Scots Vote

[JudgeDredd]

^ Yes - it did.

I wasn't trying to invalidate your point - simply point out that there were and continue to be idiots on both sides.

One other thing - to everyone. Don't mistake the violence in Glasgow for anything other than football hooligans getting mixed up in it. It's that nasty sectarian split in Glasgow showing it's ugly head again. The fact that it wasn't displayed anywhere else is proof that it was linked to that sectarian divide. The Rangers football club in that city have strong links to the Union, the Queen, the Crown and to things like the Battle of the Boygne.

The violence was not indicative of YES/NO voters.

I was ashamed to be Glaswegian on Saturday night - but I wasn't surprised. As a Catholic in Glasgow (called William...I think my mother was trying to make subtle in-roads to peace!!) I saw that nasty sectarian side every single day of my youth.

As everyone else has said - the only offer on the table is new powers. I was extremely sceptical, as I was back when they were offered, about their honesty (part of the reason I wanted Scotland to be shot of Westminster) and even more so now watching the bickering going on and Cameron trying to tie it to something that hasn't been sorted in a hundred years...and he thinks he can do it in 4 months??

[EUBanana]

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd
even more so now watching the bickering going on and Cameron trying to tie it to something that hasn't been sorted in a hundred years...and he thinks he can do it in 4 months??

In fairness the Tory line seems pretty easy to me, and gives the most to Scotland. No Scottish MPs voting on English affairs, and only defence and foreign affairs retained by Westminster. You could sum that up in a pretty short bill, and I think pretty much everybody both sides of the border wants that.

Here the Labour Party intrudes, as they don't want to lose their Scottish MPs ability to legislate on purely English matters, and they don't want Scotland to get into tax competition with the rest of the UK and thus exert a downward pressure on taxes. Hence the wrangling over what tax powers are to be ceded.

IMO Cameron should get off his arse and make sure all this is done and dusted before the next election, because if Miliband was calling the shots on it we'd be being stitched up on both sides of the border.

[JudgeDredd]

That's a fair point.

I've always had a distaste in my mouth that Scottish MP's have a say in English affairs.

However - there is an underlying problem on what issues Scottish MP's would have a say in, or not. The reason that underlying issue is there goes again back to the "pocket money" Scotland gets from it's "parent".

As an example, just because a law is being passed regarding the NHS or Education does NOT mean it won't impact Scotland depending on that issue. If there's a financial implication, then it could most definitely have an impact on Scotland - but as it's classed as "an English only issue", then Scottish MP's wouldn't be able to vote...therefore preventing the effect from rebounding across the border.

I am all in favour of English only laws to be voted on by English MP's - but the meat of that will have to be very carefully looked at and defined...the inherent problem being because Westminster gathers all funds from it's constituent parts and distributes funds, I'm skeptical of what laws and rules the Scotland would not be affected by.

And please can I make a request. Can the Act of Union please stop being brought up. It was assimilation by peaceful means. There was alot of bribery going around - the Scottish Parliament was always going to sell out. Plus Scotland was ripe for the picking at the time. So enough of the Act of Union being some sort of democratic joining of the two parliaments. On the face of it, yes...it was as there was no blood spilled, but it was essentially some (ex) rich people who needed cash due to Scotland's failed attempt to "build an empire" or at least spread and create trade routes and sold out. End of [:D]

[JudgeDredd]

By the way EUBanana - I love Spitfire - very nice beer [:)]

[EUBanana]

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd
However - there is an underlying problem on what issues Scottish MP's would have a say in, or not. The reason that underlying issue is there goes again back to the "pocket money" Scotland gets from it's "parent".

IMO if Scotland gets its own tax raising powers, as it should do, then the relationship can (and should) be reversed, in that Scotland will be charged for defence and foreign affairs by the rest of the UK.

Exactly how it is charged is going to be a source of some wrangling, but taking the defence and intelligence budget, and the cost of the foreign office, and then splitting it by population seems fair to me as a start point.

Bear in mind that we can always tweak things afterwards. We don't have a written constitution so the UK is infinitely malleable - hence why it could be ended on a simple majority vote.

As an example, just because a law is being passed regarding the NHS or Education does NOT mean it won't impact Scotland depending on that issue. If there's a financial implication, then it could most definitely have an impact on Scotland - but as it's classed as "an English only issue", then Scottish MP's wouldn't be able to vote...therefore preventing the effect from rebounding across the border.

This is true. But the solution is for the Scottish institutions to be separated from the British ones. Which would have to happen anyway in the event of full independence. There will be a Scottish NHS, which Scotland will pay for. It will be nothing to do with the rest of the UK.

I mean thats what devo-max is going to mean in practice. The end result is that we will have very few institutions in common - the armed forces and the foreign office.

I am all in favour of English only laws to be voted on by English MP's - but the meat of that will have to be very carefully looked at and defined...the inherent problem being because Westminster gathers all funds from it's constituent parts and distributes funds, I'm skeptical of what laws and rules the Scotland would not be affected by.

Yup, the solution is to charge Scotland for what few British services they actually want, not to allocate pocket money.

[EUBanana]

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

By the way EUBanana - I love Spitfire - very nice beer [:)]

Most awesome adverts on TV as well. [:D][:D][:D]

http://vimeo.com/45578684

[JudgeDredd]

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd
However - there is an underlying problem on what issues Scottish MP's would have a say in, or not. The reason that underlying issue is there goes again back to the "pocket money" Scotland gets from it's "parent".

