Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Scötterdämmerung. The Twilight of the Union?

135

Comments

  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 57,678
    Is Cumbria still a COVID hot spot, or has that abated?
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,687

    The only way to save the union now is for England to relinquish power over Scotland. If we want to save the union, which I do, then an English majority must not ever again be able to overrule the wishes of the Scottish electorate. Complete autonomy.

    Are unionists ready to pay that price? Or is it actually about power and control rather than a union of likeminded and common nations?

    I have no problem with a federal arrangement with concensus
    I like it when we agree Big G.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 6,743

    algarkirk said:

    A max of 51% 'yes' is not exactly a wipeout. And we haven't yet had the debate on: debt, deficit, NATO, monarchy, Catalonia, entering the EU, Schengen, currency, ECB, hard borders at Gretna, exports to England, FoM, subsidy, oil, fish, and a few other things.

    Also worth noting that the constituencies at the border on both the England and Scotland side are a sea of blue with no exceptions.

    I hope Boris will stand firm against a second referendum.

    You sound like a remoaner.
    I am in the happy position of supporting the result of both the Scottish and Brexit referendums. No remoaning.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 37,973

    Growing up in Scotland with English parents, and now a Scot living in England, I was always a natural unionist. But Brexit has changed my mind. First, because of the ugly English nationalism that seems to have emerged in provincial England, which as a Scot and London resident is just utterly alien to me. And second, taking Scotland out of the EU against its will, with no effort at all to carve out a special status or to offer another independence referendum to give Scots a fair choice of EU vs UK, has convinced me that the Union is a toxic relationship for Scotland. Who knows, maybe Galloway and Gove (a parcel of rogues if ever I saw one) might even give me a chance to vote Yes this time.

    Ugly English Nationalism as opposed to the cuddly, friendly nationalism of Nicola and Co? and the nats on here?
    Yes the Scots Nats on here are generally polite, fine people.

    Malcolm is the exception but it is part of his personal brand to be rude – and he applies his rudeness equally and fairly to all.
    He's actually my favourite, and I find his insults rather funny.
    Casino , Thank you , as they are meant to be. I am actually a cuddly gentle person. Some people have no sense of humour or awareness unfortunately or take themselves too seriously.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    edited August 2020

    Pagan2 said:

    malcolmg said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    I think the most serious question about a split in the Union (the UK will automatically lose a lot of its global and international influence as a consequence) is defence.

    How do we protect the GIUK gap, and defend the British Isles and its surrounding waters against Russian incursions and espionage?

    At present, the SNP seem more interested in booting out British forces, and the nuclear deterrent, than seriously considering the closest of alliances.

    Putin must be licking his lips.

    Why would we mind them spying on the scottish after independence? What happens in the scots airspace or scots waters is something for the scots to decide surely.....hell if the scots after independence decided to offer Moscow an army base in the cairngorms I don't see why we should mind.
    Our defence is predicated on the security of both the Channel and the Greenland-Iceland-UK gap because that's where threats to our shipping lanes and physical security as an island develop.

    We could never tolerate (and neither could NATO, the EU or the US) what you suggest in your final sentence (which seems like something a Russian bot would write) as that army base would physically threaten us and could march straight down to London.
    Well I am not a russian bot. Nor do I think it likely the SNP would offer an army base to Putin. However if they don't join Nato I don't see there is much we could do if they decided to. No more than we could if France left Nato and invited him to do so.

    If the conditions we need to defend change then we need to change defense plans simple as that. In this case it sounds like an independent scotland requires them to change as presumably the scots wont have the airforce or navy necessary to deter the russians for a while.

    Nato is pretty much Kaput as the eu seem intent on pulling their own army together and Trump seems less than interested and I suspect if he wins again you might see a us withdrawal.

    The reality is we could object all we want but it would be empty words I don't see the EU or UK or Nato invading scotland to dislodge a base do you?
    If they decided to do so it would precipitate a British Cuban missile crisis. There'd be a military blockade of the British Isles, which the US and EU would join in on, and Scotland would be utterly isolated.

    A neutral or unaligned Scotland would make everyone's lives much harder, but it could be accepted.

    It being an ally of Putin's Russia would threaten Western security and it would invite a proportionate response.
    You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.
    It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.

    Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
    The UK would not under any circumstance invade an independent Scotland. It would face a revolt if it did amongst its own people. For everyone like you will to send young men to go kill scots there are a lot more who would be standing in your way.
    It wouldn't be there to kill Scots - it would be there to evict or pre-empt Russian troop deployments or basing. The same would have happened to the Irish sea ports in WWII had the need ever arised.

    If I was worried about the Ruskies having undue influence on the British Isles I'd be slightly more concerned about the Trotskyist Communist faction who've managed to position a member as a senior policy advisor to the British government. The same government who has "I worked in Russia 1994-7 on various projects" as the PM's right hand man.
  • Oh look there's Remoaner again, how old are you 12?
  • malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Alistair's post yesterday about only a dozen roads or so crossing the Scottish border had me thinking and looking at Google Maps. It's indeed the case that there are very few road crossings. I tried to find the most obscure one, and this is my preferred candidate.

    https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@55.1365422,-2.8115425,3a,75y,14.02h,70.79t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1siBJ3F5hVKrQVXpBdtVV_yw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

    The major issue is surely not the number of crossings but the volume of traffic. 30,000 people cross the Northern Irish border every day; the Scottish border has 100,000 commuters alone, to say nothing of other traffic.
    All just bollox, it is only an issue if sad losers cannot stand losing their last colony and decide to be arseholes and cut off their nose to spite their face.
    It will be a NON issue.
    Colony ?

    You do realise the act of union with Scotland was purely voluntary and the Scots joined willingly.

    It’s not like Ireland.

    I get it you want out. I want you out too. I’m happy for Scotland to go its own way if that’s what a majority in the whole union wants. But a colony. LOL.
    You utter imbecilic moronic halfwitted loony , go online and read a history book. I will give you a clue start at 1707.

    Kinder politics, nationalist bigot style.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 5,616

    The only way to save the union now is for England to relinquish power over Scotland. If we want to save the union, which I do, then an English majority must not ever again be able to overrule the wishes of the Scottish electorate. Complete autonomy.

    Are unionists ready to pay that price? Or is it actually about power and control rather than a union of likeminded and common nations?

    Is not the more important question why do we spend so much time arguing about it in our parliaments when frankly 70% of the country probably don't even think its an issue either way. I suspect that if you counted the actually give a damn pro union people in the country you would find they number less than pro av people

    The only people I have ever met that give a damn about the union either for or against are on here and scots, welsh and cornish. I have yet to hear anyone that is english in real everyday life treat scottish independence with more than a shrug of whatever we don't mind either way.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    One the GOP Convention has finished I am hence forth ignoring (not really ignoring) Registered Voter polls and only paying attention to Likely Voter polls.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 37,973

    The only way to save the union now is for England to relinquish power over Scotland. If we want to save the union, which I do, then an English majority must not ever again be able to overrule the wishes of the Scottish electorate. Complete autonomy.

