# David Cameron



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 7, 2014)

Making his keynote 'Keep Scotland in the UK' speech today in LONDON.


----------



## Wildrover (Feb 7, 2014)

I'm no fan of Dishface, far from it, but if he did go to Scotland to make his speech do you think he would get a proper hearing? Whether you're a pro or anti independence, there isn't much love of the Tories north of the border. We don't want you to go independent because without all the Scottish MP's we'll probably get stuck with the Tories forever, if that happens I'm emigrating.


----------



## Pistol Peter (Feb 7, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Making his keynote 'Keep Scotland in the UK' speech today in LONDON.
		
Click to expand...

And your point is ?


----------



## In_The_Rough (Feb 7, 2014)

Wildrover said:



			I'm no fan of Dishface, far from it, but if he did go to Scotland to make his speech do you think he would get a proper hearing? Whether you're a pro or anti independence, there isn't much love of the Tories north of the border. We don't want you to go independent because without all the Scottish MP's we'll probably *get stuck with the Tories forever*, if that happens I'm emigrating.
		
Click to expand...

One can hope Seriously though it said that without the Scottish Labour MP's it will virtually guarantee a Tory government for the next 25 years. Whilst I make no secret of the fact I am a Tory voter I do think it is bad if there is no opposition as the will be able to simply bulldoze anything through parliament


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 7, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Making his keynote 'Keep Scotland in the UK' speech today in LONDON.
		
Click to expand...

I'll put money on him not addressing any of the key issues that are in the sole remit of Westminster and as such not things that the Scottish YES or NO campaigns can guarantee.  

He'll wrap himself up in patriotic Union Jack stuff - what we've achieved in the past (some OK some not so OK even without too much revisionism) - 100 anniversary of WWI - brave boys of the 42nd Highlanders anyone? (my grandfathers regiment) THE 2012 OLYMPIC GAMES!!!! (let's hear it).  And it's really all good stuff - but irrelevant to what happens in the future.

Wouldn't it be nice/fun/cruel to see him standing on a soap box on Glasgow Green or in George Square!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 7, 2014)

Wildrover said:



			I'm no fan of Dishface, far from it, but if he did go to Scotland to make his speech do you think he would get a proper hearing? Whether you're a pro or anti independence, there isn't much love of the Tories north of the border. We don't want you to go independent because without all the Scottish MP's we'll probably get stuck with the Tories forever, if that happens I'm emigrating.
		
Click to expand...

But if you believe in what you say and your beliefs are grounded in strong positions of principle then you stand up and say it - you face up to the baying mob!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 7, 2014)

Pistol Peter said:



			And your point is ?
		
Click to expand...

Cameron tells us that it is Scottish electorate to make the decision and not rUK.  So he should go to Scotland and address the Scottish electorate there - as that is where the decision will be made.


----------



## Keeno (Feb 7, 2014)

I also find it strange.  The fact he is doing so little to persuade people to Vote no, its looks to me that's he hopes Yes voters get their way.


----------



## In_The_Rough (Feb 7, 2014)

Keeno said:



			I also find it strange.  The fact he is doing so little to persuade people to Vote no, its looks to me that's he hopes Yes voters get their way.
		
Click to expand...

Possibly as it will virtually give him the next election and several after that. It does make you wonder.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 7, 2014)

If he does make a statement from Westminster today (first I'd heard of it) - excellent little example of English Imperialist attitudes.  Stand up in London and advise the Scots of what is good for them LOL 

Does the guy (other nouns typed then deleted) not see that that sort of thing plays into the hands of the YES campaign.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 7, 2014)

Keeno said:



			I also find it strange.  The fact he is doing so little to persuade people to Vote no, its looks to me that's he hopes Yes voters get their way.
		
Click to expand...

He's keeping quiet on some key issues as what he says around currency, EU and similar will either spook markets - if he says Scotland can go homeward and think again  - or strengthen the YES position.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 7, 2014)

"Team GB - the winning team in the history of the world" 

oh yes - go for it Davey boy.


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 7, 2014)

I'd have thought Somerset/Dorset/Cornwall etc should be higher on his agenda rather than preaching about Scotland on any topic right now.Priorities n'that.


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Feb 7, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			If he does make a statement from Westminster today (first I'd heard of it) - excellent little example of English Imperialist attitudes.  Stand up in London and advise the Scots of what is good for them LOL 

Does the guy (other nouns typed then deleted) not see that that sort of thing plays into the hands of the YES campaign.
		
Click to expand...

If you bothered to research rather than react you would have seen that his comments were directed at the population of UK as a whole and not specifically the Scots.


----------



## Fish (Feb 7, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I'd have thought Somerset/Dorset/Cornwall etc should be higher on his agenda rather than preaching about Scotland on any topic right now.Priorities n'that.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 7, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			I'd have thought Somerset/Dorset/Cornwall etc should be higher on his agenda rather than preaching about Scotland on any topic right now.Priorities n'that.
		
Click to expand...

And, reacting to forum criticism, he's there now!

:smirk:


----------



## Fish (Feb 7, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			If he does make a statement from Westminster today (first I'd heard of it) - excellent little example of English Imperialist attitudes.  Stand up in London and advise the Scots of what is good for them LOL 

Does the guy (other nouns typed then deleted) not see that that sort of thing plays into the hands of the YES campaign.
		
Click to expand...

I think he makes himself very clear in what he has said here and why he is addressing the UK and not just Scotland at this point.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-26071166


----------



## drawboy (Feb 7, 2014)

This has been going on so long now (yawn) that I think most if not all scotts know how they are going to vote anyway regardless of anything anyone says. Roll on the vote let's just get it out of the way and deal with the consequences afterwards, it's getting tedious now.


----------



## Tashyboy (Feb 7, 2014)

David Cameron has just announced a Scarecrow has won a Top Industry Award for being ' outstanding in his field'

Thats my thoughts on him


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 7, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			If you bothered to research rather than react you would have seen that his comments were directed at the population of UK as a whole and not specifically the Scots.
		
Click to expand...

Do you think Scots care about that subtlety - they will be not unreasonably perhaps ask why he is addressing the UK when he tells everyone that the decision is Scotlands?  But if he IS addressing the UK did he detail the UK government position on 'EU membership for Scotland' and 'Sterling Zone' following a YES - or it's position on 'increasing devolved powers to Scotland' and 'changes to the Barnett funding formula' following a NO.