IMO if Scotland gets its own tax raising powers, as it should do, then the relationship can (and should) be reversed, in that Scotland will be charged for defence and foreign affairs by the rest of the UK.

Exactly how it is charged is going to be a source of some wrangling, but taking the defence and intelligence budget, and the cost of the foreign office, and then splitting it by population seems fair to me as a start point.

Bear in mind that we can always tweak things afterwards. We don't have a written constitution so the UK is infinitely malleable - hence why it could be ended on a simple majority vote.

As an example, just because a law is being passed regarding the NHS or Education does NOT mean it won't impact Scotland depending on that issue. If there's a financial implication, then it could most definitely have an impact on Scotland - but as it's classed as "an English only issue", then Scottish MP's wouldn't be able to vote...therefore preventing the effect from rebounding across the border.

This is true. But the solution is for the Scottish institutions to be separated from the British ones. Which would have to happen anyway in the event of full independence. There will be a Scottish NHS, which Scotland will pay for. It will be nothing to do with the rest of the UK.

I mean thats what devo-max is going to mean in practice. The end result is that we will have very few institutions in common - the armed forces and the foreign office.

I am all in favour of English only laws to be voted on by English MP's - but the meat of that will have to be very carefully looked at and defined...the inherent problem being because Westminster gathers all funds from it's constituent parts and distributes funds, I'm skeptical of what laws and rules the Scotland would not be affected by.

Yup, the solution is to charge Scotland for what few British services they actually want, not to allocate pocket money.

What you are speaking of is total fiscal autonomy for Scotland...and I'm not sure that was on offer. If it was, I concede the point that Scotland would be self sufficient and even English policies with a financial implication would not affect Scotland - but again, I'm not sure that's what is on offer. (I hope it is)

In fact - and I could be wrong - Scotland was being offered tax raising powers - the key word being "raising". They were not going to be allowed to have full control over taxation - just raising the level, hence why I believe the Barnett formula was going to stay. But - I could be wrong

If the Barnett formula stays and IF Scotland only has tax "raising" powers, then the NHS spending in the rest of the UK would most definitely have an effect on the NHS in Scotland. Not directly, but indirectly. Scotland gets a percentage of the money spent on the NHS in England. If that money is being siphoned off for private health care then it's less money going into the NHS and therefore Scotland's percentage, whilst syaing the same as a percentage, in real terms drops. Now Scotland DOES have total control over the NHS - but if the true value of that percentage drops, then so too does the money Scotland can assign to it's NHS - or it keeps the same level but hits some other aspect of life in Scotland financially.

That's at least as I understand it.

Of course - again - if full fiscal autonomy is what is on offer then these issues will be non issues...but as I said, I don't think that's what was on offer. We'll see. I'll actually give up drinking for a year if they come up with the goods as even a framework for an acceptable bill by January.

Wait and see is the name of the game.

[JudgeDredd]

ORIGINAL: EUBanana

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

By the way EUBanana - I love Spitfire - very nice beer [:)]

Most awesome adverts on TV as well. [:D][:D][:D]

http://vimeo.com/45578684

Very good!

[EUBanana]

Thats the only way I can see it working re. the English votes for English MPs. Given I heard Miliband squeaking about Scotland only varying taxation by plus or minus 15% I made the assumption that the Tories were offering greater tax freedom, possibly erroneously on my part.

I think the Tories will be Scotlands biggest buddies on this one though, now the English only MPs thing has been publicly mooted. They want that prize. And it seems to me a confederal system will keep the Tories happy (armies, flags, no northern socialists) and the Scots happy (near as dammit independence).

So with luck, thats what we'll end up with!

[Mobius]

ORIGINAL: warspite1
warspite1
That comment shows you don't understand [&:] Scotland is not ruled by the English [8|] England and Scotland are in a voluntary Union. The seat of UK Government happens to be in Westminster, England. The MP's that make up Parliament are representatives from all over the UK including 59 MP's from Scotland. England happens to be the largest of the four Home Countries, so will have proportionally more MP's.
That's democracy. Oh and by the way, a majority of Scots have just voted to remain part of that United Kingdom.

As to what Scots opinions are. A business in Scotland that is part of the UK would have an advantage over one that is in an independent Scotland if it has international sales. An independent Scotland would be a large complication for them as one CEO of a large Scotch Whiskey maker said. As for Scots working in England like the ones you meet they too have a better chance of working when Scotland is part of the UK. They are talking their book, so to speak. Scots over here in the US don't have any cause to support a UK-Scotland bond so an independent Scotland is more theoretical for them.

[warspite1]

I liked this - kind of summed up the campaign quite well I thought [:)]

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

I liked this - kind of summed up the campaign quite well I thought [:)]

[:D]

[JudgeDredd]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

I liked this - kind of summed up the campaign quite well I thought [:)]

The key is not to believe either - they were both talking shite [:D] (to varying degrees)

[Toby42]

I didn't realize that the Scottish population base was so small! There must be a lot of empty areas there?

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Treale

I didn't realize that the Scottish population base was so small! There must be a lot of empty areas there?

warspite1

Yes. Yes there is.

Very beautiful it is too.

[geozero]

At least the secession movement was peaceful and resolved by ballot and not by bullets.