This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
This thread is not about whether or why Scotland should or should not vote yes. That is done to death elsewhere and ends with both sides just getting more entrenched.
But what if Scotland votes no? Would it be time for him to resign, having made his political career on what turns out to be a failure? Would he have the good grace and decency to admit failure, and leave? Or would he hang around like a bad unwanted smell? Or change his policy? Or would he push for another vote in a few years time? Or would he try and spin it some other weird and wonderful political way, perhaps by saying he wanted it but accepts Scotland doesn't but will continue to fight for what Scotland wants? The stakes are high - isn't it all or nothing for him here, amazing success and a place in history, or a spectacular drawn out failure that sohuld end in ignimony? He's a politician whose instinct is to do what it takes to survive - do you think he is contemplating options now for what do if Scotland votes no?
Post edited at 18:19
In reply to nickinscottishmountains:
nothing, scotland will/can still do all the same things. Salmond may not get a pay rise.
nothing, scotland will/can still do all the same things. Salmond may not get a pay rise.
In reply to nickinscottishmountains:
Hopefully he'll be taken aside and shot... regardless of the vote
He's only doing this so he can be King Salmon!
Hopefully he'll be taken aside and shot... regardless of the vote
He's only doing this so he can be King Salmon!
In reply to itsThere:
Sure, but where does that leave him? The First Minister who got to being First Minister by building an idea that never came to fruition? Surely that is just time to go, you can't ignore or brush aside failure of that scale.
Sure, but where does that leave him? The First Minister who got to being First Minister by building an idea that never came to fruition? Surely that is just time to go, you can't ignore or brush aside failure of that scale.
In reply to crayefish:
I like your style! He doesn't exactly come over as a world class statesman, does he?
I like your style! He doesn't exactly come over as a world class statesman, does he?
In reply to nickinscottishmountains:
I'm by no means a fan of his ,
But he is a very capable political figure.
He could hold his own.
Maybe give the pies a rest though ,Eck.
And maybe start running ,or shooting a few hoops before breakfast like Obama.
Image ,image ,image
I'm by no means a fan of his ,
But he is a very capable political figure.
He could hold his own.
Maybe give the pies a rest though ,Eck.
And maybe start running ,or shooting a few hoops before breakfast like Obama.
Image ,image ,image
In reply to nickinscottishmountains:
The Prophecies of the Brahan Seer, mention a violent Putsch by the secretive Tartan Teuchter Ninjas....... 'Oor Donald' will be along soon to dispute this of course..
> I like your style! He doesn't exactly come over as a world class statesman, does he?
The Prophecies of the Brahan Seer, mention a violent Putsch by the secretive Tartan Teuchter Ninjas....... 'Oor Donald' will be along soon to dispute this of course..
In reply to nickinscottishmountains:
What do you mean "what happens"? In terms of party leader, first minister or what?
Party Leader - Stand aside and let Sturgeon in
First Minister - see above.
What do you mean "what happens"? In terms of party leader, first minister or what?
Party Leader - Stand aside and let Sturgeon in
First Minister - see above.
In reply to Saor Alba:
Eh? I asked 8 questions in the OP, that should be enough to give you a steer, surely?
Stand aside and remain in politics, or stand aside meaning resign?
> What do you mean "what happens"? In terms of party leader, first minister or what?
Eh? I asked 8 questions in the OP, that should be enough to give you a steer, surely?
Stand aside and remain in politics, or stand aside meaning resign?
Post edited at 19:37
In reply to nickinscottishmountains:
New name, same job or maybe leave and become a consultant to his government.
New name, same job or maybe leave and become a consultant to his government.
In reply to nickinscottishmountains:
Stand aside as leader of the SNP I mean which then answers the question on FM.
Course he is going to remain in politics. He's designed and implemented one of the most significant events for decades.
Stand aside as leader of the SNP I mean which then answers the question on FM.
Course he is going to remain in politics. He's designed and implemented one of the most significant events for decades.
In reply to nickinscottishmountains:
Plenty of people in Scotland who are 100% opposed to independence don't especially mind Salmond as First Minister. Me, for instance.