I'll go listen to Channel 4 news


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Feb 7, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Do you think Scots care about that subtlety - they will be not unreasonably perhaps ask why he is addressing the UK when he tells everyone that the decision is Scotlands?  But if he IS addressing the UK did he detail the UK government position on 'EU membership for Scotland' and 'Sterling Zone' following a YES - or it's position on 'increasing devolved powers to Scotland' and 'changes to the Barnett funding formula' following a NO.

I'll go listen to Channel 4 news
		
Click to expand...

As those are post independence issues they are for the YES campaign to provide a definitive answer. At present all they seem to have done is to talk about what they would like to happen rather than what will necessarily happen.

Until a formal request for currency union is made there can be no answer from the UK Government.


----------



## Andy808 (Feb 7, 2014)

If they really want the yes vote to work they should open the vote up the everyone in the UK.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 7, 2014)

MetalMickie said:



			As those are post independence issues they are for the YES campaign to provide a definitive answer. At present all they seem to have done is to talk about what they would like to happen rather than what will necessarily happen.

Until a formal request for currency union is made there can be no answer from the UK Government.
		
Click to expand...

The first two are post a YES vote the latter two are post a NO vote and all four are not things that the YES campaign can possibly provide a definitive answer to at the moment because they are decisions that ONLY the rUK government can make.  The only 'party' that can give any definitive statement prior to the referendum on the rUK position on these matters is the UK government. The YES campaign can only PREDICT what an rUK government is likely to do - they can't determine rUK policy - only the UK government can tell us what that would be.  But they are silent.  

The NO/BT campaign is busy-busy demanding answers from the YES campaign to a myriad and many _'what-if'_ questions.  So the questions to the NO/BT campaign on these four questions is _'what-if the vote is YES'_.  Never mind that the Scottish electorate deserve answers to these questions, as an income tax and council tax payer living in England I want to know the answers from my government.

Speak up Davey boy.  I'm listening.


----------



## chrisd (Feb 7, 2014)

Yawn!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Perhaps David Cameron cares as much as 99% of England


----------



## Deleted member 18588 (Feb 7, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			The first two are post a YES vote the latter two are post a NO vote and all four are not things that the YES campaign can possibly provide a definitive answer to at the moment because they are decisions that ONLY the rUK government can make.  The only 'party' that can give any definitive statement prior to the referendum on the rUK position on these matters is the UK government. The YES campaign can only PREDICT what an rUK government is likely to do - they can't determine rUK policy - only the UK government can tell us what that would be.  But they are silent.  

The NO/BT campaign is busy-busy demanding answers from the YES campaign to a myriad and many _'what-if'_ questions.  So the questions to the NO/BT campaign on these four questions is _'what-if the vote is YES'_.  Never mind that the Scottish electorate deserve answers to these questions, as an income tax and council tax payer living in England I want to know the answers from my government.

Speak up Davey boy.  I'm listening.
		
Click to expand...

Why should the UK Government state its position on purely hypothetical situations  which will ultimately depend upon whatever questions an independent Scottish Government might ask? After all why should there be any change to the status quo in the event of a NO vote. 

When negotiating it is generally inadvisable to state your final position at the outset


----------



## Imurg (Feb 7, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			The first two are post a YES vote the latter two are post a NO vote and all four are not things that the YES campaign can possibly provide a definitive answer to at the moment because they are decisions that ONLY the rUK government can make.  The only 'party' that can give any definitive statement prior to the referendum on the rUK position on these matters is the UK government. The YES campaign can only PREDICT what an rUK government is likely to do - they can't determine rUK policy - only the UK government can tell us what that would be.  But they are silent.  

The NO/BT campaign is busy-busy demanding answers from the YES campaign to a myriad and many _'what-if'_ questions.  So the questions to the NO/BT campaign on these four questions is _'what-if the vote is YES'_.  Never mind that the Scottish electorate deserve answers to these questions, as an income tax and council tax payer living in England I want to know the answers from my government.

Speak up Davey boy.  I'm listening.
		
Click to expand...

But it's all hypothetical.
The Yes side can't say for certain what's going to happen so it stands to reason that the No side are in the same position.
rUK! as you put it, can't give you a definitive statement on anything because it doesn't exist and will not unless there is a Yes vote.
How rUK reacts to an independent Scotland could change depending on many variables - but until both exist there's no way of knowing any outcome
The Yes campaign has to convince the voters that their way is the way forward.All the No's have to do is cast enough doubt on the Yes's and they will win. But without cast iron guarantees, which can't be given as the body that can give them doesn't exist to give them,  how can the Yes's win?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 7, 2014)

Imurg said:



			But it's all hypothetical.
The Yes side can't say for certain what's going to happen so it stands to reason that the No side are in the same position.
rUK! as you put it, can't give you a definitive statement on anything because it doesn't exist and will not unless there is a Yes vote.
How rUK reacts to an independent Scotland could change depending on many variables - but until both exist there's no way of knowing any outcome
The Yes campaign has to convince the voters that their way is the way forward.All the No's have to do is cast enough doubt on the Yes's and they will win. But without cast iron guarantees, which can't be given as the body that can give them doesn't exist to give them,  how can the Yes's win?
		
Click to expand...

And in the same way an independent Scotland does not currently exist and the YES campaign is being asked for answers to what can in the same way only be hypothetical questions.  The UK government knows what the YES campaign would want in the matters of 'EU membership and membership of a sterling zone' so what is the question they are struggling to understand.  On the two questions relating to post a NO vote - the UK government must have some idea of what it might do - but it's not telling the Scottish voters.  Why not?  Both the Barnett formula and devolving of further powers to the Scottish parliament are things completely and solely in the power of Westminster.  If it can't answer _'what-if' _question as around a YES vote it must by definition be able to answer questions around a NO vote - as the NO vote leaves as it's starting point the status quo.  But does the status quo remain - and if so for how long.  

As a voter in England maybe I want to see a move towards equalisation of per head central government funding/expenditure - and in the current economic climate this isn't going to come around by the funding down here being increased - it can only come about through a cut in Scotland's grant.  So is that going to happen?  What does the UK government have in mind?  If no change then Davey boy please just actually say 'no change'.  More poweras devolved to Scotland - if no change from current situation is currently what is planned then say 'no change'

What is impossible about that?


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 7, 2014)

I dont know if I am a typical English person (I am speaking on behalf of my country not rUK)  I am sick and tired of being berated and demonised by those that want to make a case against the 'old enemy/Edwards army' as a reason why Scotland will be better off without us.   I have become weary with the arguments and demonisation of our race and just want it over and done with.   I find that most English are keeping neutral on the issue and leaving to the Scots to decide for themselves but would feel a lot more comfortable with it if the continual harping back to historic prejudices and racist (Anti-English is actually racist) didn't seem to be biting the hand that feeds you.


