Re: The Bigger, Badder, Even More Serious Thread [5]

[Pettytyrant101]

Only if you ignore all the facts, the SNP record, the platform they are standing on for this election everything they have been saying and basically everything else and instead just want to point and go "look scarey SNP boyegmen are coming to fill England with immigrants, steal all your money and leave you defenseless"

Its nonsense and rubbish with no basis in the facts of the day. And its hugely ignorant of how Sottish politics now works and massively derisory to the Scottish people who must obviously be blind deaf and stupid not to notice what a terrible government we have in the SNP which we keep reelecting with increased majorities.

Nicola Sturgeon is the only Party leader in the UK whose poll ratings are in the positive numbers- Ed's is in the -40's that lower than Cameron who is in the -30's with Clegg.
It was the same for Salmond before her, the only leader with positive ratings- and that is remarkable for a party that has been in power for 7 years- that just never happens- incumbent governments ratings go down, thats what always happens- the SNP's have gone up, their polling has gone up, their membership has gone up.
Thats not because they are shit at running things you know. We would notice.

[Pettytyrant101]

Anyone watching the election leaders debate in the uk at 8?- not sure even a political head like me will last the course here with 7 of the buggers all haranguing and shouting over each other for a full 2 hours- but I will give it a go. Lots of buckie and crabbit at the ready!

[Pettytyrant101]

Well I needed the buckie for that! Two hours of largely dull with the odd flash of interesting. Thought Nicola did well though when she got the chance.

[malickfan]

Two hours of largely dull with the odd flash of interesting

Listening to two politicians arguing about who is dodging the question is bad enough, seven would be unbearable.

[Mrs Figg]

that was bloody boring. like a row of false waxworks apart from Nigel, at least he was sweaty

[malickfan]

at least he was sweaty

I didn't watch the debate, and I don't agree with most of UKIP's policies, but Farage does have charisma, and a decent speaking voice, he says what he thinks rather than what he thinks people want to hear.

I honestly don't know if I'll bother voting.

[Mrs Figg]

yes he certainly doesn't shy away from uncomfortable truths. He says things other politicians think but are too afraid to say.

[malickfan]

yes he certainly doesn't shy away from uncomfortable truths. He says things other politicians think but are too afraid to say.

That's probably UKIP's problem, they are the only UK party pointing out uncomfortable truths the way they see things and have to 'speak' louder to be heard, unfortunately for them it makes them seem like angry loonys (although, to be fair alot of UKIP supporters do seem like angry loonys)...

[Pettytyrant101]

BBC political editors Nick Robinsons summing up of who will likely be seen to have come out well in the debate-

"My hunch is that battle is most likely to be won by Sturgeon, Farage and Miliband."

Why kind of sums up the mad world of UK politics at the moment as only one of those three has a snowballs chance in hell of being the next PM (Sturgeon of course isnt even standing to be PM and he rates Miliband third) and I think Farage hurt his cause with that bit about how we should refuse treatment of HIV sufferers who come here from overseas- that just seems to go against the grain of the UK sense of fairplay and treating those in need with compassion regardless of background or wealth.


"A YouGov poll of 1,100 people gave a clear victory to the SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon, with 28%, followed by UKIP leader Nigel Farage on 20%, Mr Cameron on 18%, Mr Miliband on 15%, Mr Clegg on 10%, Green Party leader Natalie Bennett on 5% and Plaid Cymru's Leanne Wood on 4%."- BBC

[Mrs Figg]

I thought Cameron looked like he had been taking valium, The Welsh woman sounded like she was going to take five minutes to get each boring word out, the Green woman was dull and dreary made flesh, Nigel should have kept his gob shut about HIV, although I liked his uncompromising anti-political correctness stance, Milliband was like Wallace and Gromit on acid with those round staring eyes, how many times can you refer to the 'people at home' I counted at least 10 times, and Clegg was a non entity, Sturgeon was probably the best speaker although its a pity she will shaft the English as soon as she gets into Westminster.

[Pettytyrant101]

Sturgeon was probably the best speaker although its a pity she will shaft the English as soon as she gets into Westminster.- Figg

WHat are you basing that on? And in what way will she 'shaft the english?'