If I thought it was possible to vote SNP without lending support to independence, I might well do that, especially when I consider the calibre of the Labour and Lib Dem front benches in Holyrood.
I think a lot of people vote for the SNP in precisely this way--they don't want independence, but they think the SNP are more credible as an executive than their opponents.
No reason why that should change after a No vote, broadly speaking.
It's also true that there's a bit of a second-order debate starting up already, about how much of a No really counts as a No. I've heard Better Together spokesmen say "We don't just need to win, we need to win big enough to kill off the whole issue". They say this, of course, to get the No vote out even when all the polls say the No side will win anyway. But it's also an open goal for the SNP--they can say after the event "OK, we didn't win, but even Better Together admit that a 55/45 vote is not really decisive".
Plenty of people in Scotland who are 100% opposed to independence don't especially mind Salmond as First Minister. Me, for instance.
If I thought it was possible to vote SNP without lending support to independence, I might well do that, especially when I consider the calibre of the Labour and Lib Dem front benches in Holyrood.
I think a lot of people vote for the SNP in precisely this way--they don't want independence, but they think the SNP are more credible as an executive than their opponents.
No reason why that should change after a No vote, broadly speaking.
It's also true that there's a bit of a second-order debate starting up already, about how much of a No really counts as a No. I've heard Better Together spokesmen say "We don't just need to win, we need to win big enough to kill off the whole issue". They say this, of course, to get the No vote out even when all the polls say the No side will win anyway. But it's also an open goal for the SNP--they can say after the event "OK, we didn't win, but even Better Together admit that a 55/45 vote is not really decisive".
Post edited at 19:53
In reply to nickinscottishmountains:
If, as is likely, the 3 opposition parties (that did not want a Devo Max Question remember) will now come up with more powers for Scotland at the last minute to swing/buy the vote.
Salmond he will probably hail a close vote as a success, and SNP may even get enough votes to get back in at the next election, which of course is not the same as a vote for independance.
( despite the confusion caused deliberately by opposition parties , to catch people who dislike either or both Salmond /independence )
If, as is likely, the 3 opposition parties (that did not want a Devo Max Question remember) will now come up with more powers for Scotland at the last minute to swing/buy the vote.
Salmond he will probably hail a close vote as a success, and SNP may even get enough votes to get back in at the next election, which of course is not the same as a vote for independance.
( despite the confusion caused deliberately by opposition parties , to catch people who dislike either or both Salmond /independence )
In reply to nickinscottishmountains:
We need to get independence so that we can get rid of the b45t4rd. Who is so thick that they don't understand that it's independence that disposes of his raison d'etre and not continued union? Scottish nationalism has been politically organised since the 1920s and has survived more knock-backs than Del Boy.
We need to get independence so that we can get rid of the b45t4rd. Who is so thick that they don't understand that it's independence that disposes of his raison d'etre and not continued union? Scottish nationalism has been politically organised since the 1920s and has survived more knock-backs than Del Boy.
In reply to nickinscottishmountains:
Not even in the slightest. I think he is Scotland's answer to Bob Crow!
> I like your style! He doesn't exactly come over as a world class statesman, does he?
Not even in the slightest. I think he is Scotland's answer to Bob Crow!
Post edited at 21:04
In reply to The Watch of Barrisdale:
Aye me too. He is has done more for scotland than pretty much any other politician. Imagine having Gordon Brown or Johann Lamont.
Aye me too. He is has done more for scotland than pretty much any other politician. Imagine having Gordon Brown or Johann Lamont.
In reply to Saor Alba:
Kinnock always said HE wouldn't take a peerage. You should know by know that politicians are two faced hypocrites.
> The SNP don't accept or nominate for peerages etc.
Kinnock always said HE wouldn't take a peerage. You should know by know that politicians are two faced hypocrites.
In reply to FesteringSore:
You misunderstand - The SNP are a political party and have never taken or nominated for titles like that. Labour have for a long time. Parties and politicians are not the same.
You misunderstand - The SNP are a political party and have never taken or nominated for titles like that. Labour have for a long time. Parties and politicians are not the same.
