FREEDOM!!!! [4]

{{{Well the SNP will get my main vote for certain for my local MSP, but I don't think its healthy in a democracy for their not be a strong opposition- and Scotland doesn't have one right now- and there in lies the problem as the other options I have are Labour (hopeless and their Scottish leader is equally hopeless) Tories (just no) Tommy Sheridans Socialist party- a ragtag of far left crazies- and 1 independent who is also a bit fairytale politics stuff- hence my dilemma! }}}

{{{Keiza Dugdale, leader of Scottish Labour, in oneof the worst pre-election interviews Ive seen here in a long time- ever reason why I cant vote Labour is here- what a mess}}

What about the Lib Dems? Or are they out of the question due to the coalition?

Pettytyrant101 wrote:what a mess

Labour is a big fat mess!

lib Dems are cowards.  

don't you have a Green Party candidate? or a Raving Monster Loony? or a Shitting Down Chimneys Party?

{{I considered voting Green Figg, but then I just cant trust them on their vegetable policy- in that they seem to want people to eat them! And not even deep fry them in batter first! Its clearly dangerous, havering gibberish so I just couldn't bring myself to vote for them}}}

don't let Dave hear you denounce veggies.

Not a good night for Labour, especially in Scotland.

Way more impressed by Ruth Davidson than I remember having been in 2014. Nicola Sturgeon is still the boss, though.

{{{I predicted a modest increase in support for the Tories sometime ago    or as they are better known now in Scotland, Ruth Davidson's party- nice bit of marketing that- the socially concious face of new conservatism and no mention of Dave, no visits of note across the border to support the campaign from the PM or Westminster Cabinet MP's, and you need a magnifying glass to find the words 'Conservative and Unionist party' on their leaflets.
She did exactly the right things this election, and exactly what Labour should have done and didn't.
She distanced her Scottish party and distinguished it from the Englsh party in tone and presentation, and she aimed for the right slice of the electorate.

The set up for this election was simple, as the dividing lines were set by the independence referendum- there were only two sets of votes to go after here- the 45 who voted YES and the 55 who voted NO.

Dugdales strategy for Labour was to try to win back from the SNP its old Labour voters who had gone over in the referendum by appealing to the left. So she proposed a tax raise for nearly everyone in order to increase spending on services ect- appeal to the left stuff, show her Labour credentials and try to appeal to those voters- but they didn't just go over to the SNP for social policies, they went for independence, and Labour is not offering that (exactly, see below).

What she should have been going after was the 'Tony Blair' ground.
Those who voted Yes were made up largely of lower, working, and lower middle class- the bulk of the middle class, upper middle, and upper classes were on the No side. It was that Middle class they should have gone for to get a foothold back in Scottish politics- by instead going after the 45 they left the entire Unionist 55 vote for the Tories to try to pick up.

Especially as Dugdale had so confused the Scottish Labour party position on independence by saying the Labour party would campaign for a no again in the event of another one, but individual party members and cabinet members can campaign as they see fit- this left the Tories as the only party left fully defending a unionist position.

And this muddled message on major polices is not confined to this- on the issue of if Trident should be renewed, Dugdale the leader is in favour of renewal, the Scottish Labour party policy however, the party she leads, is to scrap Trident, and the Westminster party position is (currently) in favour of retaining Trident- no one knows whose policy they are actually voting for or whose trumps whose- its a mess.

Its also worth noting however that whilst the Tories did better, they haven't done well, they are flattered by how spectacularly bad Labour have done, and Labour were already starting from spectacularly bad position- its amazing they found a way to go further down really!

And whilst some, notably the BBC for some reason, are making a big deal that the SNP lost their majority, its worth remembering they got a majority in the first place in a system designed by Labour to make it as impossible as possible to ensure the SNP never won a majority- it was a spectacular thing to get one at all, to come within two seats of getting another one, after 9 years as the incumbent government in an era of harsh austerity measures, and to have increased their overall share of the public vote, is nothing short of astounding (if this were just a first past the post election and you ignore the list MSP's then the SNP victory is not just a majority, but a landslide).