----------



## Captainron (Feb 8, 2014)

I don't get this. Do the Scots want to feel more Scottish by having an independent Scotland? Most of you north of the border are fiercely patriotic and I love that. Being proud of where you come from is part if who you are and you should always keep that close to your heart. I just don't think that the last couple of hundred years of economic and governmental ties can be severed as easily as many people think.


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 8, 2014)

Captainron said:



			I don't get this. Do the Scots want to feel more Scottish by having an independent Scotland? Most of you north of the border are fiercely patriotic and I love that. Being proud of where you come from is part if who you are and you should always keep that close to your heart. I just don't think that the last couple of hundred years of economic and governmental ties can be severed as easily as many people think.
		
Click to expand...

So being proud of being English is also good to keep close to your heart?   I just feel that this sentiment holds true to anyone but us.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 8, 2014)

Tashyboy said:



			David Cameron has just announced a Scarecrow has won a Top Industry Award for being ' outstanding in his field'

Thats my thoughts on him
		
Click to expand...

That'll be a Tattie-bogle for the 'Yes' voters then!


----------



## Fish (Feb 8, 2014)




----------



## Dodger (Feb 8, 2014)

Guy on Channel 4 news last night................"Of course I want Scotland to stay, Its the most beautiful part of England" .   

Commentator said Britain, you mean Britain, the guy seemed confused and then corrected himself......clueless but I am not exactly surprised by it.

Cameron is a fud, he seemed to be banging on about FREEDOM! Supporting the No? Sounded more like supporting the Yes in a sly way.


----------



## MegaSteve (Feb 8, 2014)

Dodger said:



			Guy on Channel 4 news last night................"Of course I want Scotland to stay, Its the most beautiful part of England" .   

Commentator said Britain, you mean Britain, the guy seemed confused and then corrected himself......clueless but I am not exactly surprised by it.
		
Click to expand...

Believe the most common response south of the wall has been "will it make a blind bit of difference to me?"

Does anyone north of the wall [with a vote] truly believe 'Call me Dave' should have come to you on bended knee begging? Or is it just Salmond himself that thinks this...


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 8, 2014)

MegaSteve said:



			Believe the most common response south of the wall has been "will it make a blind bit of difference to me?"

Does anyone north of the wall [with a vote] truly believe 'Call me Dave' should have come to you on bended knee begging? Or is it just Salmond himself that thinks this...
		
Click to expand...

Davey boy should go north,. face the baying mob, and bang the drum loud for the UK and the BT campaign.  No-one is asking for any knee-bending - to the contrary they want him to stand tall for the UK.

And I south of the border want to know if it would make any difference to me? So for instance I want to know whether or not the UK government is in principle for or against a 'sterling zone' if Scotland came asking.  They must know.


----------



## Sweep (Feb 8, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I'll put money on him not addressing any of the key issues that are in the sole remit of Westminster and as such not things that the Scottish YES or NO campaigns can guarantee.  

He'll wrap himself up in patriotic Union Jack stuff - what we've achieved in the past (some OK some not so OK even without too much revisionism) - 100 anniversary of WWI - brave boys of the 42nd Highlanders anyone? (my grandfathers regiment) THE 2012 OLYMPIC GAMES!!!! (let's hear it).  And it's really all good stuff - but irrelevant to what happens in the future.

Wouldn't it be nice/fun/cruel to see him standing on a soap box on Glasgow Green or in George Square!
		
Click to expand...

And Salmond doesn't wrap himself up in Scottish patriotic stuff?
And it would be nice to see him on Glasgow Green or George Square - for those who want to hear the Prime Minister's views on what for those citizens are important matters. While I do understand the frustration felt towards politicians nowadays, I have never quite got this thing about deriding them in public. Personally, I would rather hear what they have to say and then make a reasoned decision on who to vote for.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 8, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Davey boy should go north,. face the baying mob, and bang the drum loud for the UK and the BT campaign.  No-one is asking for any knee-bending - to the contrary they want him to stand tall for the UK.

And I south of the border want to know if it would make any difference to me? So for instance I want to know whether or not the UK government is in principle for or against a 'sterling zone' if Scotland came asking.  They must know.
		
Click to expand...

I'm sure the question of the pros and cons (ha!) of making that 'plea' in either country was considered. I suspect that there'll be some sort of excuse found for a trip North some time in the future, where another appeal will be made.

He's not going to come out with possible ways to manage a 'Yes' result at this stage. That would be admitting that the 'Yes' option is workable/reasonable (which it is imo) in the same way as, going into an election, admitting that working in a coalition was reasonable. Easy way to lose a great chunk of votes from those 'swayers' who know that status-quo works, however badly, but are afraid that a 'Yes' would be too much of a leap!


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 8, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			I'm sure the question of the pros and cons (ha!) of making that 'plea' in either country was considered. I suspect that there'll be some sort of excuse found for a trip North some time in the future, where another appeal will be made.
		
Click to expand...

I read this morning that the Westminster cabinet is meeting ion Aberdeen on the 24th Feb.  Interesting.  I'll have to ask my brother who lives in Aberdeen what he's going to vote.  If *he *says he'll vote yes - and he is a senior civil engineer in Scottish company doing global business - then a YES is a distinct possibility.

On whether DC should state position of UK - you are of course correct.  Any statement of UK position in respect of what-if YES will be tacit admission that a YES outcome is possible.  But being a bystander to the referendum vote he should though be able to admit a YES is possible (because it is) and explain to the Scottish voters what he'd do.  As it is he is not providing the electorate with important information that could inform their decision.  Is that democratically an OK thing to do - telling the Scottish electorate that though he knows the answers to some open questions he's not going to tell them - a bit of _yah boo sucks - I'm not telling_ politics that.  

Anyway - I'm sure Scottish voters can see that he is playing games.  And if that is what he wants to do then so be it.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 8, 2014)

Ha! 

Yes. the hypocrisy of politics always seem too obvious. No wonder so many distrust them!

The Press and other media though are a different, potentially more dangerous, lot. They (believe they can) wrap their attitudes up in legitimate reporting/journalism. As a supporter, though sometime critic, of the House of Lords, it always amuses me when (the mainly left) press hypocritically criticise HofL as 'unelected'!