    Are unionists ready to pay that price? Or is it actually about power and control rather than a union of likeminded and common nations?

    I have no problem with a federal arrangement with concensus
    I like it when we agree Big G.
    London will never cede power, the union is a bust flush.
  • guybrushguybrush Posts: 222

    guybrush said:

    Just took BBC off my bookmarks list. Always been my go-to site for news, but now the front page seems to be filled with stories about video games, celebrities, Youtubers, and general woke brainwashing. You have to scroll down a fair bit to get any actual news.

    Replaced with Euronews and Sky. Trying to avoid the heavily opinionated papers. Any other reliable sources for news?

    Funny you should mention that.

    I quit BBC news less than a fortnight ago and took up a digital subscription to The Times.
    Toying with the idea of that, it's probably the paper I find most tolerable, but a little sceptical of it's proprietor. Some good journalism though.

    I'd quite happily pay for the news content of the Guarniad, if they would remove the Owen Jones/Peak Guardian clickbaity rubbish.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 36,732

    The only way to save the union now is for England to relinquish power over Scotland. If we want to save the union, which I do, then an English majority must not ever again be able to overrule the wishes of the Scottish electorate. Complete autonomy.

    Are unionists ready to pay that price? Or is it actually about power and control rather than a union of likeminded and common nations?

    It is quite clear from @Casino_Royale and @HYUFD that many Tories regard Scotland as a colony not suited to self determination. It only reinforces Indy sentiment.

    I have always felt that it is for the people of Scotland to decide, and was relieved when the vote went to No. Since then the lack of action on further devolution, and complete disregard for Scotlands clearly stated position on Brexit has doomed the Union.

    It may have been possible for a soft EEA Brexit to have molified Scottish, Irish, and English Remania opinion, but the sheer divisiveness of the foaming Brexiteers position has doomed the Union.

    I suspect that it will be rocky initially, but that Indy Scotland will emerge as a strong European voice on the international stage. If I had a vote on it, I would vote Yes.
  • Pagan2 said:

    The only way to save the union now is for England to relinquish power over Scotland. If we want to save the union, which I do, then an English majority must not ever again be able to overrule the wishes of the Scottish electorate. Complete autonomy.

    Are unionists ready to pay that price? Or is it actually about power and control rather than a union of likeminded and common nations?

    Is not the more important question why do we spend so much time arguing about it in our parliaments when frankly 70% of the country probably don't even think its an issue either way. I suspect that if you counted the actually give a damn pro union people in the country you would find they number less than pro av people

    The only people I have ever met that give a damn about the union either for or against are on here and scots, welsh and cornish. I have yet to hear anyone that is english in real everyday life treat scottish independence with more than a shrug of whatever we don't mind either way.
    The only thing I'm surprised to discover is that the Cornish give a damn about the union.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 35,822
    edited August 2020

    The only way to save the union now is for England to relinquish power over Scotland. If we want to save the union, which I do, then an English majority must not ever again be able to overrule the wishes of the Scottish electorate. Complete autonomy.

    Are unionists ready to pay that price? Or is it actually about power and control rather than a union of likeminded and common nations?

    That's the cleft stick that Unionism is in.

    Give a Scotland that votes SNP almost all the appurtenances of a proper country with equal status to England, plus some oversight of foreign & military matters (including any of the overseas military adventures in which HMG likes to indulge), what could possibly go wrong?

    Labour have been burned by devolution not killing nationalism stone dead, and Tories hate the idea of devolution full stop. Trying to be as objective as I'm able, I just can't see it happening.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 57,678
    malcolmg said:

    The only way to save the union now is for England to relinquish power over Scotland. If we want to save the union, which I do, then an English majority must not ever again be able to overrule the wishes of the Scottish electorate. Complete autonomy.

    Are unionists ready to pay that price? Or is it actually about power and control rather than a union of likeminded and common nations?

    I have no problem with a federal arrangement with concensus
    I like it when we agree Big G.
    London will never cede power, the union is a bust flush.
    You wrote that last time.....
  • The only way to save the union now is for England to relinquish power over Scotland. If we want to save the union, which I do, then an English majority must not ever again be able to overrule the wishes of the Scottish electorate. Complete autonomy

    The complete autonomy you describe is independence with England paying the bill. Even the Articles of Confederation didn't provide for individual states having a veto over every aspect of decision making.

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 37,973
    Pagan2 said:

    The only way to save the union now is for England to relinquish power over Scotland. If we want to save the union, which I do, then an English majority must not ever again be able to overrule the wishes of the Scottish electorate. Complete autonomy.

    Are unionists ready to pay that price? Or is it actually about power and control rather than a union of likeminded and common nations?

    Is not the more important question why do we spend so much time arguing about it in our parliaments when frankly 70% of the country probably don't even think its an issue either way. I suspect that if you counted the actually give a damn pro union people in the country you would find they number less than pro av people

    The only people I have ever met that give a damn about the union either for or against are on here and scots, welsh and cornish. I have yet to hear anyone that is english in real everyday life treat scottish independence with more than a shrug of whatever we don't mind either way.
    so why does your government do all in its power to hold us hostage. When is it ever discussed in Westminster as well.
  • Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 29,175

    Give a Scotland that votes SNP almost all the appurtenances of a proper country with equal status to England, plus some oversight of foreign & military matters (including any of the overseas military adventures in which HMG likes to indulge), what could possibly go wrong?

    The biggest problem with that is the pretendy Parliament and the clowns that run it.

    I didn't watch this live (life is too short) but it is extraordinary...

    https://twitter.com/BingoDemagogue/status/1296458186397036544
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 35,822
    Alistair said:

    Pagan2 said:

    malcolmg said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    I think the most serious question about a split in the Union (the UK will automatically lose a lot of its global and international influence as a consequence) is defence.

    How do we protect the GIUK gap, and defend the British Isles and its surrounding waters against Russian incursions and espionage?

    At present, the SNP seem more interested in booting out British forces, and the nuclear deterrent, than seriously considering the closest of alliances.

    Putin must be licking his lips.

    Why would we mind them spying on the scottish after independence? What happens in the scots airspace or scots waters is something for the scots to decide surely.....hell if the scots after independence decided to offer Moscow an army base in the cairngorms I don't see why we should mind.
    Our defence is predicated on the security of both the Channel and the Greenland-Iceland-UK gap because that's where threats to our shipping lanes and physical security as an island develop.

    We could never tolerate (and neither could NATO, the EU or the US) what you suggest in your final sentence (which seems like something a Russian bot would write) as that army base would physically threaten us and could march straight down to London.
    Well I am not a russian bot. Nor do I think it likely the SNP would offer an army base to Putin. However if they don't join Nato I don't see there is much we could do if they decided to. No more than we could if France left Nato and invited him to do so.