The BBC have also unfairly drawn comparisons with the General election result where the SNP got over 50% of the vote- but Scots vote differently in general elections as its a different parliament with different functions- in the case of the last one we just had the referendum, the Westminster parties made promises in the infamous vow, and there was no point sending a Westminster party to make sure they kept to it- so Scotland sent the SNP to do the job and make sure Westminster stuck to the deal- I don't see it happening again in those numbers at the next general election}}

Very interesting stuff, Petty.

Speaking of that deal, did Westminster actually follow through on giving Scotland devo max? I know that the Scottish Parliament has increased tax powers now but I don't recall what exactly was promised in 2014 (actually I feel like it was kinda vague but I might just be forgetful).

did Westminster actually follow through on giving Scotland devo max?- Eldo

{{{More or less.There are a few minor areas that were never properly resolved, but the vast bulk was honoured, eventually and it was a bit like pulling teeth- the SNP of course tried to get more than as on the table as a tactic to ensure they actually got what was on the table.
Unfortunately there are still massive important areas we don't control- most notably in taxation and welfare reform.

And whilst its true we got new tax raising powers allowing us to create new tax bands or vary differently within bands we didn't get all the tools to make it workable.

This election was a good example- Labour proposed increasing the top rate of tax from its current 45% in the UK to 50% in Scotland, giving Scotland a higher level than RUK.

But there are easy to access saving accounts which tax earnings of the well off at a lower rate than normal tax, and more importantly the tax on that bypasses Scotland altogether and goes straight to the Treasury in Westminster.

Sturgeon argument therefore was she was in favour of the increase but her civil servants were telling her the end result, without powers to prevent the wealthy just moving to another account thats English based, we would actually lose tax revenue not gain any.

Labour of course claimed the SNP were U-turning on the matter, but when Labour were repeatedly pressed on how they would stop this happening their only answer was- 'it wont we will get to keep all the money'- which none believes.

So you see the complexity of it- we have certain powers but unless you have the full deck of cards you cant play the game properly.



On another matter I note the BBC and others are continuing to play up the Tory second place far beyond its actual achievement- ignoring even the collapse of Labour again, the Tories got almost exactly the same share of the vote that they last got in 1992 under John Major's Tories- a result at the time described as 'disastrous' for the Tories}}}

He was a bit contained on hte normal length version, but this seems better.

10 min in, they cut all his best parts so far in the normal version. :/

{{{Does this version still have the Queen/Rolf Harris gag in it?}}}

It has Cameron smothering the Queen with a pillow for a big news story.

'Adults in Scotland have increased their consumption of alcohol for the second year in a row, according to a report.'

{{ }}

'Sales in 2015 were 20% higher in Scotland than they were in England and Wales, with each adult consuming the equivalent of 477 pints of beer.'

{{{I assume thats per month }}}

'The Scottish government said the report supported the case for minimum pricing.'

{{ }}

'Total sales were the equivalent to 41 bottles of vodka or 116 bottles of wine for each adult.'- BBC Scotland

{{{Typical BBC, too posh to give the stats in buckie! }}

'About 22 people a week are dying in Scotland because of alcohol'

{{Yes but they were drunks and therefore happy or psychotically depressed and violent- and if they didn't die they would only have cost a fortune in health care, jail time and then pensions- its a public duty as a Scot to die of liver failure! }}}

I call that Consideration !

{{{ }}}


{{{Police Scotland got called out to a brawl in a Glasgow pub- the statement they put out reads-

"Around 19.10 hours on Wednesday evening, officers were called following an alleged assault within the Waterloo Bar on Argyle Street in Glasgow city centre.

"A full and thorough investigation led to the arrest of a 23-year-old male who is expected to appear at Glasgow Sheriff Court on 2nd June.