----------



## One Planer (Feb 8, 2014)

Here's a question:

Let's say Scotland vote yes to independence, but after much negotiation there is no 'Sterling Zone' and only the only option for them remaining is to join the Eurozone and the Euro. Would the people who voted yes still be happy?

If all the issues that are currently up for discussion weren't settled amicably or to what Mr Salmond expects would the people who voted yes still be happy?

After the yes vote has been cast and people find out things aren't as rosy as they thought or were lead to believe they 'could' be, what then?

At what point does having an independent Scotland become more about pride than economic and national (Scottish) stability?


----------



## MegaSteve (Feb 8, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			And I south of the border want to know if it would make any difference to me?
		
Click to expand...


If you are a shipbuilder, in Portsmouth, you could be looking forward to a return to work....


----------



## Sweep (Feb 8, 2014)

Gareth said:



			At what point does having an independent Scotland become more about pride than economic and national (Scottish) stability?
		
Click to expand...

Now. Scotland already has economic stability. It's just that the SNP say they could be wealthier if they go it alone. This is about pride and nationalism and nothing else.
There is no doubt that Westminster will have to make it clear, pre vote, about the situation with the Sterling zone. I think they have already made it pretty clear it isn't going to happen and Mr. Carney's visit was all part of getting that point across. The sterling issue is so central to the decision the Scottish people must make, they cannot hold the vote without knowing one way or the other. Which just reinforces just how much this whole independence issue is built on sand. Clearly lots of promises made by the SNP with no knowledge whatsoever if it is doable or not.
Is it real independence if you have to rely on another nations currency to have a decent economy?
Is it real independence if you have to rely on England protecting you in the case of a nuclear threat?
All sounds like a cherry pickers fantasy to me.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 8, 2014)

Gareth said:



			Here's a question:

Let's say Scotland vote yes to independence, but after much negotiation there is no 'Sterling Zone' and only the only option for them remaining is to join the Eurozone and the Euro. Would the people who voted yes still be happy?
		
Click to expand...

Happy or not - they'd be stuck with the decision and would have to make the best of whatever situation presented




			If all the issues that are currently up for discussion weren't settled amicably or to what Mr Salmond expects would the people who voted yes still be happy?
		
Click to expand...

As above




			After the yes vote has been cast and people find out things aren't as rosy as they thought or were lead to believe they 'could' be, what then?
		
Click to expand...

..and again as above.  And you could ask exactly the same question for after a NO vote.  Because following a NO vote are things going to be the same as now?  Westminster won't say!




			At what point does having an independent Scotland become more about pride than economic and national (Scottish) stability?
		
Click to expand...

Don't know.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 8, 2014)

MegaSteve said:



			If you are a shipbuilder, in Portsmouth, you could be looking forward to a return to work....
		
Click to expand...

You could indeed - so pray enlighten us Davey boy.  Following a YES will you demand that BAE SYSTEMS move the recent orders from the Clyde to Portsmouth - pray tell.


----------



## Hobbit (Feb 9, 2014)

Is there anyone in Scotland saying no? 

And TBH, having listened to so much rhetoric about how badly Scotland is treated by Westminster I hope Scotland votes to leave the Union - never thought I'd ever say it but there appears to be so much bile spewing out, I think the relationship is becoming soured.


----------



## Dodger (Feb 9, 2014)

I have a question for the Scots on here.

Do you sing GSTQ?


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 9, 2014)

Dodger said:



			I have a question for the Scots on here.

Do you sing GSTQ?
		
Click to expand...

Well I sure as heck don't sing a negro spiritual no more


----------



## Tashyboy (Feb 9, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			Is there anyone in Scotland saying no? 

And TBH, having listened to so much rhetoric about how badly Scotland is treated by Westminster I hope Scotland votes to leave the Union - never thought I'd ever say it but there appears to be so much bile spewing out, I think the relationship is becoming soured.
		
Click to expand...

Hobbit sorry to join the debate a bit late, but you could say that anywhere north of Watford gap is treated badly and as far west as Somerset. 

I always find that it's not so much what the government says but more so what it doesn't say and even that is double tonged gobblygook. Eg, latest example. Dredging rivers would not make any difference to flooding, Davy boy one week later as soon as it stops raining we will dredge the rivers. Why if it makes no difference.

i am as fiercely patriotic as the next man and as royalist as they come, but if I was a sweaty sock, there's no way I would want to be governed by the sassanach heathens.

yup it will be tough, but if as a scot you are struggling for work, come to England coz it seems half of flipping Europe has.

good luck Scotland on the yes vote.


----------



## Dodger (Feb 10, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Well I sure as heck don't sing a negro spiritual no more
		
Click to expand...

Genuine question to all the Scots.....


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 10, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			Is there anyone in Scotland saying no?
		
Click to expand...

Yes.... most of us!


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 10, 2014)

Dodger said:



			I have a question for the Scots on here.

Do you sing GSTQ?
		
Click to expand...

No, but that's more from an anti-monarchist than anti-union perspective.


----------



## One Planer (Feb 10, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			Yes.... most of us!
		
Click to expand...

Is there a reason _most_ are saying no Karen?


----------



## MarkA (Feb 10, 2014)

chrisd said:



			Yawn!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Perhaps David Cameron cares as much as 99% of England
		
Click to expand...

Well you bloody well should care because if Scotland does become independent you as a taxpayer will be propping up the Scottish currency if they want to retain sterling.  What I don't get is how Scotland believes it can use sterling and be totally independent  - as if the B of E and the English economy/ Tax payer is propping up the Scottish Currency as the lifeboat we will need to have some pretty major input into Scottish Fiscal policy.


----------



## One Planer (Feb 10, 2014)

MarkA said:



			Well you bloody well should care because if Scotland does become independent you as a taxpayer will be propping up the Scottish currency if they want to retain sterling.  What I don't get is how Scotland believes it can use sterling and be totally independent  - as if the B of E and the English economy/ Tax payer is propping up the Scottish Currency as the lifeboat we will need to have some pretty major input into Scottish Fiscal policy.
		
Click to expand...

You do realise that as part of the Union Scotland have a stake in the BoE?


----------



## MarkA (Feb 10, 2014)

Any Bank notes issued by BOS must be backed by one to one deposits so explain how that is relevant


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 10, 2014)

Gareth said:



			Is there a reason _most_ are saying no Karen?
		
Click to expand...

I doubt there's a single reason, just doesn't seem to be much appetite for it. Of course many others are desperate for it and it seems, to me at least, those are the ones making the most noise.