    If the conditions we need to defend change then we need to change defense plans simple as that. In this case it sounds like an independent scotland requires them to change as presumably the scots wont have the airforce or navy necessary to deter the russians for a while.

    Nato is pretty much Kaput as the eu seem intent on pulling their own army together and Trump seems less than interested and I suspect if he wins again you might see a us withdrawal.

    The reality is we could object all we want but it would be empty words I don't see the EU or UK or Nato invading scotland to dislodge a base do you?
    If they decided to do so it would precipitate a British Cuban missile crisis. There'd be a military blockade of the British Isles, which the US and EU would join in on, and Scotland would be utterly isolated.

    A neutral or unaligned Scotland would make everyone's lives much harder, but it could be accepted.

    It being an ally of Putin's Russia would threaten Western security and it would invite a proportionate response.
    You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.
    It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.

    Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
    The UK would not under any circumstance invade an independent Scotland. It would face a revolt if it did amongst its own people. For everyone like you will to send young men to go kill scots there are a lot more who would be standing in your way.
    It wouldn't be there to kill Scots - it would be there to evict or pre-empt Russian troop deployments or basing. The same would have happened to the Irish sea ports in WWII had the need ever arised.

    If I was worried about the Ruskies having undue influence on the British Isles I'd be slightly more concerned about the Trotskyist Communist faction who've managed to position a member as a senior policy advisor to the British government. The same government who has "I worked in Russia 1994-7 on various projects" as the PM's right hand man.
    Not to mention all those lovely roubles swilling about.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,687
    algarkirk said:

    algarkirk said:

    A max of 51% 'yes' is not exactly a wipeout. And we haven't yet had the debate on: debt, deficit, NATO, monarchy, Catalonia, entering the EU, Schengen, currency, ECB, hard borders at Gretna, exports to England, FoM, subsidy, oil, fish, and a few other things.

    Also worth noting that the constituencies at the border on both the England and Scotland side are a sea of blue with no exceptions.

    I hope Boris will stand firm against a second referendum.

    You sound like a remoaner.
    I am in the happy position of supporting the result of both the Scottish and Brexit referendums. No remoaning.
    You still sound exactly like a remoaner.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 36,732
    Scott_xP said:
    It is the mafia presidency, only without the brains and coherence.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 57,678
    Foxy said:

    The only way to save the union now is for England to relinquish power over Scotland. If we want to save the union, which I do, then an English majority must not ever again be able to overrule the wishes of the Scottish electorate. Complete autonomy.

    Are unionists ready to pay that price? Or is it actually about power and control rather than a union of likeminded and common nations?

    Since then the lack of action on further devolution
    There HAS been action on further devolution - just the SNP government has delayed taking up the powers offered:

    SNP Ministers have been urged to apologise after admitting it will take at least nine years to deliver a clutch of devolved social security benefits after yet another delay to the timetable. Opposition MSPs said the slow pace made a mockery of the SNP’s claim before the 2014 referendum that it could set up a fully independent state in just 18 months.

    Under the 2016 Scotland Act that followed the No vote, Holyrood was given power over 11 benefits worth £3bn, roughly 15 per cent of social security spending north of the border. Despite criticising how the UK Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) oversees these benefits, SNP ministers have previously delayed delivering some of them because of the complexity of the process and the need to set up a new Scottish benefits agency.

    However the Government promised they would be fully operational by the end of the current parliamentary term in 2021. But in a surprise Holyrood statement, Social Security Secretary Shirley-Anne Somerville said that, to get the system right, the group of benefits would not be fully devolved until 2024.

    There could also be a further delay if ministers felt there was a risk to claimants.


    https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/17467830.snp-urged-apologise-devolved-benefits-delayed-2024/
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,687

    Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English

    He can sell it as “stop the Scots meddling with English matters”
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 36,732

    Alistair said:

    Pagan2 said:

    malcolmg said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    I think the most serious question about a split in the Union (the UK will automatically lose a lot of its global and international influence as a consequence) is defence.

    How do we protect the GIUK gap, and defend the British Isles and its surrounding waters against Russian incursions and espionage?

    At present, the SNP seem more interested in booting out British forces, and the nuclear deterrent, than seriously considering the closest of alliances.

    Putin must be licking his lips.

    Why would we mind them spying on the scottish after independence? What happens in the scots airspace or scots waters is something for the scots to decide surely.....hell if the scots after independence decided to offer Moscow an army base in the cairngorms I don't see why we should mind.
    Our defence is predicated on the security of both the Channel and the Greenland-Iceland-UK gap because that's where threats to our shipping lanes and physical security as an island develop.

    We could never tolerate (and neither could NATO, the EU or the US) what you suggest in your final sentence (which seems like something a Russian bot would write) as that army base would physically threaten us and could march straight down to London.
    Well I am not a russian bot. Nor do I think it likely the SNP would offer an army base to Putin. However if they don't join Nato I don't see there is much we could do if they decided to. No more than we could if France left Nato and invited him to do so.

    If the conditions we need to defend change then we need to change defense plans simple as that. In this case it sounds like an independent scotland requires them to change as presumably the scots wont have the airforce or navy necessary to deter the russians for a while.

    Nato is pretty much Kaput as the eu seem intent on pulling their own army together and Trump seems less than interested and I suspect if he wins again you might see a us withdrawal.

    The reality is we could object all we want but it would be empty words I don't see the EU or UK or Nato invading scotland to dislodge a base do you?
    If they decided to do so it would precipitate a British Cuban missile crisis. There'd be a military blockade of the British Isles, which the US and EU would join in on, and Scotland would be utterly isolated.

    A neutral or unaligned Scotland would make everyone's lives much harder, but it could be accepted.

    It being an ally of Putin's Russia would threaten Western security and it would invite a proportionate response.
    You unionists really are wetting your pants now , the fantasies about life after defeat get ever more stupid.
    It's not my fantasy Malc. It's what I think would happen in such a scenario.

    Scotland isn't Ireland: it occupies a very important strategic position.
    The UK would not under any circumstance invade an independent Scotland. It would face a revolt if it did amongst its own people. For everyone like you will to send young men to go kill scots there are a lot more who would be standing in your way.
    It wouldn't be there to kill Scots - it would be there to evict or pre-empt Russian troop deployments or basing. The same would have happened to the Irish sea ports in WWII had the need ever arised.

    If I was worried about the Ruskies having undue influence on the British Isles I'd be slightly more concerned about the Trotskyist Communist faction who've managed to position a member as a senior policy advisor to the British government. The same government who has "I worked in Russia 1994-7 on various projects" as the PM's right hand man.
    Not to mention all those lovely roubles swilling about.
    And all the ex Revolutionary Communists...