[Mrs Figg]

that's her game plan

[Pettytyrant101]

that's her game plan- FIgg

No its not.
Her plan is for Scotland to become an independent nation, just as she said in her opening statement.

Its not a secret plan.

And if we are such a resource drain on England

(a) why did the SNP and the Greens and a bunch of fringe socialist groups no-ones heard of just fight a huge campaign with every major party and every single media outlet, print and television in the UK to keep us in the Union? and
(B) why would us becoming independent shaft England if we are just taking English money and resources?

I don't understand your argument.
Are we a drain on Englands resources or not in your view?

And if we are how do you explain, as Nicola Sturgeon pointed out when Farage said 'too much money goes north over Hadrians Wall' (nice use of divisive imagery there, typical of him) why Scots have paid more in tax per head of population to the Treasury, every single year for the last 38 years, than English people did?

And I'm sure the oil revenue over the last few decades has not been useful in England, you know  like when Thatcher used it as the basis for funding her conversion of the UK from production to services and destroyed all the industry, that mass unemployment was funded by oil revenue, its a matter of record.
And then there is the electricity we supply to the national grid, the whisky tax revenue, the Crown Shore properties, worth billions, something like 90% of the UK fishing fleet. 90% of UK's renewable potential.
Oh and very soon there is a large military NATO naval exercise to rattle the sabres at Russia going on  just off our coast, because a lot of the sea and quite a few of the islands dotted all over Scotland are military Naval and have everything from NATO radar posts to god knows what on them.
The Highlands are used for training our troops - it was particularity useful for Afghanistan.
Oh and the small matter of having all the uk nukes here, right next to our densest populated city in the country just because no one in England wants them on their doorstep, and also the small problem that you don't have any of the facilities to house them and there aren't really many places like the lochs where its deep enough for the subs sneaking in and out. Knowing the English parties they will probably just force them onto the Welsh next time.

We have strategic importance because of our landscape and our physical position in the world in relation to the powerful countries either side. And most of the facilities are NATO owned and we plan on remaining a member of them if ever get independence.

So in a sense I do agree with you, I think if we became independent it might hurt England, but you'd have more than enough in your own country to do just fine, if you vote for the right people.
I will be very worried if I looked south and see its Farage, because one thing I am certain of is that he, and many of those who make up his party, are not the right people to turn to.

[Mrs Figg]

I would rather have Farage, at least I know he would fight our corner, whether he is right or not. Sturgeon will fight for Scotland and that is fair enough, but don't expect me to trust her an inch.

[Pettytyrant101]

I don't see what it is you are basing this severe distrust of her on. What is it you think she is going to try to do?

She has the highest trust rating of any leader in the UK by a country mile.
There is reason for this, when the SNP first got into power it was on the back of a manifesto like every other party has. And like every manifesto everyone expected everything in it to be broken almost immediately.
But it wasnt.
As a minority they never got all of it through, but they failed trying, which was acceptable in the circumstances- but they didnt abandon any of them, they pursued exactly what they said they would.
When the got elected with a majority it happened again- they did exactly what they said they were going to try to do. And it kept happening. Not say one thing then do another, but setting aims out clearly then in government trying to achieve them. They did more in their first year in government than Labour and the Lib-Dems before them had done since the Parliament was set up- the difference was night and day.
Its why that trust rating is so high.

So I dont get your distrust or what its source is.



Why do you think she is lying when she says this?

[Mrs Figg]

her end game is the break up of the union, all her efforts will be to achieve this goal. I am not deceived by her good debating skills for one minute.