----------



## One Planer (Feb 10, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			I doubt there's a single reason, just doesn't seem to be much appetite for it. Of course many others are desperate for it and it seems, to me at least, those are the ones making the most noise.
		
Click to expand...

In your opinion, what do you think the reasons are?


----------



## FairwayDodger (Feb 10, 2014)

Gareth said:



			In your opinion, what do you think the reasons are?
		
Click to expand...

It's kind of like trying to prove a negative, you don't need a reason to vote for the status quo and most of us are actually quite happy being part of the UK and don't really hate the English or anything.


----------



## ger147 (Feb 10, 2014)

FairwayDodger said:



			It's kind of like trying to prove a negative, you don't need a reason to vote for the status quo and most of us are actually quite happy being part of the UK and don't really hate the English or anything.
		
Click to expand...

Added to that, most of the folk I know don't believe it's going to happen and so spend little time thinking, debating or worrying about it.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 10, 2014)

Sorry late to this after OP.

Couple of questions and comments.

1] Why are so many posters saying England instead of rUK and is that part of the problem?

2] If you were a non Tory/Ukip supporter living in England would you feel happy in being isolated for the next 20 years min.
[remember only ONE Tory/Ukip MP was elected in Scotland at the last Westminster election]

I thought Dave gave quite a passionate speech to keep Scotland in the UK, whether he meant it or not was hard to work out. The Tories have quite a long history of throwing the Scots on the midden.

I try hard not to sing GSTQ but occasionally I feel that good manners come first.
[BTW why do English sporting teams playing against rUK teams continue to sing the British National anthem , I find that very bad mannered, perhaps they don't have a decent English one.

Scotland is still very much in the BT camp but there are an awful lot of folk who have yet to make up their minds.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 10, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			...
[BTW why do English sporting teams playing against rUK teams continue to sing the British National anthem , I find that very bad mannered, perhaps they don't have a decent English one.
		
Click to expand...

Well Swing Low Sweet Chariot and Jerusalem certainly don't seem right.

And Land of Hope and Glory has the same 'problem' as GSTQ.

I Vow to Thee My Country.. seems a bit general - and seems more associated with funerals and remembrance.


----------



## drawboy (Feb 10, 2014)

Do Scots think it is more about getting Salmonds name in the history books than having any genuine reason for independence? I do.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 10, 2014)

No
The SNP have done a good job in running Scotland and as I have said many times on here.......there are many Scots who are happy to vote SNP for Holyrood but not for Westminster.


----------



## Hobbit (Feb 10, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Sorry late to this after OP.

Couple of questions and comments.

1] Why are so many posters saying England instead of rUK and is that part of the problem?

2] If you were a non Tory/Ukip supporter living in England would you feel happy in being isolated for the next 20 years min.
[remember only ONE Tory/Ukip MP was elected in Scotland at the last Westminster election]

I thought Dave gave quite a passionate speech to keep Scotland in the UK, whether he meant it or not was hard to work owt. The Tories have quite a long history of throwing the Scots on the midden.

I try hard not to sing GSTQ but occasionally I feel that good manners come first.
[BTW why do English sporting teams playing against rUK teams continue to sing the British National anthem , I find that very bad mannered, perhaps they don't have a decent English one.

Scotland is still very much in the BT camp but there are an awful lot of folk who have yet to make up their minds.
		
Click to expand...

1) Haven't got a clue what rUK is.

2) If you are a Labour voter, living in a Tory stronghold, you never get out anyway. If Labour are in, they protect the strongholds and if the Tories are in you get landed with things you don't agree with.

3) Living in the northeast, the Tories have had us on the midden many times through my life.

National Anthems; wish us English had something a bit more stirring like Jerusalem, or Flower of Scotland


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 10, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			Well Swing Low Sweet Chariot and Jerusalem certainly don't seem right.

And Land of Hope and Glory has the same 'problem' as GSTQ.

I Vow to Thee My Country.. seems a bit general - and seems more associated with funerals and remembrance.
		
Click to expand...

I did suggest some time ago that an English NAtional Anthem could easily be written to the tune of Greensleeves - and old English folk tune - and 'England' and 'Greensleeves' have the same meter so replacing Greensleeves with the word England in the song works not bad - as in the chorus - with only one other word swapped (country for lady in last line).

England was all my joy
England was my delight,
England was my heart of gold,
And who but my country England


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 10, 2014)

drawboy said:



			Do Scots think it is more about getting Salmonds name in the history books than having any genuine reason for independence? I do.
		
Click to expand...

No - they don't


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 10, 2014)

Hobbit said:



			1) Haven't got a clue what rUK is.

2) If you are a Labour voter, living in a Tory stronghold, you never get out anyway. If Labour are in, they protect the strongholds and if the Tories are in you get landed with things you don't agree with.

3) Living in the northeast, the Tories have had us on the midden many times through my life.
		
Click to expand...

1) pay more attention to the debate - fairly widespread now - shorthand for_ rest of the UK _(though iScot hasn't quite caught in in the same way)
2) and 3) are indeed arguments the YES campaign use.  Fact that they apply to other geographical areas of UK and constituencies of voters is bye-the-bye as far as Scotland is concerned.  But I am sure they feel our pain.


----------



## Fish (Feb 10, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			1) pay more attention to the debate .
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 10, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I did suggest some time ago that an English NAtional Anthem could easily be written to the tune of Greensleeves - and old English folk tune - and 'England' and 'Greensleeves' have the same meter so replacing Greensleeves with the word England in the song works not bad - as in the chorus - with only one other word swapped (country for lady in last line).
		
Click to expand...

I'd be looking for the Mr Whippy Ice Cream van!


----------



## Hobbit (Feb 10, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			1) pay more attention to the debate - fairly widespread now - shorthand for_ rest of the UK _(though iScot hasn't quite caught in in the same way).
		
Click to expand...

Apologies for not following more closely...I tend to skim read your tiring posts...


----------



## ger147 (Feb 10, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			1) pay more attention to the debate - fairly widespread now - shorthand for_ rest of the UK.._.
		
Click to expand...

Only place I've seen it used is on this forum, so widespread is at best mistaken.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 10, 2014)

There is no such place as rUK - I live in England which is part of the UK 

So I won't be calling anyplace where I live rUK

Still very confident that it will be UK this time next year


----------



## Fish (Feb 10, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			There is no such place as rUK - I live in England which is part of the UK 

So I won't be calling anyplace where I live rUK
		
Click to expand...