    Why does Putin need to put troops anywhere, when our government already dances to his tunes?
  • Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English

    He can sell it as “stop the Scots meddling with English matters”
    It is so sensible.
  • Scott_xP said:

    Give a Scotland that votes SNP almost all the appurtenances of a proper country with equal status to England, plus some oversight of foreign & military matters (including any of the overseas military adventures in which HMG likes to indulge), what could possibly go wrong?

    The biggest problem with that is the pretendy Parliament and the clowns that run it.

    I didn't watch this live (life is too short) but it is extraordinary...

    https://twitter.com/BingoDemagogue/status/1296458186397036544
    Absolute shambles
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 35,822
    Scott_xP said:

    Give a Scotland that votes SNP almost all the appurtenances of a proper country with equal status to England, plus some oversight of foreign & military matters (including any of the overseas military adventures in which HMG likes to indulge), what could possibly go wrong?

    The biggest problem with that is the pretendy Parliament and the clowns that run it.

    I didn't watch this live (life is too short) but it is extraordinary...

    https://twitter.com/BingoDemagogue/status/1296458186397036544
    Luvvin' the nihilist wee crack that you're lodged in, roaring impotently into the void about Holyrood and Westminster.
  • Its a remarkable coincidence that there were simultaneously an 'abler cohort' taking A levels this year and an 'abler cohort' taking GCSEs this year.

    But what is strange is that the 'abler cohort' who took A levels this year showed no sign of being an 'abler cohort' two years ago when they took their GCSEs.
  • MonkeysMonkeys Posts: 737
    Do we really think the next Indyref will also be a yes/no question, and not, say, Remain/Leave? The SNP aren't as lucky with their opponents this time round.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 72,853

    The only way to save the union now is for England to relinquish power over Scotland. If we want to save the union, which I do, then an English majority must not ever again be able to overrule the wishes of the Scottish electorate. Complete autonomy.

    Are unionists ready to pay that price? Or is it actually about power and control rather than a union of likeminded and common nations?

    I've reached this conclusion too
    Pulpstar said:

    One potential card is abolition of the UK parliament, to be replaced by the English parliament which holds joint precedence with the Welsh and Scots parliaments. All matters devolved, UK single market maintained - essentially the federalisation of the UK - but keeping the Union.

    If Boris blocks a request for a section 30, after a nationalist majority at the next Holyrood elections that'll be when the Union dies for good. If he accepts it and unionists win the subsequent referendum; the Union is secure for a very long time. But I doubt the referendum can be won unless drastic measures of the type you or I suggest are taken.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,687

    Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English

    He can sell it as “stop the Scots meddling with English matters”
    It is so sensible.
    He can also use it to relaunch English Labour as a proud to be English party.
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818

    Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English

    Starmer in 2024.

    And what will labour's comprehensive asylum and immigration policy be if elected to government?

    GAME OVER
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 20,393
    edited August 2020
    Austria? Didn't expect the 14 day quarantine to be extended to them.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 37,973

    The only way to save the union now is for England to relinquish power over Scotland. If we want to save the union, which I do, then an English majority must not ever again be able to overrule the wishes of the Scottish electorate. Complete autonomy.

    Are unionists ready to pay that price? Or is it actually about power and control rather than a union of likeminded and common nations?

    I have no problem with a federal arrangement with concensus
    I like it when we agree Big G.
    Remember last time they promised that
    https://twitter.com/YesScot/status/1296477710512947200
  • Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English

    Starmer in 2024.

    And what will labour's comprehensive asylum and immigration policy be if elected to government?

    GAME OVER
    Either points based, or if it's a fuck up, EEA
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 5,616

    Pagan2 said:

    The only way to save the union now is for England to relinquish power over Scotland. If we want to save the union, which I do, then an English majority must not ever again be able to overrule the wishes of the Scottish electorate. Complete autonomy.

    Are unionists ready to pay that price? Or is it actually about power and control rather than a union of likeminded and common nations?

    Is not the more important question why do we spend so much time arguing about it in our parliaments when frankly 70% of the country probably don't even think its an issue either way. I suspect that if you counted the actually give a damn pro union people in the country you would find they number less than pro av people

    The only people I have ever met that give a damn about the union either for or against are on here and scots, welsh and cornish. I have yet to hear anyone that is english in real everyday life treat scottish independence with more than a shrug of whatever we don't mind either way.
    The only thing I'm surprised to discover is that the Cornish give a damn about the union.
    Probably more anti than pro. I actually went to school with someone that got arrested for terrorism to do with cornish nationalism
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 29,175

    SNIP

    I note you made no attempt to defend the witness begging the chair of the inquiry to stop her answering the question...

    Just whiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiine...
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,687

    Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English

    Starmer in 2024.

    And what will labour's comprehensive asylum and immigration policy be if elected to government?

    GAME OVER
    “We’ll negotiate a better deal with France to ensure they fulfill their international obligations. The Government has shown they are incompetent. We will do it better. The country deserves better.”

    Reframe. Game over.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 20,393
    edited August 2020
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 72,853
    Are nations within the EU allowed to 'quarantine' each other's citizens or is the option only open to recently departed/halfway-house members ourselves and Norway ?

  • What is the Union for ?

    To preserve the Hanoverian succession
    To safeguard the Protestant religion
    To stop a French / German / Russian invasion
    To provide 40+ Labour MPs

    It doesn't seem to have a current purpose.
  • contrariancontrarian Posts: 5,818

    Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English

    Starmer in 2024.

    And what will labour's comprehensive asylum and immigration policy be if elected to government?

    GAME OVER
    Either points based, or if it's a fuck up, EEA
    Well Mr CHB if he can get the left of his party to swallow that. and I am very far from sure that he can, then labour are indeed ready for government.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 5,616
    malcolmg said:

    Pagan2 said:

    The only way to save the union now is for England to relinquish power over Scotland. If we want to save the union, which I do, then an English majority must not ever again be able to overrule the wishes of the Scottish electorate. Complete autonomy.

    Are unionists ready to pay that price? Or is it actually about power and control rather than a union of likeminded and common nations?

    Is not the more important question why do we spend so much time arguing about it in our parliaments when frankly 70% of the country probably don't even think its an issue either way. I suspect that if you counted the actually give a damn pro union people in the country you would find they number less than pro av people

    The only people I have ever met that give a damn about the union either for or against are on here and scots, welsh and cornish. I have yet to hear anyone that is english in real everyday life treat scottish independence with more than a shrug of whatever we don't mind either way.
    so why does your government do all in its power to hold us hostage. When is it ever discussed in Westminster as well.
    Not my government I didn't vote for tories since 2010. Unionism is to illustrate what I said a total non topic in any uk wide party manifesto. So couldn't vote for a party that didn't care if I wished to
  • Its a remarkable coincidence that there were simultaneously an 'abler cohort' taking A levels this year and an 'abler cohort' taking GCSEs this year.