[Pettytyrant101]

She says up front that is her goal.
But to get to that goal she has get a very large majority in the 2016 Scottish Parliament election. I am willing to bet that the SNP manifesto for that election will include a demand for a second referendum. She might wait till the election after that- but if she does she will have to not destroy the Union in or crash the country meantime because that will also crash the only votes that matter to her- the Scottish people, as thats the only way to Independence.
Crashing the UK would be suicidal for her- doing what she says she will- pushing for what would be traditional Labour positions- no privatisation of NHS, no tax cuts for millionaires, higher upper rate of tax, levvy on bank bonuses, with modest but increased spending on social housing and infrastructure to help stimulate the building sector and improve connectivity, and she would appeal to the right too on some policies with modest cuts in business rates and corporation tax but offset by increased jobs from the freed up money and therefore increased tax revenue- if she goes for these things and tires to help achieve them then there is plenty in England would be happy f she succeeded , especially in the North. And is she fails it doesn't matter so long as she is seen by Scots as doing her best against the old boy network of Westminster. Its win win if she plays it right, she cements her position in Scotland but not if she screws over England, that would also screws over us with it, and there goes her Independence dream she has worked her life for.

To achieve her aims it makes no sense she would change the SNP tactic now, of staying up front the aims and trying to carry them out. Lying now in play to wrecking England would not be a vote winner here whatever you might think.

[Mrs Figg]

I don't want anyone who wants the break up of the union anywhere near Westminster. end of.

[Pettytyrant101]

I still ant tell hat you are claiming about the SNP please help me out by answering these questions-

1. Is Scotland a net contributor to the UK or subsidised by English tax payers?
2. Do you believe the SNP plan is to wreck England or not by getting a voice at Westminster?


In other desperate attacks on the SNP news todays Telegraph (English right wing Tory paper) printed a huge scope that a leaked memo had fallen into their hands taken by an unnamed civil servant at a meeting between Nicole Sturgeon and the French Ambassador, at which Strugeon said Milliband was to weak to be PM and she would prefer David Cameron."
This of course is incendiary stuff in Scotland.

Strugeon intermediately came out saying it was categorically 100% untrue and she never said any such thing.
Of course she would say that no matter what you could think.
But then the French Ambassador came out and he said the memo was inaccurate there was no such conversation and she made no indication of preference of who becomes PM.
And then the Foreign Office came out to say they had no such memo on record and it didn't come from them.

So where did this memo come from? Who wrote it? Why was it inaccurate in such a deliberate way calculated to try to damage the SNP? And who leaked it to the right wing media?

Sturgeon has written to the Head of the Civil Service demanding an enquiry- I doubt we will ever get one, same as we never got a proper one into how the RBS HQ move got leaked to the press during the referendum, before the Board Meeting making that decision had even concluded.

This is how afraid and desperate Westminster is that Scotland takes up their Union offer of giving us an equal voice at Westminster.

[Mrs Figg]

1. Is Scotland a net contributor to the UK or subsidised by English tax payers?
2. Do you believe the SNP plan is to wreck England or not by getting a voice at Westminster?

1. the latter
2. yes

[Pettytyrant101]

1, The issue of economics was central to the referendum debate and was under the highest scrutiny from the public. The case that Scotland was subsided England was put firmly to the test and found very wanting to the point that, well, their own words speak best for themselves-

Alistair Darling, Head of the No campaign – “The question is not whether Scotland can survive as a separate state. Of course it could.”

Ruth Davidson, Leader of the Scottish Tories – “I believe Scotland is big enough, rich enough and good enough to be an independent country.”

Anas Sarwar, Deputy Leader of Scottish Labour – “Scotland would probably be a successful country if it was an independent country.”

Iain Gray, former Scottish Labour Leader – “I do not think Scotland is too small, too poor or too stupid to stand on its own.”

David McLetchie, late Scottish Conservative Leader – “An independent Scotland would be viable.”

Michael Moore, Secretary of State for Scotland – “You’ll never hear me suggest that Scotland could not go its own way.”

Denis Healy, former UK Chancellor, “I think they [Westminster politicians] are concerned about Scotland taking the oil, I think they are worried stiff about it…I would think Scotland could survive perfectly well, economically, if it was independent…I think we did underplay the value of the oil to the country [for political reasons]”.

“Supporters of independence will always be able to cite examples of small, independent and thriving economies across Europe such as Finland, Switzerland and Norway. It would be wrong to suggest that Scotland could not be another such successful, independent country.”

David Cameron, Prime Minister of the UK.