In reply to Saor Alba:
It was said in Parliament when the date of the referendum was announced, that Salmond had just named his date of retirement.
It was said in Parliament when the date of the referendum was announced, that Salmond had just named his date of retirement.
In reply to nickinscottishmountains: My guess is that Yes/SNP will lose the referendum, however may well still form the next Scottish Executive in 2016, albeit with a significantly reduced majority and less of the wifebeaters/dodgy builders/lobby fodder who got in by accident last time. There will be a degree of bloodletting within the SNP. AS will stand down as FM and hand over to Sturgeon who will then have to try to keep various populist plates spinning ie free university tuition, council tax freeze etc, which were intended to be short term vote winners rather than sustainable in the long term. At the next election (2020) or possibly even before if labour find a more appealing leader than JL and win a confidence vote, her FM career will be over.
In the meantime, Salmond will stand at the General election in 2015, having thanked whoever is keeping his seat warm for him, proclaiming that he needs to stand up for Scotland at Westminster, or words to that effect, and also because he actually quite enjoys the commons. He will appear on Question time, book festivals etc reasonably often and generally morph into a tartan Tony Benn, former firebrand now national (UK) treasure.
In the meantime, Salmond will stand at the General election in 2015, having thanked whoever is keeping his seat warm for him, proclaiming that he needs to stand up for Scotland at Westminster, or words to that effect, and also because he actually quite enjoys the commons. He will appear on Question time, book festivals etc reasonably often and generally morph into a tartan Tony Benn, former firebrand now national (UK) treasure.
In reply to nickinscottishmountains:
I don't like Salmond much, but I think ( know) he would totally wipe the floor with ( world class?) Cameron in a debate. ( as Sturgeon did with his proxy)
At least Cameron is bright enough to know that, but then I would also hesitate to call Cameron (or Clegg) world class politicians.( or Statesmen)
> I like your style! He doesn't exactly come over as a world class statesman, does he?
I don't like Salmond much, but I think ( know) he would totally wipe the floor with ( world class?) Cameron in a debate. ( as Sturgeon did with his proxy)
At least Cameron is bright enough to know that, but then I would also hesitate to call Cameron (or Clegg) world class politicians.( or Statesmen)
Post edited at 00:07
In reply to nickinscottishmountains:
Go on then Nick, who out of the current crop of Scottish or UK politicians would you recon to be world class statesmen?
> I like your style! He doesn't exactly come over as a world class statesman, does he?
Go on then Nick, who out of the current crop of Scottish or UK politicians would you recon to be world class statesmen?
In reply to Craig Mc:
You are cruel Craig, this could be a long pause waiting for the answer to that one.
Tick, tick, tick........
> Go on then Nick, who out of the current crop of Scottish or UK politicians would you recon to be world class statesmen?
You are cruel Craig, this could be a long pause waiting for the answer to that one.
Tick, tick, tick........
Post edited at 00:25
In reply to nickinscottishmountains: Even if Scotland votes "No" this year ( not likely), the independence campaign will still likely have greater support from the Scottish people than Cameron had from the British electorate.
A lot of the Independence voters aren't voting for Salmond...personally I like the man, and as a reward for his hard work, contributing to an independent Scotland, I would hope that a statue would be made of him which could then replace the vile statue of the Duke of Sutherland.
A lot of the Independence voters aren't voting for Salmond...personally I like the man, and as a reward for his hard work, contributing to an independent Scotland, I would hope that a statue would be made of him which could then replace the vile statue of the Duke of Sutherland.
In reply to Craig Mc:
I think the last one we had was Tony Blair aaaaaaaaaaggggggg........
> Go on then Nick, who out of the current crop of Scottish or UK politicians would you recon to be world class statesmen?
I think the last one we had was Tony Blair aaaaaaaaaaggggggg........
In reply to Al Evans:
Wasn't he a world class poodle?
> I think the last one we had was Tony Blair aaaaaaaaaaggggggg........
Wasn't he a world class poodle?