    But what is strange is that the 'abler cohort' who took A levels this year showed no sign of being an 'abler cohort' two years ago when they took their GCSEs.

    Not at all Richard. The aim of grades is to judge the individual not the cohort.
  • Monkeys said:

    Do we really think the next Indyref will also be a yes/no question, and not, say, Remain/Leave? The SNP aren't as lucky with their opponents this time round.

    If they don't change 'Remain' to 'Stay', they're missing a trick. Rebrand 'Leave' as 'Quit' as well.

  • Since starmer took over that Shepzy crank has been spamming Twitter with all sorts of nonsense. I’m going to have to block.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 5,616

    Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English

    He won't find it helps because while the english don't really care about the union they do care about being regionalised and Starmer wont go for an english parliament he will push for the old regions model where nothing gets devolved
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,687

    Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English

    Starmer in 2024.

    And what will labour's comprehensive asylum and immigration policy be if elected to government?

    GAME OVER
    Either points based, or if it's a fuck up, EEA
    Well Mr CHB if he can get the left of his party to swallow that. and I am very far from sure that he can, then labour are indeed ready for government.
    It doesn’t matter. If the Government has been unable to prevent “hoards” of immigration despite being out of the EU for 5 years, then all bets are off.

    If they have, Labour will just say they won’t change the system.

    You expect the current government’s incompetence to not extend to this area?
  • Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English

    Starmer in 2024.

    And what will labour's comprehensive asylum and immigration policy be if elected to government?

    GAME OVER
    The same as it was previously. Open door in reality talk tough in word only. Why not have a grown up,conversation about the benefits of mass inward migration and disperse asylum seekers fairly rather than dumping them in bleak northern outposts where houses are dirt cheap.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 37,973
    edited August 2020

    Foxy said:

    The only way to save the union now is for England to relinquish power over Scotland. If we want to save the union, which I do, then an English majority must not ever again be able to overrule the wishes of the Scottish electorate. Complete autonomy.

    Are unionists ready to pay that price? Or is it actually about power and control rather than a union of likeminded and common nations?

    Since then the lack of action on further devolution
    There HAS been action on further devolution - just the SNP government has delayed taking up the powers offered:

    SNP Ministers have been urged to apologise after admitting it will take at least nine years to deliver a clutch of devolved social security benefits after yet another delay to the timetable. Opposition MSPs said the slow pace made a mockery of the SNP’s claim before the 2014 referendum that it could set up a fully independent state in just 18 months.

    Under the 2016 Scotland Act that followed the No vote, Holyrood was given power over 11 benefits worth £3bn, roughly 15 per cent of social security spending north of the border. Despite criticising how the UK Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) oversees these benefits, SNP ministers have previously delayed delivering some of them because of the complexity of the process and the need to set up a new Scottish benefits agency.

    However the Government promised they would be fully operational by the end of the current parliamentary term in 2021. But in a surprise Holyrood statement, Social Security Secretary Shirley-Anne Somerville said that, to get the system right, the group of benefits would not be fully devolved until 2024.

    There could also be a further delay if ministers felt there was a risk to claimants.


    https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/17467830.snp-urged-apologise-devolved-benefits-delayed-2024/
    You forgot the bit where the delay was the DWP systems being unable to feed the data to Scotland, lies lies and lies , how very Tory.
    Regurgitating the same old rubbish shows you unionists are a bust flush.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,687
    Pagan2 said:

    Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English

    He won't find it helps because while the english don't really care about the union they do care about being regionalised and Starmer wont go for an english parliament he will push for the old regions model where nothing gets devolved
    He wont because he’ll focus group it like he’s focus grouping everything.

    Besides some parts of England DO want to be regionalised - Yorkshire for one.
  • Its a remarkable coincidence that there were simultaneously an 'abler cohort' taking A levels this year and an 'abler cohort' taking GCSEs this year.

    But what is strange is that the 'abler cohort' who took A levels this year showed no sign of being an 'abler cohort' two years ago when they took their GCSEs.

    Not at all Richard. The aim of grades is to judge the individual not the cohort.
    In which case the pupils with honest teachers have lost out.

    Hopefully someone will compare the 2018 GCSE results by school to the 2020 A levels results.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 37,973
    edited August 2020

    Scott_xP said:

    Give a Scotland that votes SNP almost all the appurtenances of a proper country with equal status to England, plus some oversight of foreign & military matters (including any of the overseas military adventures in which HMG likes to indulge), what could possibly go wrong?

    The biggest problem with that is the pretendy Parliament and the clowns that run it.

    I didn't watch this live (life is too short) but it is extraordinary...

    https://twitter.com/BingoDemagogue/status/1296458186397036544
    Luvvin' the nihilist wee crack that you're lodged in, roaring impotently into the void about Holyrood and Westminster.
    Evans is a well practiced liar for sure. Scott is just another one of the ones on here with Brexititis, deranged and foaming at both ends.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Andy_JS said:
    Yes.

    HYUFD will be along to say they got a cherry picked selection of states right in 2016.

    Their poll breakdowns lack pretty much any important demographic information to say whether they are quality polls or not.
  • Pagan2 said:

    Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English

    He won't find it helps because while the english don't really care about the union they do care about being regionalised and Starmer wont go for an english parliament he will push for the old regions model where nothing gets devolved
    We'll have to see won't we.

    You going to apologise yet?
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 37,973
    Scott_xP said:

    SNIP

    I note you made no attempt to defend the witness begging the chair of the inquiry to stop her answering the question...

    Just whiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiine...
    She was so gobsmacked by the blatant lying she was speechless.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 5,616

    Pagan2 said:

    Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English

    He won't find it helps because while the english don't really care about the union they do care about being regionalised and Starmer wont go for an english parliament he will push for the old regions model where nothing gets devolved
    He wont because he’ll focus group it like he’s focus grouping everything.

    Besides some parts of England DO want to be regionalised - Yorkshire for one.
    With regionalisation it is surely an all or nothing thing. You cant have an english parliament apart from yorkshire and somerset and kent who have their own parliaments.

    I also to be honest question the value of focus groups, somehow they always seems to come up with the answer favoured by those that convene them and differ from the average man in the street view
  • Its a remarkable coincidence that there were simultaneously an 'abler cohort' taking A levels this year and an 'abler cohort' taking GCSEs this year.

    But what is strange is that the 'abler cohort' who took A levels this year showed no sign of being an 'abler cohort' two years ago when they took their GCSEs.

    Not at all Richard. The aim of grades is to judge the individual not the cohort.
    In which case the pupils with honest teachers have lost out.

    Hopefully someone will compare the 2018 GCSE results by school to the 2020 A levels results.
    Not at all.

    If a teacher is being honest - and if they lack 100% foresight of Mystic Meg - then should an honest teacher give benefit of doubt to the pupil or not?

