UKC

Scotland: the great Westminster sell out begins...

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
 Postmanpat 06 Sep 2014

It appears the new YouGov poll gives "Yes" a 1% lead. The Grauniad reporting that the Cameron, Milliband et al are preparing to offer Scotland a federal solution.

So, having sold out their core voters for the last three decades and wondering why their support goes down the major parties now abandon the RUK for 2.5 million Scots. When does the RUK get a referendum on the giveaway?

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/06/scots-radical-new-deal-save...
 aln 06 Sep 2014
In reply to Postmanpat:


Is Catalan a country? And hilariously, things will get better if we vote for them to stay the same.
 Dr.S at work 06 Sep 2014
In reply to aln:

> Is Catalan a country?
Yes - by similar measures that Scotland is
 nw 06 Sep 2014
In reply to Postmanpat:
Lots of crowing by Yes folk on facebook tonight, but 1% is neither here nor there. Especially seeing as postal votes already in and the Yougov poll doesn't account for don't knows. Still to close to call. Personally I think a Federal solution is the best option.
Post edited at 22:30
OP Postmanpat 06 Sep 2014
In reply to nw:

> Lots of crowing by Yes folk on facebook tonight, but 1% is neither here nor there. Especially seeing as postal votes already in and the Yougov poll doesn't account for don't knows. Still to close to call. Personally I think a Federal solution is the best option.

Very Possibly it is, but Westminster politicians have no right to cut some dodgy deal to save their skins without consulting the whole of the UK electorate.
 nw 06 Sep 2014
In reply to Postmanpat:

Which bit do you regard as dodgy? Ceding powers or are sweeteners on offer too?
 RomTheBear 06 Sep 2014
In reply to Postmanpat:
> Very Possibly it is, but Westminster politicians have no right to cut some dodgy deal to save their skins without consulting the whole of the UK electorate.

Indeed, completely agree with you on that. They had all the time in the world to come up with a radical deal, and they didn't. Now they'll probably come up with some dodgy deal that won't be satisfying to English voters, or will be broken.
Post edited at 22:54
 aln 06 Sep 2014
In reply to Dr.S at work:

> Yes - by similar measures that Scotland is

Utter bollocks
OP Postmanpat 06 Sep 2014
In reply to nw:

> Which bit do you regard as dodgy? Ceding powers or are sweeteners on offer too?

That they should impose major constitutional change without proper democratic consultation.
The upside is that the UK needs massive constitutional change and this could be the catalyst to enable it.
 nw 06 Sep 2014
In reply to Postmanpat:

Are you saying the rUK should have a veto on indy/devo max?
KevinD 06 Sep 2014
In reply to nw:

> Are you saying the rUK should have a veto on indy/devo max?

On devo max yes.
 nw 06 Sep 2014
In reply to dissonance:

Hmm yes I suppose for a true federal solution the other parts of the rUK would have to become devolved 'federates' too, which would require change backed by consent.
 elsewhere 06 Sep 2014
In reply to Postmanpat:
> The upside is that the UK needs massive constitutional change and this could be the catalyst to enable it.

I like the sound of that but can they knock up a constitution in the next week?

 Morgan Woods 07 Sep 2014
In reply to Postmanpat:

The problem with the status quo is that the Scots have a large degree of autonomy but no responsibility for collecting taxes, maintaining their own currency and all the other boring things governments do. I don't think the solution is to keep devolving more powers, especially since there doesn't seem to be a plan to limit the corresponding voting power of Scottish MP's on rUK matters in Westminster. Time to cut the purse strings I say!
 Morgan Woods 07 Sep 2014
In reply to Postmanpat:

> It appears the new YouGov poll gives "Yes" a 1% lead. The Grauniad reporting that the Cameron, Milliband et al are preparing to offer Scotland a federal solution.


and naturally worth pointing out that at this point such moves reek of desperation.
 Dr.S at work 07 Sep 2014
In reply to aln:

> Utter bollocks

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catalonia

Used to be an independent state, merged with a larger one, currently has devolution under a constitutional monarchy - by what measures is it not a country if Scotland is?