:thup:

I thought it stood for "Are you kidding", which would be more synonymous with most of SILH posts :smirk:


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 10, 2014)

rUK is  short hand for England, Wales and Northern Ireland [or if you are English......England]


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 10, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			rUK is  short hand for England, Wales and Northern Ireland [or if you are English......England]
		
Click to expand...

Then it should be RUK but as it is a baiting move by some nationalists on hear and the odd jock that wishes to stir from afar I tend to ignore it.


----------



## Fish (Feb 10, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			rUK is  short hand for England, Wales and Northern Ireland [or if you are English......England]
		
Click to expand...

It isn't "shorthand" as in the official writing of shorthand, it is an abbreviation. 

*Terminology*

10. In keeping with reports produced by other House of Commons Select Committees and other organisations, in our report we have used the *abbreviation* 'rUK' as a shorthand way of referring to the 'remainder of the UK', the State which, in the event of Scottish independence, would comprise England, Wales and Northern Ireland.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 10, 2014)

Perhaps we should be more politically correct and call it dUK as in Diminished UK.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 10, 2014)

How about we just carry on calling it UK because it's still United Kingdoms together :thup:


----------



## User20205 (Feb 10, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Perhaps we should be more politically correct and call it dUK as in Diminished UK.
		
Click to expand...

 How about the Bo Uk (better off) :thup:

No one I know actually cares that much about Scottish independence, so maybe the GI UK (generally indifferent) works


----------



## drawboy (Feb 10, 2014)

Liverpoolphil said:



			How about we just carry on calling it UK because it's still United Kingdoms together :thup:
		
Click to expand...

Or indeed Great Britain as that is what we are Great with a rich history to be proud of, one that I think needs celebrating not destroying. We are unique and should stay that way.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 10, 2014)

drawboy said:



			Or indeed Great Britain as that is what we are Great with a rich history to be proud of, one that I think needs celebrating not destroying. We are unique and should stay that way.
		
Click to expand...


Totally agree :thup:


----------



## Dodger (Feb 10, 2014)

Just make sure you follow the great man on Twitter.

He is a great leader of the country..... https://twitter.com/AngrySalmond


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 10, 2014)

Seemingly the first question after Cameroon's speech came from an English journalist.
She asked 'what are you going to do about the floods?'

Comedy gold.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Feb 10, 2014)

Why is that comedy gold ? It's very relevant and current and far more important right now with people's homes at risk


----------



## Blue in Munich (Feb 10, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Seemingly the first question after Cameroon's speech came from an English journalist.
She asked 'what are you going to do about the floods?'

Comedy gold.
		
Click to expand...

Probably a lot more now it's hitting his mates along the Thames than he did when it was only affecting the yokels down in Zummerzet.


----------



## In_The_Rough (Feb 10, 2014)

Blue in Munich said:



			Probably a lot more now it's hitting his mates along the Thames than he did when it was only affecting the yokels down in Zummerzet.
		
Click to expand...

Have to agree with you, soon as the rich start getting clobbered action will be taken. Sucks but that is how it is unfortunately


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 10, 2014)

What can he or anyone do about the floods.    There is no plug to pull out.


----------



## Hobbit (Feb 10, 2014)

drawboy said:



			Or indeed Great Britain as that is what we are Great with a rich history to be proud of, one that I think needs celebrating not destroying. We are unique and should stay that way.
		
Click to expand...




Liverpoolphil said:



			Totally agree :thup:
		
Click to expand...

Huzzah!

And WE are bigger and better than the sum of our parts... Team GB!


----------



## In_The_Rough (Feb 10, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			What can he or anyone do about the floods.    There is no plug to pull out.
		
Click to expand...

Finance dredging rivers for a start.


----------



## Fish (Feb 10, 2014)

In_The_Rough said:



			Finance dredging rivers for a start.
		
Click to expand...

and how much dredging was done and finance given when the last government was in?


----------



## In_The_Rough (Feb 10, 2014)

Fish said:



			and how much dredging was done and finance given when the last government was in?
		
Click to expand...

Sweet FA mate that's why they continue to get worse year on year. Something has to be done as it will keep happening on a grander scale. The gov was warned 6 months ago about the risk in Somerset and still did naff all. By the way I am a Tory voter so don't think this post or the one you quote is an anti Cameron rant. It is an anti gov rant over the last 15 years or so.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 11, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			What can he or anyone do about the floods.    There is no plug to pull out.
		
Click to expand...

Exactly my point.

If people buy cheap houses that are below sea level or on an eroded coast line they must be prepared to accept some risk/responsibility. Why should sensible home buyers have to bail them out.
Dredging those two rivers in Somerset will only help the tidal surge reach higher levels.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 11, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Exactly my point.

If people buy cheap houses that are below sea level or on an eroded coast line they must be prepared to accept some risk/responsibility. Why should sensible home buyers have to bail them out.
Dredging those two rivers in Somerset will only help the tidal surge reach higher levels.
		
Click to expand...

Too much knee-jerk reaction by politicians - suggesting the experts know fall.  As you say - dredging seems an obvious answer to the problems of rivers flooding - but it doesn't work like that quite so easily.  The gradient of the river is crucial I read.  So low gradient tidal rivers like those in the Somerset Levels silt up very rapidly as silt is deposited as the tide turns - and the tide turns twice a day every day.  

The Clyde has serious silting but it was worth dredging it for as long as shipping travelled up river into the city - commercially sensible thing to do.  But it is done much less these days because there is no commercial need.  It will still be done around the yards as it is necessary.

And flooding is caused by a whole variety of reasons.  Our course is suffering due to the way a neighbouring farmer cultivates his fields and puts down ground sheeting to minimise weed growth.  And with the fields sloping towards the course - where does gravity take the water? Onto our course.  Wouldn't have happened maybe 20yrs ago as this method of weed growth restriction wasn't used.  And of course run-off is much less when the fields are fallow.  Can rain all it likes but it doesn't run off the fields onto the course.  And for polythene on ground also read building and roads and even putting hard standing where grass was.


----------



## Fish (Feb 11, 2014)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Too much knee-jerk reaction by politicians - suggesting the experts know fall.  As you say - dredging seems an obvious answer to the problems of rivers flooding - but it doesn't work like that quite so easily.  The gradient of the river is crucial I read.  So low gradient tidal rivers like those in the Somerset Levels silt up very rapidly as silt is deposited as the tide turns - and the tide turns twice a day every day.  

The Clyde has serious silting but it was worth dredging it for as long as shipping travelled up river into the city - commercially sensible thing to do.  But it is done much less these days because there is no commercial need.  It will still be done around the yards as it is necessary.

