.
This was despite threatened job losses which have prompted a series of protests by lecturers at the Plymouth University campus this summer. "
Austerity is only for the little people, never for the Fatcats.
Early days yet but if other elements (Greens, etc.) agree this could impinge on the betting discussions here.
What this thread shows is that Conservative policy is predicated on wrong-footing one of its opponents than on any serious belief in real devolution for England.
Devolution is about much more than EV4EL - it should be about the whole nature of the governance of England and that may mean repatriating powers from Westminster and Whitehall to local authorities.
Are the Conservatives serious about this - Tories are not known for their love of voluntarily giving up power and control - or is it all, as I fear, a sham whose sole aim is to win the 2015 GE after which, Scotland notwithstanding, it will be business as usual for England with real devolution shoved into the background.
Lets not get hung up on Salmonds self serving acccusations or the media's stupidity and their own self serving speculations.
Camerons comments after the referendum result were clear and we should not lose sight of the horrendous reaction from Labour.
Scotland will get its extra devolution to be delivered formally after the election, which provided it's terms are seen to be sensible will not harm the tories one jot in Scotland.
England will get EV4EL after the election if the tories are returned. This will not harm the tories one jot in England.
The spotlight is all on Labour.
EV4EL - EU referendum - Rotherham...
Labour are increasingly toxic among this voting bloc - their results among the 10 million voters of the South and the East are every bit as bad as the Tories in Scotland.
It's only the Tory/Kipper split that is keeping hopeless Ed in the game.
What are the odds on the SNP outpolling Labour North of the Border on the popular vote?
Here in Perth (which is quite a conservative town, in nature if not by voting) there was a march of YES campaigners through the town centre today that had apparently been organised on facebook without any politcal party input. Several hundred seem to of taken part today in this which was not did not attract any policing with it being very much done by word of mouth.
I do think that the SNP will benifit from a much more enthused membership at next year's election and it will be very surprising if they did not take several seats off both the LDs and LAB.
If the Lib Dems get more than 2 seats in Scotland it would be quite surprising the moment with only the very northern seats looking possible (It would still be a shock for them to lose the seat of Shetland and Orkney)
I'm more familiar with the Cornish 'mine in the sea' where, like at the Moat Pit, the shaft was actually on the seabed below the high water mark. The mine's name, and that of it's eccentric owner, sadly escapes me, and I can't find my notes.
(Edit: it might be the Wherry Strange: http://www.cornishman.co.uk/Wherry-strange-ndash-collision-ship/story-18542716-detail/story.html but that doesn't quite fit my recollections. It's the only tin mine hit by a ship!)
I assume - but may be wrong - that the logic for the E-G link is not so much as a link in itself but because it forms the two upper arms of the Y needed to connect to HS2, 3, 4, ... - equivalent to the WCML electrification of Carlisle to Carstairs and then Edin and Glasgow. The use of a HS2 grade route for E-G transport may not be worthwhile given the perfectly good links on other routes and the need to serve intermediate stations. However, as I recall, it was for a time used for fast trains between E and G nevertheless even in recent years, so perhaps using HS grade trains on this line would be useful like those commuter trains on HS1 from Ashford.
http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/heywood-and-middleton-by-election/winning-party
That I believe is a reason to be cautious with the scottish part of the poll.
Meanwhile Labour will be talking about the disastrous Tory privatisation of the NHS and the worsening Cost of Living Crisis.
Gideon's a strategic genius.
They think they will win on the economy, while Labour are running in circles trying to defend Scottish Votes for English laws.
Loads of words tonight btw. Did you spill coffee on your Ctrl button or something?
But he feels better copying and pasting tweets as you know its making a difference.
It's there in all the soft polling information, it's there in Labour's under-performance to poll in real elections and it's there in the sizeable drop off in voting intention between March and May the last two years.
Only the Tory/Kipper thing is keeping him in the game.
The 2 parts seen here:
http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Where-Next-for-Scotland-Tables.pdf
http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Referendum-Reactions-Results.pdf
So there might be some marginal change in favour of UKIP, mind you the 7 point gap between UKIP and the Tories might make for some interesting times just after the Clacton by-election.
Historically if a minor party (like the Liberals or LD's) won a by-election, they get a surge of around 6 points in the polls, UKIP might get close to the Tories post Clacton.
And while Bertie, Gussie, Bingo and the others are still likeable in their inept cluelessness Cammy, Ozzy and Ollie aren't.
The Lab/SDP thing kept them out of the game , for a few years.
A split on the right of centre, could do the same on FPTP.
I'm not sure what the answer is for Edinburgh to Glasgow. It'll be interesting to see if the extra capacity given by EGIP (13 trains per hour, I think, up from five or six) is filled in the next few years.
As a way of going even further off-topic, I see Salmond recently called for regular steam excursions on the Waverley Line when it opened. It's a shame the line wasn't designed for 'regular' such services. At least that's the way it's been reported down here. Any view on it?
That course really is Media Studies for the posh and privileged.
I wonder how many will also get a shock should they look at SNP policy. I dare say it won't be left enough for what many would hope.