A bit beside the point really - the "Scotland is a country" argument is the least important consideration in this debate and the closest to nationalism in the bad sense of the word.
 Dauphin 07 Sep 2014
In reply to Postmanpat:

> Very Possibly it is, but Westminster politicians have no right to cut some dodgy deal to save their skins without consulting the whole of the UK electorate.

Buisness as usual for Westminster and likely to widen the Yes camp I would think.

D
OP Postmanpat 07 Sep 2014
In reply to Morgan Woods:

Osborne has just confirmed to Andrew Marr that a "devomax" proposal including tax raising powers and agreed by Milliband is going to be made this week.

Marr didn't even think to ask what RUK voters might think of this or whether we shouldn't get a new settlement as well.
 Trevers 07 Sep 2014
In reply to Postmanpat:

Hard to see momentum shifting back the other way.

However there is one thing which might throw all the polls off. The 'Yes' vote is obviously the more positive sounding side, and provokes more passion. But there must be a load of more or less apathetic voters out there who have taken no part in debates, opinion polls etc but who will still vote anyway. And the likelihood is that they'll vote No (that's me hypothesising now). So there might be a large but silent No vote out there
 RomTheBear 07 Sep 2014
In reply to Postmanpat:
> Osborne has just confirmed to Andrew Marr that a "devomax" proposal including tax raising powers and agreed by Milliband is going to be made this week.

> Marr didn't even think to ask what RUK voters might think of this or whether we shouldn't get a new settlement as well.


Tbh the devil is in the details. I expect that there will be more powers to set taxes and welfare but the block grant will probably still depend on the level of spending in the rUK. So these new measures are probably going to be very cosmetic.

I was expecting more radical changes but listening to Osborne it's clear it's not going to be the case.
Post edited at 11:29
 Bruce Hooker 07 Sep 2014
In reply to Trevers:

> The 'Yes' vote is obviously the more positive sounding side,

Watching from afar this has always puzzled me. By presenting it as simply "yes" or "no" there is an obvious advantage to the "yes" side, even the word is better than the mean sounding "no". It would have been more neutral and hence fairer to have had a campaign "For an independent Scotland" versus "For Scotland remaining part of the UK", or something similar, it's hard to find a totally neutral presentation.

At what point and by who was the "yes"/"No" system set up?
 RomTheBear 07 Sep 2014
In reply to Bruce Hooker:


> At what point and by who was the "yes"/"No" system set up?

The Edinburgh agreement gave a mandate to the Scottish government to ask one single question on independence, and the question had to be reviewed by the electoral commission to make sure it's not biased. In fact the electoral commission rejected the first question that was submitted.
 Bruce Hooker 07 Sep 2014
In reply to RomTheBear:

So it was the Scottish "government" which set the question? Cameron let himself get shafted again.
 Dr.S at work 07 Sep 2014
In reply to Bruce Hooker:

> So it was the Scottish "government" which set the question? Cameron let himself get shafted again.

The actual question is fine - it's the way the two campaigns have been conducted and the word choices adopted that favour the yes side IMHO
 RomTheBear 07 Sep 2014
In reply to Bruce Hooker:

> So it was the Scottish "government" which set the question? Cameron let himself get shafted again.

Well it would be weird that the question on independence is set by Westminster wouldn't it ? Anyway it was reviewed by the electoral commission, if it was biased they could have rejected it, like they did for the first question that was submitted.
 Bruce Hooker 07 Sep 2014
In reply to RomTheBear:

> Well it would be weird that the question on independence is set by Westminster wouldn't it ?

No, not really. They are, and were at the time, responsible for looking after the interests of the whole country, including Scotland. But as Dr S says it's not so much the question, which is rarely cited it is the way both sides of the campaign have allowed it to be reduced to "yes" "no". Obviously this is to the advantage of the nationalists so as a said above, Cameron, but also Labour and the unionists in general have allowed themselves to get shafted.