And flooding is caused by a whole variety of reasons.  Our course is suffering due to the way a neighbouring farmer cultivates his fields and puts down ground sheeting to minimise weed growth.  And with the fields sloping towards the course - where does gravity take the water? Onto our course.  Wouldn't have happened maybe 20yrs ago as this method of weed growth restriction wasn't used.  And of course run-off is much less when the fields are fallow.  Can rain all it likes but it doesn't run off the fields onto the course.  And for polythene on ground also read building and roads and even putting hard standing where grass was.
		
Click to expand...

I think so with many out of town retails parks, business centres, domestic block paving and the list could go on all contribute to less natural drainage areas and with more hard standing the old antiquated drainage systems across the country are clearly showing they can't cope!


----------



## Adi2Dassler (Feb 11, 2014)

Dodger said:



			I have a question for the Scots on here.

Do you sing GSTQ?
		
Click to expand...

No, but I actually quite like The Queen, she seems a decent sort.



Sweep said:



			Now. Scotland already has economic stability. It's just that the SNP say they could be wealthier if they go it alone. This is about pride and nationalism and nothing else.
There is no doubt that Westminster will have to make it clear, pre vote, about the situation with the Sterling zone. I think they *have already made it pretty clear it isn't going to happen and Mr. Carney's visit was all part of getting that point across.* The sterling issue is so central to the decision the Scottish people must make, they cannot hold the vote without knowing one way or the other. Which just reinforces just how much this whole independence issue is built on sand. Clearly lots of promises made by the SNP with no knowledge whatsoever if it is doable or not.
*Is it real independence if you have to rely on another nations currency to have a decent economy?
Is it real independence if you have to rely on England protecting you in the case of a nuclear threat?*
All sounds like a cherry pickers fantasy to me.
		
Click to expand...

I'll tell the jokes



Liverpoolphil said:



			How about we just carry on calling it UK because it's still United Kingdoms together :thup:
		
Click to expand...

If Scotland leaves there is one kingdom,one principality and one province, so only one kingdom left...


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 11, 2014)

Adi2Dassler said:



			If Scotland  leaves there is one kingdom,one principality and one province, so only one kingdom left...
		
Click to expand...

Jings Adi, don't give them facts, it will only confuse them!


----------



## Blue in Munich (Feb 11, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			What can he or anyone do about the floods.    There is no plug to pull out.
		
Click to expand...

He was a politician in 2007 when the last ones occurred, having been elected in 2001.  He became Prime minister in 2010.  It is now 2014.  No good doing the rounds & pressing the flesh now, should have done something in the last 3 and a bit years.  It's on his watch and he should have acted earlier.


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 11, 2014)

Blue in Munich said:



			He was a politician in 2007 when the last ones occurred, having been elected in 2001.  He became Prime minister in 2010.  It is now 2014.  No good doing the rounds & pressing the flesh now, should have done something in the last 3 and a bit years.  It's on his watch and he should have acted earlier.
		
Click to expand...

July 2007 had record levels of rain for one month, 2014 has had the highest rainfall so far for over two hundred years.   

How exactly is he supposed to control the rain?


----------



## Blue in Munich (Feb 11, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			July 2007 had record levels of rain for one month, 2014 has had the highest rainfall so far for over two hundred years.   

How exactly is he supposed to control the rain?
		
Click to expand...

Surely if that happened with one month's rain, a forward thinking politician, given the issues with global warming and climate change, would have considered what needed to be done to prevent a repetition or at least lessen the impact.  What exactly has he done?  No one's expecting him to control the rain, but it's not unreasonable to expect him to learn from history.


----------



## Old Skier (Feb 11, 2014)

Blue in Munich said:



			but it's not unreasonable to expect him to learn from history.
		
Click to expand...

Politician learning from history.  Now there's a novelty.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 11, 2014)

Blue in Munich said:



			Surely if that happened with one month's rain, a forward thinking politician, given the issues with global warming and climate change, would have considered what needed to be done to prevent a repetition or at least lessen the impact.  What exactly has he done?  No one's expecting him to control the rain, but it's not unreasonable to expect him to learn from history.
		
Click to expand...

Seems far too sensible!

Government politicians only ever think to the next election cycle. Global Warming/Climate Change doesn't really feature, though must be addressed imo. 

And the EA's plans actually seemed to have worked - within the constraints of what their Budget allowed them to.
It's just that they weren't allowed to Budget/plan for the amount of rain etc that has occurred - in certain areas particularly.
Whether that's because the politicians didn't allow them to - in an economic trough - or the Agency didn't argue strongly enough for the 'right amount of funding' is an issue for later. 

The way I see the 'Rules' working, farmland is always going to be sacrificed for the needs of homes and populated areas. 

Flooding in far more than 'the usual places' around me.

As for learning from history.....:rofl:


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 11, 2014)

Blue in Munich said:



			Surely if that happened with one month's rain, a forward thinking politician, given the issues with global warming and climate change, would have considered what needed to be done to prevent a repetition or at least lessen the impact.  What exactly has he done?  No one's expecting him to control the rain, but it's not unreasonable to expect him to learn from history.
		
Click to expand...

I live in Worcestershire and we experience the river Severn flooding annually, it always has this time of year.  The EA has spend a lot of money on flood defences in the area and they have been extremely effective in areas like Bewdley, Worcester and Upton upon Severn.   There are not funds available to set up defences in areas that do not flood like these on a regular basis.   We have experienced unprecedented rain recently, it is not proven that this is a climate change or global warming issue, the Jet Stream seems to be an influencing factor and the experts don't understand why it has moved the way it has this year.

In my opinion its wrong to blame Cameron personally for the floods, Nature is too powerful for us to control, there have always been unpredictable natural disasters beyond our control and there always will be.


----------



## Blue in Munich (Feb 11, 2014)

Cameron wants all the credit for things that go right, in my book that makes him culpable for things that were preventable.  As for funds not being availableâ€¦â€¦..

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-giving-millions-aid-India-don-t-want-it.html


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 11, 2014)

Blue in Munich said:



			Cameron wants all the credit for things that go right, in my book that makes him culpable for things that were preventable.  As for funds not being availableâ€¦â€¦..

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-giving-millions-aid-India-don-t-want-it.html

Click to expand...

Dave has now told us that money is no object and whatever can or needs to be done to help will be done.  Really?  That's seems to me to be quite an open-ended commitment.  Or was he talking about in future rather than now.  I think it was now.  Seems a rather silly thing to say as nobody will believe him.