In reply to Al Evans:
Well Yo Blair got into the world class, only problem was the bigger boys over the pond discovered he was a useful idiot, and gave him a whole pack of lies that he had to sell to the British public, however as he was an excellent salesman, he did the job he'd been paid to do, and now he's a very rich and powerful man. I think Stuart Adamson with his Seer like poetry pinged him back in the 80's
youtube.com/watch?v=b8-EiQYoMOo&
> I think the last one we had was Tony Blair aaaaaaaaaaggggggg........
Well Yo Blair got into the world class, only problem was the bigger boys over the pond discovered he was a useful idiot, and gave him a whole pack of lies that he had to sell to the British public, however as he was an excellent salesman, he did the job he'd been paid to do, and now he's a very rich and powerful man. I think Stuart Adamson with his Seer like poetry pinged him back in the 80's
youtube.com/watch?v=b8-EiQYoMOo&
Post edited at 08:33
In reply to Craig Mc:
The amazing thing once again is that as per usual the issues are ignored and the whole thing is reduced to the simplistic Westminster Punch and Judy show with one man taking the whole focus. The sneering self entitlement is quite surprising at this late stage in the debate.
The amazing thing once again is that as per usual the issues are ignored and the whole thing is reduced to the simplistic Westminster Punch and Judy show with one man taking the whole focus. The sneering self entitlement is quite surprising at this late stage in the debate.
In reply to johnj:
Well said. The other point to note is that the system allowed Blair and Brown to sell the lies, be exposed and then still go ahead with it. Scotland was an irrelevance in the whole thing.
Well said. The other point to note is that the system allowed Blair and Brown to sell the lies, be exposed and then still go ahead with it. Scotland was an irrelevance in the whole thing.
In reply to Fat Bumbly2:
I agree.
Agree with him or not, Salmond has put his money where his mouth is.
> It was said in Parliament when the date of the referendum was announced, that Salmond had just named his date of retirement.
I agree.
Agree with him or not, Salmond has put his money where his mouth is.
In reply to Saor Alba:
Seriously - led by a cabbage patch doll? Haud me back!
If those were the only choices, I'd rather have Eck...and that's saying something, as I'm completely opposed to independence!
> Party Leader - Stand aside and let Sturgeon in
> First Minister - see above.
Seriously - led by a cabbage patch doll? Haud me back!
If those were the only choices, I'd rather have Eck...and that's saying something, as I'm completely opposed to independence!
In reply to Fraser:
Really? I think she has real ability and has been good as health secretary and destroyed every suitor in every debate so far.
The question was what happens to AS if it's NO.
An alternative question is what happens to Darling, Carmichael, Cameron but it's a pointless question as the clear answer is title and a seat in the Lords as well as years of talking about it. I think it's going to be YES.
Really? I think she has real ability and has been good as health secretary and destroyed every suitor in every debate so far.
The question was what happens to AS if it's NO.
An alternative question is what happens to Darling, Carmichael, Cameron but it's a pointless question as the clear answer is title and a seat in the Lords as well as years of talking about it. I think it's going to be YES.
In reply to Saor Alba:
Yes, really. I think the SNP has been front-loading their policies and strategies to get in good with the Scottish populace, so when it comes to the vote, the latter will remember the 'good stuff' and not think further down the line once the hypothetical honeymoon period is over.
I find her manner quite patronising and I always get the impression that she's got away with her position thus far, but it's only a matter of time before she's found out. I've had dealings with her on a business level and that only reinforced my opinion.
If the SNP had a larger pool to choose from, she'd be long gone IMO. In any other political party she wouldn't have lasted in such high profile positions. Time will tell I suppose. I sincerely hope the vote result is a resounding NO. In which case, and to answer the OP, I would hope he would have the grace to admit he was wrong and to retire promptly and discretely.
Yes, really. I think the SNP has been front-loading their policies and strategies to get in good with the Scottish populace, so when it comes to the vote, the latter will remember the 'good stuff' and not think further down the line once the hypothetical honeymoon period is over.
I find her manner quite patronising and I always get the impression that she's got away with her position thus far, but it's only a matter of time before she's found out. I've had dealings with her on a business level and that only reinforced my opinion.