    If a teacher thinks that a student could get one of two different grades should they roll a dice or toss a coin to determine which they'd get? Or should the pupil get the benefit of the doubt?
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 35,822
    Scott_xP said:

    SNIP

    I note you made no attempt to defend the witness begging the chair of the inquiry to stop her answering the question...

    Just whiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiine...
    I note in your clenched wee knot of negativity that you haven't made a single suggestion about what options Scotland should take. Which three points do you agree with currently?
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 35,822
    malcolmg said:

    deranged and foaming at both ends.

    That's me put aff ma dinner :)
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,687
    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English

    He won't find it helps because while the english don't really care about the union they do care about being regionalised and Starmer wont go for an english parliament he will push for the old regions model where nothing gets devolved
    He wont because he’ll focus group it like he’s focus grouping everything.

    Besides some parts of England DO want to be regionalised - Yorkshire for one.
    With regionalisation it is surely an all or nothing thing. You cant have an english parliament apart from yorkshire and somerset and kent who have their own parliaments.

    I also to be honest question the value of focus groups, somehow they always seems to come up with the answer favoured by those that convene them and differ from the average man in the street view
    You can just have an English Parliament at Westminster then a greater Yorkshire County Council if so desired by locals, with no greater power than any other council.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    edited August 2020
    If teachers are having to guess what grades their pupils would get this year the only way there would be no inflation is if either.

    A: The teachers have magical 100% foresight and made no mistakes OR
    B: The teachers have made mistakes and not given the benefit of the doubt to pupils and lots of pupils have a worse result than they should have got.

    A is implausible and B is improper. The proper result should be the pupils get the benefit of the doubt (but not dishonesty) which means that grades are rounded up - leading to inflation. But no individual pupil should be out of line, its simply that they've each individually gained the benefit of the doubt on their grade.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 5,616

    Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English

    Starmer in 2024.

    And what will labour's comprehensive asylum and immigration policy be if elected to government?

    GAME OVER
    The same as it was previously. Open door in reality talk tough in word only. Why not have a grown up,conversation about the benefits of mass inward migration and disperse asylum seekers fairly rather than dumping them in bleak northern outposts where houses are dirt cheap.
    Because all politicians use totally true stats to lie and it contradicts peoples personaly experience. A good example is the claim that immigrants are a net postive on gdp. Yes they are its a true fact but also totally misleading.

    It doesn't take into account social costs such as increased competition for housing, school places, doctors appointments, road congestion etc.

    It also is misleading because if you have a party and 100 people between them have brought 10 cakes, inviting another 50 people that bring 3 cakes increases the cake value of the party (gdp) while at the same time lowering the total cake per person (gdp per capita). Strangely you never hear the pro immigration they are a net benefit people talking either about social costs or gdp per capita....its always yes it added 1% to our gdp
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 72,853
    Minnesota could be a pickup for Trump even if he loses overall. I think that scenario is unlikely but it's not impossible.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 5,616
    edited August 2020

    Pagan2 said:

    Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English

    He won't find it helps because while the english don't really care about the union they do care about being regionalised and Starmer wont go for an english parliament he will push for the old regions model where nothing gets devolved
    We'll have to see won't we.

    You going to apologise yet?
    Nothing to apologise for, you called me a racist I insulted you back. Can't take it don't dish it out
  • Its a remarkable coincidence that there were simultaneously an 'abler cohort' taking A levels this year and an 'abler cohort' taking GCSEs this year.

    But what is strange is that the 'abler cohort' who took A levels this year showed no sign of being an 'abler cohort' two years ago when they took their GCSEs.

    Not at all Richard. The aim of grades is to judge the individual not the cohort.
    In which case the pupils with honest teachers have lost out.

    Hopefully someone will compare the 2018 GCSE results by school to the 2020 A levels results.
    Not at all.

    If a teacher is being honest - and if they lack 100% foresight of Mystic Meg - then should an honest teacher give benefit of doubt to the pupil or not?

    If a teacher thinks that a student could get one of two different grades should they roll a dice or toss a coin to determine which they'd get? Or should the pupil get the benefit of the doubt?
    Benefit of the doubt is just a term to excuse doing what you want.

    We will hopefully be able to compare how much 'benefit of the doubt' was given from one school to another.

    Still at least the 'abler cohort' line is no longer being mentioned.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 37,973

    Monkeys said:

    Do we really think the next Indyref will also be a yes/no question, and not, say, Remain/Leave? The SNP aren't as lucky with their opponents this time round.

    If they don't change 'Remain' to 'Stay', they're missing a trick. Rebrand 'Leave' as 'Quit' as well.
    It will not be Westminster crooks choosing the question
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 37,973
    Pagan2 said:

    Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English

    Starmer in 2024.

    And what will labour's comprehensive asylum and immigration policy be if elected to government?

    GAME OVER
    The same as it was previously. Open door in reality talk tough in word only. Why not have a grown up,conversation about the benefits of mass inward migration and disperse asylum seekers fairly rather than dumping them in bleak northern outposts where houses are dirt cheap.
    Because all politicians use totally true stats to lie and it contradicts peoples personaly experience. A good example is the claim that immigrants are a net postive on gdp. Yes they are its a true fact but also totally misleading.

    It doesn't take into account social costs such as increased competition for housing, school places, doctors appointments, road congestion etc.

    It also is misleading because if you have a party and 100 people between them have brought 10 cakes, inviting another 50 people that bring 3 cakes increases the cake value of the party (gdp) while at the same time lowering the total cake per person (gdp per capita). Strangely you never hear the pro immigration they are a net benefit people talking either about social costs or gdp per capita....its always yes it added 1% to our gdp
    He is too dumb to understand your answer, will be miles above his head.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 20,376
    malcolmg said:

    Foxy said:

    The only way to save the union now is for England to relinquish power over Scotland. If we want to save the union, which I do, then an English majority must not ever again be able to overrule the wishes of the Scottish electorate. Complete autonomy.

    Are unionists ready to pay that price? Or is it actually about power and control rather than a union of likeminded and common nations?

    Since then the lack of action on further devolution
    There HAS been action on further devolution - just the SNP government has delayed taking up the powers offered:

    SNP Ministers have been urged to apologise after admitting it will take at least nine years to deliver a clutch of devolved social security benefits after yet another delay to the timetable. Opposition MSPs said the slow pace made a mockery of the SNP’s claim before the 2014 referendum that it could set up a fully independent state in just 18 months.

    Under the 2016 Scotland Act that followed the No vote, Holyrood was given power over 11 benefits worth £3bn, roughly 15 per cent of social security spending north of the border. Despite criticising how the UK Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) oversees these benefits, SNP ministers have previously delayed delivering some of them because of the complexity of the process and the need to set up a new Scottish benefits agency.