We don't need any subsidy, we pay slightly more than our share in as it is. And have done for three and a half decades now.
We get more back from the Treasury per head of population, but we still pay more in per head of population than we get back. Making us a net benefit to the UK.

2. Why would they want to wreck England? That would only lose them votes in Scotland- the platform they are asking to be elected on for this election is one of holding Westminster to their promises and supporting any party that puts forward a bill they agree with on a vote by vote basis. No coalitions.

In return for their vote they will expect full implementations of the promises made- their votes are the leverage to get what they want, which is only what was already promised by all three main Westminster Parties.

They are not asking to be elected by the Scottish people to demand independence. That's not their platform. They have made it perfectly clear to the electorate here that this election is not about independence or another referendum. If they go back on that they would have no chance of winning such a referendum.

What they want to show is they can make a competent job of working with like minded parties and pushing for left of center social policies along the likes of those they already have in place in Scotland- like free prescriptions- but at UK level.
if they can show they can make any positive change at all at the UK level they demonstrate they could probably do just fine running Scotland if it was independent.
It is in their best interests to bolster that- its how they got to where they are.

When they first got elected here they got in on a minority government- they had never had power before, Scotland was willing to give them a go, but not the full reigns.

But they did very well, did more than anyone more them, worked constructively with other parties on all sides. Improved things.

So next they got the most seats, solid but nothing commanding and everyone else together could still out vote them, as its a pr system deliberately designed by Labour to, in their words, "ensure the SNP can never win an outright majority."

Then they kept doing things people liked. Kept the Council Tax freeze, free tuition ect and did it all in budget year on year while at UK level the government was running up massive debts, so they got the landslide the system was supposed to stop.

And the amazing thing was once they had it and didn't need other parties votes to pass legislation, they continued to consult on legislation and try to get as a large a consensus as possible on every vote.

They got where they are by demonstrating competence at each step, gaining more peoples trust every time and in return getting more votes each time. They didnt do it by making an arse of running the country.
They did it by running it noticeably better than the Westminster parties had before them.

I cant see them throwing away that wining tactic now.

Sturgeon's performance in the debate, her pitch, her message and the reaction she has got to it, all demonstrate that tactic of winning trust is still ongoing.

[Pettytyrant101]

Update on the leaked memo-

Cabinet Secretary Sir Jeremy Heywood said a leak inquiry had been set up.
In a letter to Ms Sturgeon he said: "You have asked me to investigate issues relating to the apparent leak of a Scotland Office memo that forms the basis of this morning's Daily Telegraph story.
"I can confirm that earlier today I instigated a Cabinet Office-led leak inquiry to establish how extracts from this document may have got into the public domain."

The French consul general in Edinburgh, Pierre-Alain Coffinier, whose comments are claimed to have been the basis for the leaked memo, has told the BBC Ms Sturgeon did not express any preference for a leader.

A spokesman for the French ambassador Sylvie Bermann, whose conversation with Ms Sturgeon was being briefed on in the memo, also said the SNP leader had not expressed an opinion on who she would prefer as prime minister.

A Foreign Office spokeswoman said they had no record of the memo. '- BBC


But my favourite line of the day from this story is this one-

'Labour called the report "damning" and said that even if it was not true the "SNP are happy to see another Tory government".'

[Pettytyrant101]

Follow up to this memo nonsense.

'Scottish Secretary Alistair Carmichael has said the leaking of a memo which claimed Nicola Sturgeon would prefer David Cameron to be prime minister was "just one of those things".
He said: "This is the middle of an election campaign, these things happen."- BBC


Um, no these things don't just happen.
It would be a complete breach of rules at any time, let alone in the middle of a General Election, for the supposedly impartial Civil Service to leak confidential memos between Ministers and Foreign Ambassadors.
But to leak one where they seem to have made up the content of it to damage the SNP is extremely serious indeed.
Shouldn't be surprised though as the impartiality of the civil service was brought into serious question during the referendum when similar dubious and illegal tactics were deployed. But nobody is falling for it this time.

[Pettytyrant101]

NSFW

[azriel]

I think thats been posted before but it doesnt matter ! its as true now as it was then, We are heading for a dictatorship