If the SNP had a larger pool to choose from, she'd be long gone IMO. In any other political party she wouldn't have lasted in such high profile positions. Time will tell I suppose. I sincerely hope the vote result is a resounding NO. In which case, and to answer the OP, I would hope he would have the grace to admit he was wrong and to retire promptly and discretely.
In reply to Saor Alba:
Aye, the Salmond haters will get louder and angrier over the next nine months. Then they'll wake up to the reality that it was the people living in Scotland who framed the debate and scrutinised the leadership every step of the way who delivered independence.
If folk want to open their minds and can get past Salmon hating there is plenty to look forward to in the future.
http://wingsoverscotland.com/
> The sneering self entitlement is quite surprising at this late stage in the debate.
Aye, the Salmond haters will get louder and angrier over the next nine months. Then they'll wake up to the reality that it was the people living in Scotland who framed the debate and scrutinised the leadership every step of the way who delivered independence.
If folk want to open their minds and can get past Salmon hating there is plenty to look forward to in the future.
http://wingsoverscotland.com/
In reply to nickinscottishmountains: If it was a resounding No, I'd hope he'd enter UK politics as he is one of the better politians on this island. If the vote is close I would think he would push for devo max and ultimately another independence vote.
In reply to Papillon:
That is probably a pretty good take on things.
To Fraser, I don't think you can "get away" with being Health Secretary - either it works for you or it doesn't and Sturgeon was pretty good at that. So far she has hospitalised all comers to debates and long may that continue.
That is probably a pretty good take on things.
To Fraser, I don't think you can "get away" with being Health Secretary - either it works for you or it doesn't and Sturgeon was pretty good at that. So far she has hospitalised all comers to debates and long may that continue.
In reply to nickinscottishmountains:
I thought the traditional "reward" for failed attempts at Scottish separation was to be hung drawn and quartered with your head put on a pole at the Tower of London?
I thought the traditional "reward" for failed attempts at Scottish separation was to be hung drawn and quartered with your head put on a pole at the Tower of London?
I'm not sure how people can ridicule Salmond or the SNP for being unsuccessful. He's an excellent speaker and seems to be an excellent, devious politician. Although I will be voting no and I can't say I really like the man's manner, to say he's not a good politician is ludicrous. Although given how people apparently still think Tony Blair was an unintelligent and unsuccessful politician then maybe I shouldn't be surprised.
Fraser, I'm gobsmacked that you think Nicola Sturgeon is "getting away with" being in politics. Clearly you don't like her but I really don't see how you can deny she's a good politician. Whenever I've seen her debate she's been well informed, very aggressive and always seems to wipe the floor with anyone she debates with. Maybe not the characteristics you want in a drinking buddy but definitely what you want in a good politician.
Part of me would really enjoy seeing either her or Salmond debate Scottish independence with anyone from the westminster front benches, including Cameron who would never be let near a debate like that for obvious reasons. In terms of her efficacy as scottish health secretary, I don't look at the Scottish NHS and think "oh no, why has Nicola let our health service become worse than England's"!
I'm not sure what you mean by "If the SNP had a larger pool to choose from", within the party or within Scotland? I watched the Falkirk Question Time on Independence and I have to say that watching Scottish politicians have a civil and intelligent debate* didn't make me long for them to be replaced by Westminster's squabbling rabble. If you mean the SNP don't have enough to choose from within their party then please do take a look at the Scottish Labour party and tell me why Nicola Sturgeon is only in a job because the SNP don't have the same political heavyweights as the other parties.
On the actual OP's question, I see no reason why Salmond should step down when he loses the independence referendum and the SNP's majority may well hold up after a No vote. A lot of people who voted SNP wanted the political leadership but not independence. A lot more wanted the same things but didn't vote SNP for the latter reason. A no vote in a referendum might mean more people turn up to vote for Salmond in the next election, safe in the knowledge that we can have the SNP in power without independence looming.
Ben
* apart from Eddie Reader obviously, for anyone that watched it
Fraser, I'm gobsmacked that you think Nicola Sturgeon is "getting away with" being in politics. Clearly you don't like her but I really don't see how you can deny she's a good politician. Whenever I've seen her debate she's been well informed, very aggressive and always seems to wipe the floor with anyone she debates with. Maybe not the characteristics you want in a drinking buddy but definitely what you want in a good politician.