    However the Government promised they would be fully operational by the end of the current parliamentary term in 2021. But in a surprise Holyrood statement, Social Security Secretary Shirley-Anne Somerville said that, to get the system right, the group of benefits would not be fully devolved until 2024.

    There could also be a further delay if ministers felt there was a risk to claimants.


    https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/17467830.snp-urged-apologise-devolved-benefits-delayed-2024/
    You forgot the bit where the delay was the DWP systems being unable to feed the data to Scotland, lies lies and lies , how very Tory.
    Regurgitating the same old rubbish shows you unionists are a bust flush.
    9 years of DWP systems being the problem Malc? You could feed the data in less than 9 years if you fed it with a teaspoon.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 35,822
    Give it another few years and I'm sure Unionism will think of a way* to persuade everyone under 55 to love the Union.

    *May involve Union flags.

    https://twitter.com/ScoPoliticsNews/status/1296432179627597828?s=20
  • Pagan2 said:

    Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English

    He won't find it helps because while the english don't really care about the union they do care about being regionalised and Starmer wont go for an english parliament he will push for the old regions model where nothing gets devolved
    He wont because he’ll focus group it like he’s focus grouping everything.

    Besides some parts of England DO want to be regionalised - Yorkshire for one.
    I've never met anyone who wants a Yorkshire regional parliament.
  • malcolmg said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English

    Starmer in 2024.

    And what will labour's comprehensive asylum and immigration policy be if elected to government?

    GAME OVER
    The same as it was previously. Open door in reality talk tough in word only. Why not have a grown up,conversation about the benefits of mass inward migration and disperse asylum seekers fairly rather than dumping them in bleak northern outposts where houses are dirt cheap.
    Because all politicians use totally true stats to lie and it contradicts peoples personaly experience. A good example is the claim that immigrants are a net postive on gdp. Yes they are its a true fact but also totally misleading.

    It doesn't take into account social costs such as increased competition for housing, school places, doctors appointments, road congestion etc.

    It also is misleading because if you have a party and 100 people between them have brought 10 cakes, inviting another 50 people that bring 3 cakes increases the cake value of the party (gdp) while at the same time lowering the total cake per person (gdp per capita). Strangely you never hear the pro immigration they are a net benefit people talking either about social costs or gdp per capita....its always yes it added 1% to our gdp
    He is too dumb to understand your answer, will be miles above his head.
    Obsessive stalker alert. Grow up.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 18,687

    Pagan2 said:

    Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English

    He won't find it helps because while the english don't really care about the union they do care about being regionalised and Starmer wont go for an english parliament he will push for the old regions model where nothing gets devolved
    He wont because he’ll focus group it like he’s focus grouping everything.

    Besides some parts of England DO want to be regionalised - Yorkshire for one.
    I've never met anyone who wants a Yorkshire regional parliament.
    Who’s talking about Yorkshire having a regional parliament?
  • Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English

    He won't find it helps because while the english don't really care about the union they do care about being regionalised and Starmer wont go for an english parliament he will push for the old regions model where nothing gets devolved
    We'll have to see won't we.

    You going to apologise yet?
    Nothing to apologise for, you called me a racist I insulted you back. Can't take it don't dish it out
    Alright you cum stained oik!
  • CorrectHorseBatteryCorrectHorseBattery Posts: 21,436
    edited August 2020

    malcolmg said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English

    Starmer in 2024.

    And what will labour's comprehensive asylum and immigration policy be if elected to government?

    GAME OVER
    The same as it was previously. Open door in reality talk tough in word only. Why not have a grown up,conversation about the benefits of mass inward migration and disperse asylum seekers fairly rather than dumping them in bleak northern outposts where houses are dirt cheap.
    Because all politicians use totally true stats to lie and it contradicts peoples personaly experience. A good example is the claim that immigrants are a net postive on gdp. Yes they are its a true fact but also totally misleading.

    It doesn't take into account social costs such as increased competition for housing, school places, doctors appointments, road congestion etc.

    It also is misleading because if you have a party and 100 people between them have brought 10 cakes, inviting another 50 people that bring 3 cakes increases the cake value of the party (gdp) while at the same time lowering the total cake per person (gdp per capita). Strangely you never hear the pro immigration they are a net benefit people talking either about social costs or gdp per capita....its always yes it added 1% to our gdp
    He is too dumb to understand your answer, will be miles above his head.
    Obsessive stalker alert. Grow up.
    Pagan is a twat. I don't give a toss what anyone says.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 5,616

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English

    He won't find it helps because while the english don't really care about the union they do care about being regionalised and Starmer wont go for an english parliament he will push for the old regions model where nothing gets devolved
    We'll have to see won't we.

    You going to apologise yet?
    Nothing to apologise for, you called me a racist I insulted you back. Can't take it don't dish it out
    Alright you cum stained oik!
    gosh a plagiarist too, you could come up with an original insult I believe you are infringing my copyright on that one.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,147
    I don't think Brexit is decisive, after all 62% of Scots voted Remain and given Brexit occurred in March and Boris is PM and committed to hard Brexit you would expect Yes to be on over 60% now if all Remainers now backed independence.

    However it is more nuanced than that e.g. 70% of Unionist LDs voted Remain which was actually higher than the 64% of SNP voters who voted Remain, 36% of SNP voters voted Leave and they may have voted Yes in 2014 but actually more attracted by a UK out of the EU.

    An Oxford vaccine might help too.

    Do not forget either in Quebec in 1995 Yes to independence from Canada led most final polls but No won with 51% as Don't Knows went No
  • https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1296487905586749441

    It's going to get extended again, another victory for Keir
  • CorrectHorseBatteryCorrectHorseBattery Posts: 21,436
    edited August 2020
    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English

    He won't find it helps because while the english don't really care about the union they do care about being regionalised and Starmer wont go for an english parliament he will push for the old regions model where nothing gets devolved
    We'll have to see won't we.

    You going to apologise yet?
    Nothing to apologise for, you called me a racist I insulted you back. Can't take it don't dish it out
    Alright you cum stained oik!
    gosh a plagiarist too, you could come up with an original insult I believe you are infringing my copyright on that one.
    Alright, you twat!
  • Pagan2 said:

    Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English

    He won't find it helps because while the english don't really care about the union they do care about being regionalised and Starmer wont go for an english parliament he will push for the old regions model where nothing gets devolved
    He wont because he’ll focus group it like he’s focus grouping everything.

    Besides some parts of England DO want to be regionalised - Yorkshire for one.
    I've never met anyone who wants a Yorkshire regional parliament.
    Who’s talking about Yorkshire having a regional parliament?
    You are.

    Besides some parts of England DO want to be regionalised - Yorkshire for one.

    Or perhaps your legal training has progressed to the point where you can write something which means the exact opposite of what it seems to be.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 18,992
    edited August 2020

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English

    He won't find it helps because while the english don't really care about the union they do care about being regionalised and Starmer wont go for an english parliament he will push for the old regions model where nothing gets devolved
    We'll have to see won't we.