The Tories' lines to take on the NHS will be:
a) we've sacked X thousand managers and hired Y thousand nurses (NHS England, which is partly a commissioner and partly a rule-maker) is about to embark on a big restructure, cutting a lot of posts. That will help them with that line.
b) We've kept spending flat but weathered the storm in winter unlike the doom-mongers in Labour said (they have been shovelling short-term monies into local areas on the basis that they clear up their waiting lists so there's capacity going into winter. Expect Hunt to be on the phone to Chief Executives if things go south... also, they're keeping track of all the schemes that have been set up with that money, likely so they can say "we invested X amount in extra winter pressure monies and saved Y amount of money")
He won the referendum
He has Labour in knots over EV4EL
He can 'flounder' all the way back to Downing Street at this rate.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ed-miliband/11112071/Sketch-Ed-Miliband-voice-of-the-everyday-working-people.html
The election is going to be great fun
I can remember some of your predictions in 2010.
bring it on.
Lol
... want to know the reason why...
https://www.change.org/p/alex-salmond-we-the-undersigned-demand-a-revote-of-the-scottish-referendum-counted-by-impartial-international-parties
If it was down South in proportion they's have getting on for 1,000,000 sigs by now.
Bonkety-bonk.
The Scottish one by agreement of all parties to be voted after the election. Cameron keeps his promises.
The English one to show which party(s) are supporting the English (or not). Nice dividing line.
GE 2015: Improving economy, tax reductions for the low paid, EV4EL and EU referendum promise. It is Cameron's to lose.
And to think, a few days ago, some people on here were expecting his resignation on Friday afternoon. A week is a very long time in politics.
Of much, much greater importance to the SNP is the next Scottish elections. If there is to be any chance of a re-match on the referendum whilst those active in politics now are still about a whole series of bricks have to fall into place. The first, and by far the most important, of these is going to be seeking another Holyrood majority.
I think it is unlikely they will achieve this but that will be their focus. After the huge expenditure on the referendum I seriously doubt they will want to be wasting too much money on getting more irrelevant back benchers in 2015.
If Labour are to stop them they need some new heavyweight management which will involve either Gordon Brown, Jim Murphy or both. The current leadership is just embarrassing and it is very important that Labour start to take the Scottish Parliament a bit more seriously.
Their membership seems to have increased x2.
If they are from Ed's brigades fine.
If they are Turbo-Nats ... interesting.
The SNP have always been a totem for independence imho, the question is now, how does it continue to appeal, now that independence is off the agenda for the foreseeable future?
Let democracy take its course
So, Mr Palmer, are you in favour of English votes for English laws, or do you want Scots MPs to continue to tell the English what to do...
This is why I understand what and why you post.
On the Waverley Line I recall reading that the first problem was that the line was designed to a budget and that it did not initially have long enough platforms even at the terminus to cope with long trains (steam or otherwise). A check on the current situation [edit: now sorted, it seems] confirms this and adds that another issue is the single/double track arrangement for long passing loops for economy, but which limits additional train paths. ( I believe the construction provides for latr 100% doubling, like the original, but could be wrong.)
http://www.rail.co.uk/rail-news/2014/steam-trains-to-launch-borders-railway-next-year/
Note the proposal for a turntable, and for extension.
One obvious connection (ouch) is with cruise ships calling at Leith - though there is no longer any passenger station there. But there are plenty of tourists in Edinburgh anyway. One thinks of the Mallaig Line excursions fed from Fort William as a tourist honeypot; but where the literary connection there is Harry Potter (or so I am told), Scott and of course Hogg are the main lit connexions in Tweeddale. I can imagine coaches going from Tweedbank to Abbotsford, Scott's pad, and Traquair House and the Borders abbeys. Could well work very nicely, esp. if tourists did a triangular route, partly by coach.
Scott thinks what the papers matters. By the time we get to the election after next we pretty much won't have a press.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron-ed-miliband-nick-4265992
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29271765
"Just as Scotland will vote separately in a Scottish parliament on their issues of tax, spending and welfare, so too England as well as Wales and Northern Ireland should be able to vote on these issues, and all this must take place in tandem with and at the same pace as the settlement for Scotland. I hope this is going to take place on a cross-party basis. I hope the Labour party will contribute."
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/19/david-cameron-devolution-revolution-uk-scotland-vote
I'd wager, to answer your second point, that if Sturgeon et al don't push for it immediately, the appeal for the bulk will wear off. Not all, but the bulk. Problem is, most of this lot genuinely seem to believe that by boycotting business and signing up to the SNP, will get them a referendum in 2016.
Madness. Oh, and really annoying may I add.
Aaah...but Gordon saved the world with his speech...... the one no one paid any attention to.... the one that moved no polls at all save in the mind of the deluded
It's a minor distinction, but I don't think it can be said he went back on his word at any point - he just attempted to tack something extra onto what was agreed, but couldn't manage it.
THIS is what the Scots were shown and what some of them voted No to gain. The link did not exist there, did it?
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron-ed-miliband-nick-4265992
Of course, if he keeps to the timetable (which has already, technically, been breached) then all is well. But that link could scupper it all.