Part of me would really enjoy seeing either her or Salmond debate Scottish independence with anyone from the westminster front benches, including Cameron who would never be let near a debate like that for obvious reasons. In terms of her efficacy as scottish health secretary, I don't look at the Scottish NHS and think "oh no, why has Nicola let our health service become worse than England's"!
I'm not sure what you mean by "If the SNP had a larger pool to choose from", within the party or within Scotland? I watched the Falkirk Question Time on Independence and I have to say that watching Scottish politicians have a civil and intelligent debate* didn't make me long for them to be replaced by Westminster's squabbling rabble. If you mean the SNP don't have enough to choose from within their party then please do take a look at the Scottish Labour party and tell me why Nicola Sturgeon is only in a job because the SNP don't have the same political heavyweights as the other parties.
On the actual OP's question, I see no reason why Salmond should step down when he loses the independence referendum and the SNP's majority may well hold up after a No vote. A lot of people who voted SNP wanted the political leadership but not independence. A lot more wanted the same things but didn't vote SNP for the latter reason. A no vote in a referendum might mean more people turn up to vote for Salmond in the next election, safe in the knowledge that we can have the SNP in power without independence looming.
Ben
* apart from Eddie Reader obviously, for anyone that watched it
In reply to Sharp: Well said Ben, excellent post. Salmond and Sturgeon are very good politicians if not particularly likeable, and we'd have a few more decent ones if they didn't have the option of Westminster.
I hope you change your mind about voting no.
I hope you change your mind about voting no.
In reply to Fraser:
I think your point is quite right, this is as good as it gets for Scottish voters, any more independence and the whole stack of bricks will come tumbling down. Scotland is being way over the top propped up economically by the UK and if they ever came completely independent in a modern world they would be in more trouble than Greece.
I think your point is quite right, this is as good as it gets for Scottish voters, any more independence and the whole stack of bricks will come tumbling down. Scotland is being way over the top propped up economically by the UK and if they ever came completely independent in a modern world they would be in more trouble than Greece.
In reply to nickinscottishmountains:
He will retire on a very generous pension, and then be employed by the Scottish Parliament as a highly paid consultant, via a limited company that will enable him to avoid tax!
The man is no fool, he is in a win win situation!
He will retire on a very generous pension, and then be employed by the Scottish Parliament as a highly paid consultant, via a limited company that will enable him to avoid tax!
The man is no fool, he is in a win win situation!
In reply to nickinscottishmountains:
Dave has a monkey on his back.
And he's going to have to deal with it.
Come on Dave .
Lets talk.
Dave has a monkey on his back.
And he's going to have to deal with it.
Come on Dave .
Lets talk.
Post edited at 18:27
In reply to Fraser:
Couldn't agree more.
I often think that the Scottish press don't really go for the jugular with these politicians because they don't want to lose good material for their front pages.
Regarding Alex himself, the only Premier league politician in Holyrood and as such he stands out. But it's a bit like being the best striker in the SPL, an accolade but not a great one.
Looking at his record I'm honestly surprised he's still held in much esteem by anyone other than SNP supporters. He's been found out lying to both Parliament and the electorate on several occasions, he fiddled his expenses at Westminster (claiming lunch allowances when he wasn't there) and seems partial to staying in expensive hotels at the tax payers' or his own party's expense.
I'm not sure what we've got in return for that? The administration is competent enough, just like the previous ones but without any of the important legislation that we saw in the early years of the parliament. In 2007 the SNP set itself a target of reducing income inequality by 2017 (while still being part of the UK) and are nowhere near achieving that. Alex said it was priority of his to re balance the Scottish economy but nothing's happened despite spending over 40% per capita more on regional development than the UK average (life just isn't that simple). Tuition fees have been not been introduced in Scotland but the money has been taken out of Further Education to finance that. This year councils are really going to struggle with their budgets because council tax has been frozen now for 6[?] years now and business rates have gone up by 60% in the last 8 years.