----------



## Fish (Feb 12, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			I live in Worcestershire and we experience the river Severn flooding annually, it always has this time of year.  The EA has spend a lot of money on flood defences in the area and they have been extremely effective in areas like Bewdley, Worcester and Upton upon Severn.   There are not funds available to set up defences in areas that do not flood like these on a regular basis.   We have experienced unprecedented rain recently, it is not proven that this is a climate change or global warming issue, the Jet Stream seems to be an influencing factor and the experts don't understand why it has moved the way it has this year.

In my opinion its wrong to blame Cameron personally for the floods, Nature is too powerful for us to control, there have always been unpredictable natural disasters beyond our control and there always will be.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Feb 12, 2014)

Fish said:



View attachment 9103

Click to expand...

So do I


----------



## Dodger (Feb 12, 2014)

Doon frae Troon said:



			So do I
		
Click to expand...


Me three but don't stop that getting in the way of an excuse to bash a politician for something he/they do not deserve to be blamed for.


----------



## MegaSteve (Feb 12, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			In my opinion its wrong to blame Cameron personally for the floods, Nature is too powerful for us to control, there have always been unpredictable natural disasters beyond our control and there always will be.
		
Click to expand...


'Ooncle' Eric is quite happy to lay all the blame quite firmly at the welly clad feet of Lord Smith....


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 12, 2014)

MegaSteve said:



			'Ooncle' Eric is quite happy to lay all the blame quite firmly at the welly clad feet of Lord Smith....
		
Click to expand...

Lord Smith! Now you are getting closer.  IMO he is a lefty EU sycophant who with his Quango has been committed to their policy of protecting Water Voles and Wading Birds at the expense of peoples homes and businesses by returning moorland and low lying coastal areas to wetlands.   The Environment Agency is full of Green Yoghurt Knitting Dreamers like him.   And as I mentioned in another thread, his budget was increased for 2014 not cut.


----------



## Blue in Munich (Feb 12, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			I live in Worcestershire and we experience the river Severn flooding annually, it always has this time of year.  The EA has spend a lot of money on flood defences in the area and they have been extremely effective in areas like Bewdley, Worcester and Upton upon Severn.   There are not funds available to set up defences in areas that do not flood like these on a regular basis.   We have experienced unprecedented rain recently, it is not proven that this is a climate change or global warming issue, the Jet Stream seems to be an influencing factor and the experts don't understand why it has moved the way it has this year.

In my opinion its wrong to blame Cameron personally for the floods, Nature is too powerful for us to control, there have always been unpredictable natural disasters beyond our control and there always will be.
		
Click to expand...




Fish said:



View attachment 9103

Click to expand...




Doon frae Troon said:



			So do I
		
Click to expand...




Dodger said:



			Me three but don't stop that getting in the way of an excuse to bash a politician for something he/they do not deserve to be blamed for.
		
Click to expand...

http://www.parliament.uk/business/p...-parliament/green-growth/reducing-flood-risk/

The Government accepted all 92 recommendations, but what has the Government actually done to get matters sorted?  Is there more or less building on flood plains?  Has the routine maintenance of the drainage systems been done or has it been ignored.  If all the work has been done & still we flooded, fair enough, one up to Mother Nature.  When the Government accepts recommendations but does little or nothing about them then it's down to Government.  And who is in charge of that Government?  

We'll agree to differ then.


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 12, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			Lord Smith! Now you are getting closer.  IMO he is a lefty EU sycophant who with his Quango has been committed to their policy of protecting Water Voles and Wading Birds at the expense of peoples homes and businesses by returning moorland and low lying coastal areas to wetlands.   The Environment Agency is full of Green Yoghurt Knitting Dreamers like him.   And as I mentioned in another thread, his budget was increased for 2014 not cut.
		
Click to expand...

I guess you are not a fan of his then!

Would you rather the 'moorlands and low lying coastal areas' were used for homes and businesses? Seems like a recipe for more flooding to me!


----------



## Tashyboy (Feb 12, 2014)

This is one of those topics where as far as I am concerned your political preference largely influences your view. The bottom line for me is that the response to this crisis is far to late. When one person says it does not matter if rivers have been dredged and then call me David says we will dredge the rivers, tells me that the left hand don't know what the right is doing. Where actually does the buck stop.

further more, and if I get slated for saying this, so be it. why is it more of a crisis if someone gets flooded in London than say Somerset or the Devon and Cornwall Coast. It's not and some people have been in this flooded situation for weeks and will be in this flooded situation for weeks and months.

what has happened has happened, I just hope that when the dust sorry water has settled or gone. The powers that be sit down and do everything in there powers to make sure that these biblical disasters never happen again. however I have a feeling that Mother Nature may have something to say about that


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 12, 2014)

Foxholer said:



			I guess you are not a fan of his then!

Would you rather the 'moorlands and low lying coastal areas' were used for homes and businesses? Seems like a recipe for more flooding to me!
		
Click to expand...

Did I suggest that?  No! quite the opposite.   I suggest these areas continue to be drained so that farmers and villages can continue to live the way they have for hundreds of years.


----------



## MegaSteve (Feb 12, 2014)

SocketRocket said:



			And as I mentioned in another thread, his budget was increased for 2014 not cut.
		
Click to expand...

Still down on 2010 levels of agency funding though...

But that's neither here nor there though...  'Traditional' ways of land 'maintenance' [such as simple things like ditch clearance] were abandoned decades ago...


----------



## Foxholer (Feb 12, 2014)

Tashyboy said:



			further more, and if I get slated for saying this, so be it. why is it more of a crisis if someone gets flooded in London than say Somerset or the Devon and Cornwall Coast. It's not and some people have been in this flooded situation for weeks and will be in this flooded situation for weeks and months.
		
Click to expand...

An entirely reasonable question imo.

There's no difference if some*one* in either area gets flooded, but if 500 acres of London gets flooded it's a larger 'cost' than if 500 acres of a village does, which is in turn more of a cost than if 500 acres of farmland does. Just the method to measure/allocate the cost/expenditure - along with a few other considerations.


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 12, 2014)

MegaSteve said:



			Still down on 2010 levels of agency funding though...

But that's neither here nor there though...  'Traditional' ways of land 'maintenance' [such as simple things like ditch clearance] were abandoned decades ago...
		
Click to expand...

Not in Somerset.   There is an agency that is part funded by local rates and part by EA grant that deal with these matters.   I think you will find that it is pressure from the EU that encourages them to return the levels to flood plane.


----------