    You going to apologise yet?
    Nothing to apologise for, you called me a racist I insulted you back. Can't take it don't dish it out
    Alright you cum stained oik!
    gosh a plagiarist too, you could come up with an original insult I believe you are infringing my copyright on that one.
    Alright, you !
    If you can, I would quickly edit that.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 5,616

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English

    He won't find it helps because while the english don't really care about the union they do care about being regionalised and Starmer wont go for an english parliament he will push for the old regions model where nothing gets devolved
    We'll have to see won't we.

    You going to apologise yet?
    Nothing to apologise for, you called me a racist I insulted you back. Can't take it don't dish it out
    Alright you cum stained oik!
    gosh a plagiarist too, you could come up with an original insult I believe you are infringing my copyright on that one.
    Alright, you cunt!
    Oh dear I really got under your skin didn't I by not rolling over and playing dead to your wokeness. Never mind you won't be 12 for ever
  • Pagan spends his whole life on here being rude and objectionable to everyone, so it's about time somebody puts him down a peg.
  • Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English

    He won't find it helps because while the english don't really care about the union they do care about being regionalised and Starmer wont go for an english parliament he will push for the old regions model where nothing gets devolved
    We'll have to see won't we.

    You going to apologise yet?
    Nothing to apologise for, you called me a racist I insulted you back. Can't take it don't dish it out
    Alright you cum stained oik!
    gosh a plagiarist too, you could come up with an original insult I believe you are infringing my copyright on that one.
    Alright, you cunt!
    If you can I would quickly edit that.
    It is all so childish
  • Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English

    He won't find it helps because while the english don't really care about the union they do care about being regionalised and Starmer wont go for an english parliament he will push for the old regions model where nothing gets devolved
    We'll have to see won't we.

    You going to apologise yet?
    Nothing to apologise for, you called me a racist I insulted you back. Can't take it don't dish it out
    Alright you cum stained oik!
    gosh a plagiarist too, you could come up with an original insult I believe you are infringing my copyright on that one.
    Alright, you cunt!
    Oh dear I really got under your skin didn't I by not rolling over and playing dead to your wokeness. Never mind you won't be 12 for ever
    Do you think you'll be able to pass GCSE English anytime soon?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,147

    What is the Union for ?

    To preserve the Hanoverian succession
    To safeguard the Protestant religion
    To stop a French / German / Russian invasion
    To provide 40+ Labour MPs

    It doesn't seem to have a current purpose.

    To help ensure the UK's place on the UN Security Council, to avoid a hard border and customs at the Scottish borders, so we benefit from Scottish whisky and universities and Scottish regiments, so Scotland benefits from the Barnett formula still etc
  • Funny Pagan never gets called out for his childish insults yet I get called out for calling him what he is. I don't fancy getting a ban but my thoughts on him I hope are now well known.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 72,853

    https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1296487905586749441

    It's going to get extended again, another victory for Keir

    Won't someone think of the yields :D

    https://twitter.com/AntLeach/status/1296488430533316609
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 5,616

    Pagan spends his whole life on here being rude and objectionable to everyone, so it's about time somebody puts him down a peg.

    Well I have been on for several hours and I have insulted how many? Oh I think that would be 0. By objectionable you mean I voiced something you don't agree with I assume?
  • Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English

    He won't find it helps because while the english don't really care about the union they do care about being regionalised and Starmer wont go for an english parliament he will push for the old regions model where nothing gets devolved
    We'll have to see won't we.

    You going to apologise yet?
    Nothing to apologise for, you called me a racist I insulted you back. Can't take it don't dish it out
    Alright you cum stained oik!
    gosh a plagiarist too, you could come up with an original insult I believe you are infringing my copyright on that one.
    Alright, you cunt!
    If you can I would quickly edit that.
    It is all so childish
    I've got nothing more to say but it's sad you only call out so-called childishness on one side
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 5,616

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Starmer needs to go hard on federalism, including English

    He won't find it helps because while the english don't really care about the union they do care about being regionalised and Starmer wont go for an english parliament he will push for the old regions model where nothing gets devolved
    We'll have to see won't we.

    You going to apologise yet?
    Nothing to apologise for, you called me a racist I insulted you back. Can't take it don't dish it out
    Alright you cum stained oik!
    gosh a plagiarist too, you could come up with an original insult I believe you are infringing my copyright on that one.
    Alright, you cunt!
    If you can I would quickly edit that.
    It is all so childish
    Sorry G not my doing though, just have a stalker
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,147
    Alistair said:

    Andy_JS said:
    Yes.

    HYUFD will be along to say they got a cherry picked selection of states right in 2016.

    Their poll breakdowns lack pretty much any important demographic information to say whether they are quality polls or not.
    They correctly predicted Michigan and Pennsylvania would go for Trump unlike any other pollster in 2016 Yes, though their last polls had them going to Biden so that Minnesota poll is good news for Trump
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 37,973

    malcolmg said:

    Foxy said:

    The only way to save the union now is for England to relinquish power over Scotland. If we want to save the union, which I do, then an English majority must not ever again be able to overrule the wishes of the Scottish electorate. Complete autonomy.

    Are unionists ready to pay that price? Or is it actually about power and control rather than a union of likeminded and common nations?

    Since then the lack of action on further devolution
    There HAS been action on further devolution - just the SNP government has delayed taking up the powers offered:

    SNP Ministers have been urged to apologise after admitting it will take at least nine years to deliver a clutch of devolved social security benefits after yet another delay to the timetable. Opposition MSPs said the slow pace made a mockery of the SNP’s claim before the 2014 referendum that it could set up a fully independent state in just 18 months.

    Under the 2016 Scotland Act that followed the No vote, Holyrood was given power over 11 benefits worth £3bn, roughly 15 per cent of social security spending north of the border. Despite criticising how the UK Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) oversees these benefits, SNP ministers have previously delayed delivering some of them because of the complexity of the process and the need to set up a new Scottish benefits agency.

    However the Government promised they would be fully operational by the end of the current parliamentary term in 2021. But in a surprise Holyrood statement, Social Security Secretary Shirley-Anne Somerville said that, to get the system right, the group of benefits would not be fully devolved until 2024.

    There could also be a further delay if ministers felt there was a risk to claimants.


    https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/17467830.snp-urged-apologise-devolved-benefits-delayed-2024/
    You forgot the bit where the delay was the DWP systems being unable to feed the data to Scotland, lies lies and lies , how very Tory.
    Regurgitating the same old rubbish shows you unionists are a bust flush.
    9 years of DWP systems being the problem Malc? You could feed the data in less than 9 years if you fed it with a teaspoon.
    Lucky that is lightning speed for them , they are useless.
This discussion has been closed.