I don't see the above as a damning indictment particularly. I see choices made partly by ideology and partly by a desire to be as populist as possible for the obvious reason. All in all I give them 5/10 and their leader, due to his personal failings, 3/10.
In answer to the OP. I expect he'll stay on until the next election and then jack it in.
Anyway I'll sign off now in the expectation that my observations will unleash the usual ferocious and tedious tsunami of abuse directed by SNP supporters towards the Labour party whenever they are presented with anything approaching coherent criticism of the their track record or that of that of their leader.
Couldn't agree more.
I often think that the Scottish press don't really go for the jugular with these politicians because they don't want to lose good material for their front pages.
Regarding Alex himself, the only Premier league politician in Holyrood and as such he stands out. But it's a bit like being the best striker in the SPL, an accolade but not a great one.
Looking at his record I'm honestly surprised he's still held in much esteem by anyone other than SNP supporters. He's been found out lying to both Parliament and the electorate on several occasions, he fiddled his expenses at Westminster (claiming lunch allowances when he wasn't there) and seems partial to staying in expensive hotels at the tax payers' or his own party's expense.
I'm not sure what we've got in return for that? The administration is competent enough, just like the previous ones but without any of the important legislation that we saw in the early years of the parliament. In 2007 the SNP set itself a target of reducing income inequality by 2017 (while still being part of the UK) and are nowhere near achieving that. Alex said it was priority of his to re balance the Scottish economy but nothing's happened despite spending over 40% per capita more on regional development than the UK average (life just isn't that simple). Tuition fees have been not been introduced in Scotland but the money has been taken out of Further Education to finance that. This year councils are really going to struggle with their budgets because council tax has been frozen now for 6[?] years now and business rates have gone up by 60% in the last 8 years.
I don't see the above as a damning indictment particularly. I see choices made partly by ideology and partly by a desire to be as populist as possible for the obvious reason. All in all I give them 5/10 and their leader, due to his personal failings, 3/10.
In answer to the OP. I expect he'll stay on until the next election and then jack it in.
Anyway I'll sign off now in the expectation that my observations will unleash the usual ferocious and tedious tsunami of abuse directed by SNP supporters towards the Labour party whenever they are presented with anything approaching coherent criticism of the their track record or that of that of their leader.
In reply to johncook:
Unfortunately I think this is the most likely outcome. Much as I'd like to see him hung drawn and quartered.
> He will retire on a very generous pension, and then be employed by the Scottish Parliament as a highly paid consultant, via a limited company that will enable him to avoid tax!
> The man is no fool, he is in a win win situation!
Unfortunately I think this is the most likely outcome. Much as I'd like to see him hung drawn and quartered.
In reply to andymac:
It's interesting to note who, exactly, is he being compared with here. Blair? Yes world class but a very bad influence on the world.
Cameron? Pretty light weight and clueless.
Brown? The biggest failure of British politics for many decaded. The continuation of boom and bust, promotion and full support for Iraq War and all the deaths and chaos that caused. Promotion of centre right policies - sell anything to anyone.
Gordon Brown - the man who out thatchered Thatcher.
I think AS and NS have out debated, out thought, out maneuvered all Westminster politicians and continue to do so. A recent example would be the two esteemed Scottish secretaries (supposedly the highest political office in Scotland) who were destroyed by NS on STV. Not just in debating skill which is not that important, but on policy. On issues such as child poverty, nuclear weapons, war, social policy and so on they are all centre right and all out of their depth.
You get people like Eric, dyed in the wool Labour, who are so in love with the illusion of any kind of social conscience that they start threads praising a man at the centre of the Iraq War. There are 60+ million people in the UK. Brown, Blair and Darling have been three of the most damaging for many years.
Oh and I see poor Eric is feeling the heat from the SNP. It' tough having to face up to reality at times . Apparently Grangemouth was an example of stability...............
Labourism is like a religion. Eric and poor old Al are spouting the same rhetoric.
It's interesting to note who, exactly, is he being compared with here. Blair? Yes world class but a very bad influence on the world.
Cameron? Pretty light weight and clueless.
