FREEDOM!!!! [4]

{{ SNp have managed to nab 1 more seat- taking them to 64- only one short of a majority. }}

They can easily nab a green or labor vote depending on the issue, I'd think. Are there supermajority votes required for anything? (we've got some of that in the US).

{{ No just a straight majority to pass legisaltion- so passing 2nd referendum bill is foregone conclusion now- its in the SNP and Green manifestos for this election and together they make a 8 seat majority over all the other parties added together. }}

Nice one  only one seat away. I hope this sets independence in motion, and hopefully rejoining the EU.

{{ All votes counted- the final results are-



So pro- union parties all added together (Con, Lab, Libdem) won 57 seats.
Pro-indie parties won 72 seats (SNP plus Greens). }}

Interesting - don't know anything about the liberal democrats, but you'd think from the name they'd be more interested in independence since Scotland as a whole is more progressive than England.

{{ Their history is very much grounded in England starting with the English Civil war in the 1600's though it was not until the 1800's the liberal party was officially formed out of oneof the two exisiting parties of the day (the Whigs) and it ruled for 30 years straight with famous PM Gladstone at their helm. It all fell apart for them with WW1 and they never got their act together after that becoming the third party of Uk politics. From the 1950's onward they joined with social democrats to try to form a bigger party, the SDP, Social Democratic Party. But it was not greatly succesful over the next few decades and the left wing social democrats and the right wing liberals members (formerly the Whigs) increasingly moved apart, eventually it split. The right wing end of the party formed the modern Liberal Democrats. So despite the name they are more Tory inclined than progresive in their policies and are on the right of politics. }}

Yeah, all meanings switch after a century or so.

{{ Yup and when youve a Parliament like Westminster that is several hundred years old its very complicated. And tradition filled which actually is one of the reason I want independence.
I think one of the big issues with Westminister is its simply out of date and ill prepared to work in the modern world as its so weighed down with stupid traditions.

For example take something as simple as voting. When there is a vote in the House of Commons they ring the 'division bell' at which point all the MP's file out and go to one of two lobbies- one for the motion being voted on, one against, they all have to queue up in one or other of the long corridors and slowly make their way through the appropriate lobby door while other people count them as they go. Worse, Ill touch on it again, theres too many MP's compared to when the sytem was created hundreds of years ago so you get this mess when Mps try to vote-



Its ridiculous and takes ages.


In all the other UK devolved Parliaments they have electronic voting, they vote from their seats in the chamber, it takes seconds and they can get on with the next bit of business. And thats one example of the many, many stupid ways Westminster does things solely out of tradition. Even the shape of the Commons, its adverserial, with only two benches directly facing each other, its so adverserial that if you look on the floor youll notice lines painted, this is as far forward as an MP can come. Why? Because its the length if you crossed it you could run your opponent through with a sword (the cloak rooms still have sword holders in them and they still pay someone to maintain them and someone to repaint the lines!).

(ignore the yellowlines, they are temporary for social distancing, the red lines are for sword distance- though knowing westminster theyll just keep the yellow lines too and call it a tradtion!)




Most modern Parliaments are semi or circular to bolster cooperation and reduce confrontations. They dont waste taxpayers money on something as stupid as where to put a sword noone has any more. They dont have lines on the floor from two hundred years ago when MP's came armed.
Hell the House of Commons isnt even big enough, as there are far more MP's now than when it was created for wealthy landlords to sit in, so youll notice when theres a big vote or debate in the Commons that there's loads of people having to stand crowded round the edges as there physically arent enough seats for everyone.



And the Commns has centuries worth of these stupid rituals and traditions it maintains for no reason whatsoever and that often are actively detromental to running an efficient functioning Parliament. }}

As regards electronic voting there was a scandal here as mates were pushing the buttons for absent MPs. Say one had gone out to pee, or have a coffee their mate would push the button, and that led to 'enemies' pushing the buttons of absent MPs. Its harder to do if you have to be there in the flesh.

I don't have a problem with keeping rituals that add weight to a process. Sure, two people can go register with the government to get married, it's far more efficient; but one wants a wedding.

{{ Figg thats easy solved with a pin number- plus when Scottish MSP's vote everyone is in the chamber in their seats, if youre absent you miss the chance to vote and as you'd be recorded as not present if you then showed up as having voted in the Chamber theyd be caught.
Its a milion times more efficient than some 200 year old ritual than can take an hour to complete.

Halfy a marriage is one thing, running a country bit different and especially when you use someone elses money to do it- the tax payers. Government should be efficient and organised and capable of response quicly if need be. Not some ancient ritual that takes forever to complete. If you want to compare to marriage Westminister is like a massive traditional lasting all day wedding; church,reception, speeches, the works and the devolved parliaments are like a humanist wedding held at dawn on a beach that takes twenty minutes. At the end your both legally married but only one of you has been doing other more interesting stuff all day.

Gove was interesting on Marr this moring- he appeared to signal a U-turn from Boris and his Tories on a second referendum, saying they would not contest it in court and conceding that Scotland had the right. Then later in the day had to put out a statement saying he was not giving the green light for another referendum.
However there will belegislation for it form the Scottish Parliament, if Boris says no then it Surgeon will go ahead anyway with it and challenge Boris to take her to court- as that would be the only way he could legally prevent it. So if Gove says they wont contest it in court, then they are effectively saying they cant stop it.

Best thing about Gove on Marr though was watching him try to claim people in Scotland only voted SNP as a message to them to work closer with Westminister!- How do you get that reading of this result?!!!}}}}

Well he is a slimy git isn't he, I wouldnt trust a word he says.

{{ Seems the Tories have some new buzz words to counter independence with "Team UK" and "building back better together" expect to hear them a lot over the coming days and weeks.
It seems to be based on the Brexit campaign which worked so well for Boris by reducing the whole thing down to a sentiment devoid of any arguements or pros or cons, for Brexit is was tapping into folk being fed up with the Brexit saga dragging on month after month with "Get it done!" and of course their "lets fund our NHS instead."
They seem to be deploying a similar strategy, rather than try to argue a case just repeat slogans and soundbites that are short, snappy and sound positive (and dont have anything to do with reality). }}

{{ Scottish Tory leader Douglas Ross (who only snuck in the backdoor on the list vote) says the Lord Advocate (the Scottish government legal advisor) should stop Sturgeon from even being allowed to put forward a referendum paper in the Scottish Parliament.

So the party who won in a landslide on the manifesto promise of a referendum, shouldnt be allowed to even legislate for holding one, and Scotland should be forced to remain a part of the Union like it or not forever, forced into it and bound to it by English laws formed in Westminster!! Thats an interesting idea of democracy.}}

Pettytyrant101 wrote:{{ Seems the Tories have some new buzz words to counter independence with "Team UK" and "building back better together" expect to hear them a lot over the coming days and weeks.
It seems to be based on the Brexit campaign which worked so well for Boris by reducing the whole thing down to a sentiment devoid of any arguements or pros or cons, for Brexit is was tapping into folk being fed up with the Brexit saga dragging on month after month with "Get it done!" and of course their "lets fund our NHS instead."
They seem to be deploying a similar strategy, rather than try to argue a case just repeat slogans and soundbites that are short, snappy and sound positive (and dont have anything to do with reality). }}

The Tories know that empty 3 word slogans worked on the English...so why not try a wining formula

-------

https://www.forumshire.com/viewtopic.php?t=1484