From over the sea it looks as if the campaign to keep Britain united has been very badly run... They've to a great extent allowed it to become a political election against the Tories, something which gives an enormous advantage in much of Scotland.
 RomTheBear 07 Sep 2014
In reply to Bruce Hooker:
> No, not really. They are, and were at the time, responsible for looking after the interests of the whole country, including Scotland. But as Dr S says it's not so much the question, which is rarely cited it is the way both sides of the campaign have allowed it to be reduced to "yes" "no". Obviously this is to the advantage of the nationalists so as a said above, Cameron, but also Labour and the unionists in general have allowed themselves to get shafted.

I am not sure what's your point, the electoral commission HAD a say on the question...
I think they shafted themselves tbh.
Post edited at 13:59
 wercat 07 Sep 2014
In reply to Postmanpat:

I foresee a lot of people being extremely angry that their nationality is being thrown up in the air to land in bits without their having any say. I've been British far before English for nearly 6 decades and what we're doing now seems stupid and unjust.

The British identity should stay and I'd be very happy to see a federal model replace what we have now where we all share one nationality but can feel part of whichever part of the federal union we to which we feel most attached. That solution to me seems most free from injustice.
 wercat 07 Sep 2014
In reply to RomTheBear:

I don't mind rUK as long as we also adopt the name iScotland!
 Bruce Hooker 07 Sep 2014
In reply to RomTheBear:

> I think they shafted themselves tbh.

Isn't that what I've been saying?

From the point of view of anyone who believes in union this referendum couldn't have come at a worse moment, after several years of the worst, toffee nosed, incompetent Tory rule.
 skog 07 Sep 2014
In reply to Postmanpat:

It's remarkable that they're doing this now - after many of us have already marked and sent off our postal votes!

And after the talk of the ever ill-defined 'Devo Max' requiring consultation across the entire UK (which it really does, to have any semblance of fairness).

This really does reek of panic.
 yer maw 07 Sep 2014
In reply to Postmanpat:

This is desperation and Osbourne chucks in his 'no way you will have a currency union' threat again.

There was never anything other than No from the better together , then at the last minute they throw in a convoluted devo max option. The debate has lasted over 2 years ffs. What a bunch of desperate tw*ts it makes me fume. As for the shared currency, the pound will go into freefall after a Yes vote and throwing out one of its main stabilisers. Osbourne et al are lying through their teeth and know for the London markets to survive they need a stable pound and North Sea oil revenues.

Falling apart is the best thing that can happen to rUK to change the whole political landscape for the better.
OP Postmanpat 07 Sep 2014
In reply to yer maw:

> This is desperation and Osbourne chucks in his 'no way you will have a currency union' threat again.

He was asked on the currency. He could hardly change his mind! But obviously they are desperate.

> As for the shared currency, the pound will go into freefall after a Yes vote and throwing out one of its main stabilisers. Osbourne et al are lying through their teeth and know for the London markets to survive they need a stable pound and North Sea oil revenues.

The £ will have a one off fall, which is no bad thing for the exporters and that will be that. North Sea oil revenues currently generate about about 1% of total tax revenues so that's a bit of a red herring.

> Falling apart is the best thing that can happen to rUK to change the whole political landscape for the better.

And probably the best thing for Scotland which will have a painful but successful neoliberal economic revolution and thrive as a result. Shame it will require a break up to happen.
 alastairmac 07 Sep 2014
In reply to Postmanpat:
This latest "offer" or tactic is insulting. It's already mired in confusion with Darling saying in the last hour that there would be no new powers. Why should we take a few additional powers grudgingly given when we take the lot through a democratic vote. I can't believe anybody will be taken in by these false promises. Particularly when some of us have already voted. Cameron and Darling couldn't run a nursery.
 Banned User 77 07 Sep 2014
In reply to yer maw:

>
> Falling apart is the best thing that can happen to rUK to change the whole political landscape for the better.

Absolutely non-sensical comment.. Some in Scotland are taking a very selfish view. I've said before how we work in the Union, weaker areas get supported.. Scotland wants to take out what it pays in…

Nice idea? But then who pays into the EU? Who pays to support Wales and Northern Ireland?