Brown? The biggest failure of British politics for many decaded. The continuation of boom and bust, promotion and full support for Iraq War and all the deaths and chaos that caused. Promotion of centre right policies - sell anything to anyone.
Gordon Brown - the man who out thatchered Thatcher.
I think AS and NS have out debated, out thought, out maneuvered all Westminster politicians and continue to do so. A recent example would be the two esteemed Scottish secretaries (supposedly the highest political office in Scotland) who were destroyed by NS on STV. Not just in debating skill which is not that important, but on policy. On issues such as child poverty, nuclear weapons, war, social policy and so on they are all centre right and all out of their depth.
You get people like Eric, dyed in the wool Labour, who are so in love with the illusion of any kind of social conscience that they start threads praising a man at the centre of the Iraq War. There are 60+ million people in the UK. Brown, Blair and Darling have been three of the most damaging for many years.
Oh and I see poor Eric is feeling the heat from the SNP. It' tough having to face up to reality at times . Apparently Grangemouth was an example of stability...............
Labourism is like a religion. Eric and poor old Al are spouting the same rhetoric.
In reply to Donnie:
Thanks. I don't think I will change my mind to be honest but I'm not as vehemently pro union as I used to be. Either we'll stay together and have 20 odd years of weak coalition governments, with each successive tory government trying to inch our country towards the right wing, poor hating, american model but with the financial and military security of the uk in what's set to be a turbulant century. Or we'll get independence, suffer 20 years of economic instablity for the price of a more liberal ideology which may or may not actually result in liberal policy, depending on whether finances allow. You'd have to have a crystal ball to know which option suits Scotland best. My money is on the union but I don't claim to be definitely right, either way, things will still roll on no doubt.
Eric, I've never really looked for skeletons in Salmond's closet but if stealing lunch money and not fulfilling promises are as bad as it gets then I'd say that puts him above a lot of other politicians. No one expects them to be able to keep their promises anyway but it's just a bizarre feature of our political system that we wont vote for someone unless they promise us an undeliverable world, or at least promise us something that they'd like but have no way of knowing whether the circumstances will allow it in the future. At least it gives us all something to throw at them when the time comes for them to be sent to the political graveyard.
Thanks. I don't think I will change my mind to be honest but I'm not as vehemently pro union as I used to be. Either we'll stay together and have 20 odd years of weak coalition governments, with each successive tory government trying to inch our country towards the right wing, poor hating, american model but with the financial and military security of the uk in what's set to be a turbulant century. Or we'll get independence, suffer 20 years of economic instablity for the price of a more liberal ideology which may or may not actually result in liberal policy, depending on whether finances allow. You'd have to have a crystal ball to know which option suits Scotland best. My money is on the union but I don't claim to be definitely right, either way, things will still roll on no doubt.
Eric, I've never really looked for skeletons in Salmond's closet but if stealing lunch money and not fulfilling promises are as bad as it gets then I'd say that puts him above a lot of other politicians. No one expects them to be able to keep their promises anyway but it's just a bizarre feature of our political system that we wont vote for someone unless they promise us an undeliverable world, or at least promise us something that they'd like but have no way of knowing whether the circumstances will allow it in the future. At least it gives us all something to throw at them when the time comes for them to be sent to the political graveyard.
In reply to Sharp:
Good post. I don't really see the black and white option you are laying out and the reasons for independence (apologies to OP as he wanted to avoid that) are things like increasing child poverty, infrastructure, nuclear weapons, the wars all against the Union. These are just hard facts.
The future is unknown though and I don't think the Union has prepared Scotland well for it. All countries face challenges and I'd rather have as many tools as possible to deal with them and stop supporting things that benefit few other than a rich elite or people with an investment in the system.
Good post. I don't really see the black and white option you are laying out and the reasons for independence (apologies to OP as he wanted to avoid that) are things like increasing child poverty, infrastructure, nuclear weapons, the wars all against the Union. These are just hard facts.
The future is unknown though and I don't think the Union has prepared Scotland well for it. All countries face challenges and I'd rather have as many tools as possible to deal with them and stop supporting things that benefit few other than a rich elite or people with an investment in the system.
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...