"Once the inquiry had concluded and the victim's safety ensured, Sgt Jon Harris was encouraged to participate in karaoke ongoing in the pub. 'Sgt Jon' took to the stage which helped to defuse any simmering tensions in the pub.'

And heres the proof}}}



{{Thats Scottish policing for you- pub full of angry punters- give em what all drunks love- a song! Drunk policing at its finest  And no one had to get shot! Take note America! }}

Freedom, that seems rather ironic in a totalitarian state. Its really scary.

{{{{Well thats a load of paranoid nonsense misrepresenting almost everything about it- we just had a terrible case where a couple murdered their toddler then tried to blame it on another child they were also abusing. The area it took place in was one of the few piloting the named person scheme- and it was the only part of the process that seems to have worked- with the named person flagging the child up for concern to social work twice. Had the scheme in fact gone further, and given the named person the right to ensue when they do flag something up its acted on, that child might be alive today. And that is the aim of the scheme - to protect children from abuse and harm and it has the backing of the largest children's charities in Scotland, the churches the police and the social work department. The idea it is some secret totalitarian plan to give the government control of everyone's children is as laughable as it is hysterical}}}

the kid died so it failed spectacularly. if its there to save kids its not really working is it.

I wouldn't accept state interference at any price, its worrying and creepy.

{{{No the named person bit worked - its what they term 'low level'- in that its designed to be one of the first lines of defence- it worked as it was meant to- the problem seems to have arisen after the named person part was over once it got flagged up to the supposed 'high level' of concern- a review and investigation is ongoing at the moment as to why more was not done once it was flagged up- but the flagging up concern part worked fine.

The idea behind it is very sensible- in a majority of cases where children have died or suffered horrendous abuse the warning signs were there- teachers noticing behaviour changes, suspicions amounts of hospital visits, police being called to the family home for domestic issues ect- but no joined up thinking- so one department, say social work doesn't know about the hospital visits, or the police visits, or the teachers concerns- the named person scheme is designed to draw all such reports to one place so that any worrying trends or patterns can be spotted and investigated.
Yeah its going to need fine tuning tweaking, balancing- thats what the pilot schemes are for after all- but the idea behind it is sound in my view. Its the implementation that will need time to work out, through practise.
But how often have you hears- including in England with say Baby P- that the warning signs were there but just not put together soon enough to help by all the different government bodies involved ? This is an answer to that problem. And it snot gathering extra information on anyone- all this information is recorded already, its just not drawn together cohesively at the moment}}}

{{{The named person policy is being debated today i the parliament if your interested Figg.

'The Scottish Conservatives are leading their first debate of the Holyrood term calling for a "pause" to the scheme.'

Note the Tories arent trying to block it, or scrap it, but 'pause' it- this is politics they are trying to upset the SNP but at the same time they dont want to go against the policy entirely because of the groups which support it.

Also worth bearing in mind the scheme was overwhelmingly passed in the vote.

'103 votes to nil in 2014, as part of the Children and Young People Act.'

The Tory complaints mainly seem to be about if it can be achieved rather than the principle-

'Scottish Conservatives question whether the policy is "deliverable in the proposed format"'

But it has the 'cautions backing' of the Lib Dems, the full support of the Greens, and today a bunch of children's services and charities chipped in-

'Ten groups, including Action for Children Scotland, Barnardo's, the Children and Young People's Commissioner and the National Parent Forum of Scotland, signed a letter sent to MSPs ahead of the vote asking them not to pause the roll-out of the scheme.
They said the provisions "formalise the best practice of our education and health services, ensuring that every child, young person and their family has a primary point of contact available if and when they need it."- BBC News }}}

I think if this law had come direct from London, if Dave and his mates had imposed this on Scotland, you would be manning the barricades by now. It is no surprise that you are pro-SNP what does surprise me is your acceptance of such a blatant loss of democracy and individual freedoms.