Wales especially just could not survive without the Union…

It seems some in Scotland want a successful Union to be Scotland taking out what it pays in, England paying to support NI and Wales and also paying all EU obligations even though all countries see money come back in from the EU...
 yer maw 07 Sep 2014
In reply to Postmanpat:

I agree. Thanks

 yer maw 07 Sep 2014
In reply to IainRUK:

Listen, forget the oil which will help stabilise Scotland and get it going hopefully in the right direction, which for me is investing in product and not financial services. There will be pain and even the NHS has to have a bit of a rethink. BUT the only area that interests Westminster is middle England unfortunately. This is bad for all areas of the UK from Cornwall to Northumberland. If MPs were regional and not populous based there would be a far better balance and representation in UK politics. But it'll never happen.
Are you saying Scotland shouldn't be independent because that isn't fair on Wales and NI??
 Banned User 77 07 Sep 2014
In reply to yer maw:
No, Scotland can do what it wants.. its you who is saying its better for Wales to go independent too…

Not me..

I think we are getting a bette system with regional assemblies, devolving some powers buy geographically, economically, Wales needs the UK..
Post edited at 18:39
 yer maw 07 Sep 2014
In reply to IainRUK:

Oh right I'm not sure how you got that love, but I think it is for the Welsh to decide what is better for them, certainly not me!! Though I've had many a good trip and holiday to Wales. I like the place.
 rogerwebb 07 Sep 2014
In reply to alastairmac:

> Particularly when some of us have already voted.

Good point. Even as a no voter I share your anger.

It should have been done weeks ago.

Still not convinced by divisive nationalism (even when some of it's proponents wear 'no pasaran' Tshirts without apparent irony)
 Banned User 77 07 Sep 2014
In reply to yer maw:

"Falling apart is the best thing that can happen to rUK"
 alastairmac 07 Sep 2014
In reply to Postmanpat:
Although I would have voted Yes regardless of the latest developments it almost beggars belief that a credible and grown up offer based on greater devolution wasn't put on the table from day one. All of the Westminster parties showed incredible levels of complacency and a total disregard for the changing views of people in Scotland.
 RomTheBear 07 Sep 2014
In reply to Postmanpat:

Fear not Postman ! According to the latest news, the "new powers" of Osborne will be simply what has already been suggested before by The Tories and Labour, no devomax or anything if the sort. The only difference is that they would offer a "timetable" for it.

Really they don't get it do they...
 Banned User 77 07 Sep 2014
In reply to alastairmac:

> Although I would have voted Yes regardless of the latest developments it almost beggars belief that a credible and grown up offer based on greater devolution wasn't put on the table from day one. All of the Westminster parties showed incredible levels of complacency and a total disregard for the changing views of people in Scotland.

It was.. you only have to look at the past time table and to see there was a clear path.. its been 2 decades of more and more powers transferred uo to 2012. There's no point now until after the referendum.
 alastairmac 07 Sep 2014
In reply to IainRUK:
With respect you're missing the point. This is a vote about Scotland and how it is governed. That's why only those of us living in Scotland have a vote. Designed to be used to do what we feel is best for Scotland and it's people. Both now and in the future. It is a rare privilege and I am sure most of us will use our vote carefully. The best thing those with an interest in Scotland but no vote can do is stand back and respectfully let us make our decision and I hope, wish us well whatever the result.
OP Postmanpat 07 Sep 2014
In reply to RomTheBear:


> Really they don't get it do they…


No, they don't
 Dr.S at work 07 Sep 2014
In reply to alastairmac:

> With respect you're missing the point. This is a vote about Scotland and how it is governed. That's why only those of us living in Scotland have a vote. Designed to be used to do what we feel is best for Scotland and it's people. Both now and in the future. It is a rare privilege and I am sure most of us will use our vote carefully. The best thing those with an interest in Scotland but no vote can do is stand back and respectfully let us make our decision and I hope, wish us well whatever the result.

It's unreasonable to ask people who will be affected by the vote you get to cast, but who are unable to vote themselves, not to attempt to influence the views of the Scottish electorate.
 alastairmac 07 Sep 2014
In reply to Dr.S at work:
Possibly. And everybody is of course entitled to voice their opinion. No matter how uninformed and contrary to what is good for Scotland and the Scottish people. But if the intention is to undermine the Yes vote it is clearly having the opposite effect. The endless negativity and cynicism of the no campaign has recruited a lot of yes voters. They don't understand that it's about an idea as much as anything else. Now off to watch Scotland beat Germany.......... some things we might have to continue dreaming about!
Post edited at 19:41
 DaveHK 07 Sep 2014
In reply to Postmanpat:
>
> It appears the new YouGov poll gives "Yes" a 1% lead. The Grauniad reporting that the Cameron, Milliband et al are preparing to offer Scotland a federal solution.
>

That may well be the final nudge I need to vote yes having started out as a no voter.

 Banned User 77 07 Sep 2014
In reply to alastairmac:

"The endless negativity and cynicism of the no campaign has recruited a lot of yes voters. They don't understand that it's about an idea as much as anything else. "

With respect you are missing the point..

The job of the YES side is to argue why leaving the union is better

The job of the NO side is to argue why staying in the Union is better.. by simple logic that means many arguments will centre on things that will change negatively…

It's been a clever tactic by the Yes to centre on the negativity but it's very much a core part of the NO sides argument and unavoidable..

The NO side have no power to say 'x will happen'.. especially Downing.
 alastairmac 07 Sep 2014
In reply to IainRUK:
If the no side had concentrated on why the union offers positive advantages or even opportunities then it may have been more persuasive. Instead it has used lies, half truths and scare stories. Along with some pretty poor politicians to argue their case. Let's be honest the project fear / project farce campaign has been a car crash. It rests on whether or not you think that what we have now is what we should settle for. If you don't live in Scotland and haven't seen this movement develop you may not have absorbed quite how dissatisfied we are with Westminster and policies created for the South East of England and inflicted on Scotland. We now have a grass roots movement that involves lots of us that have never been politically involved before. It's a formidable democratic surge. The threats and lies from Downing Street look Insignificant in comparison. Good Scotland performance tonight by the way. I thought we were going to sneak a draw.
 Cuthbert 07 Sep 2014
In reply to DaveHK:

I hope you do Dave. There is a raft of reasons to do so, and not to do so also. Only you can decide but if you would like any links/explanations which explain my point of view I am happy to oblige.
 Banned User 77 07 Sep 2014
In reply to alastairmac:

Didnt watch it.. if any country can just lose but play well its Scotland..

Re disatisfaction.. I just don't think you realise how much most of the UK feel this? From Yorkshire to Northumberland to Wales.. you seem to think its a uniquely scottish feeling?

Look at voter turn outs? There is huge disenfranchisement..

There's also a growth in extremist groups because of the feeling of neglect..
 skog 07 Sep 2014
In reply to IainRUK:

> The job of the NO side is to argue why staying in the Union is better.. by simple logic that means many arguments will centre on things that will change negatively…

You aren't wrong, but I'm not sure you realise just how negative it has been. There's been a near-constant drip-drip-drip of what will be worse, what will be wrong, what we can't do, what we aren't up to, how scary it all is, how stupid we are for even considering it. And very little about how the UK can be improved, how things can be made better - just how we'd lose what we have.

In the last week I've a conversation with people convinced that Russia will invade once we go independent, followed by another where someone was really concerned we might not have passports any more. (Not UK passports, just passports.)

It's exhausting, people are just fed up with it.

And on the other side, we have people discussing hopes and ideas, their visions of how Scotland can change for the better and what we should do to get there.

Don't get me wrong - the No side have not all been miserable. But the overwhelming mood from them has been one of negativity, and that just doesn't sell very well.
In reply to IainRUK:


> Wales especially just could not survive without the Union…

How about Cornwall ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornish_nationalism

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...