# EVEL - Not Worthy of Full Debate!



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Oct 22, 2015)

Debate on EVEL going on today.  How call this possibly not be deemed Primary Legislation? It changes the way the Commons works; makes Scottish (and also Welsh?) Westminster MPs 'second tier' MPs; and by effectively devolving certain matters to English MPs only it, in effect, establishes an English government.  How can EVEL therefore be deemed a Statutory Instrument - and so legislation that is not so important and deemed not worthy of the level of debate Primary Legislation gets.  

The Conservative government being quite staggering in it's level of arrogance, conceit and disregard for the governance of the UK, and it's history.


----------



## PhilTheFragger (Oct 22, 2015)

So its Ok for The Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish to have devolved powers and therefore a devolved form of government, but not the English.?

having said that.....
I can see what they are trying to do, but my own personal take on it is that if it involves establishing another tier of government, then it adds in a load more costs and expenses that weren't there before.

They should be trying to slim down government


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Oct 22, 2015)

PhilTheFragger said:



			So its Ok for The Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish to have devolved powers and therefore a devolved form of government, but not the English.?
		
Click to expand...

Seems a fair observation to me. Scots getting wound up about this is somewhat ironic.


----------



## Hobbit (Oct 22, 2015)

PhilTheFragger said:



			So its Ok for The Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish to have devolved powers and therefore a devolved form of government, but not the English.?

having said that.....
I can see what they are trying to do, but my own personal take on it is that if it involves establishing another tier of government, then it adds in a load more costs and expenses that weren't there before.

They should be trying to slim down government
		
Click to expand...

It always amazes me that the USA can be run by 100 Senators and 435 Representatives. Less than the UK, yet with a population of over 320 million.


----------



## PhilTheFragger (Oct 22, 2015)

Hobbit said:



			It always amazes me that the USA can be run by 100 Senators and 435 Representatives. Less than the UK, yet with a population of over 320 million.
		
Click to expand...

Yes but it gives Sheriff Donkey Brain, who is his wifes  brother, and also the Mayor, loads of power in CowPat County Arizona


----------



## Foxholer (Oct 22, 2015)

Hobbit said:



			It always amazes me that the USA can be run by 100 Senators and 435 Representatives. Less than the UK, yet with a population of over 320 million.
		
Click to expand...

That's because the US is a federation and the Federal government only deals with federal matters . Try adding the legislators for all 50 states into that count!

Btw. Wouldn't it be great is the EU was rather more streamlined - 751 'representatives' etc is far too many!

As for EVEl...Seems a sensible, if sensitive, idea.

And it has now been approved 312-270


----------



## Fish (Oct 22, 2015)

Just have another vote and bugger off then, PLEASE :smirk:

Why should Scottish MP's be able to vote on health & education (examples) which ONLY affects England or England & Wales?  The House of Commons has no say on similar matters in Scotland as those policies were devolved!


----------



## FairwayDodger (Oct 22, 2015)

Fish said:



			Just have another vote and bugger off then, PLEASE :smirk:

Why should Scottish MP's be able to vote on health & education (examples) which ONLY affects England or England & Wales?  The House of Commons has no say on similar matters in Scotland as those policies were devolved!
		
Click to expand...

Dear god why is it so hard to understand!?

The principle of EVEL is perfectly correct but this is the wrong way to go about it. We need Scottish, English, Welsh and NI parliaments all with identically devolved powers. And preferably the members meeting up two days a week at Westminster for UK business rather than having double the MPs!

Trying to get the UK Parliament to double up as the English Parliament with some ugly "quick fix" is a complete disaster. It will end badly!


----------



## NWJocko (Oct 22, 2015)

FairwayDodger said:



			Dear god why is it so hard to understand!?

The principle of EVEL is perfectly correct but this is the wrong way to go about it. We need Scottish, English, Welsh and NI parliaments all with identically devolved powers. And preferably the members meeting up two days a week at Westminster for UK business rather than having double the MPs!

Trying to get the UK Parliament to double up as the English Parliament with some ugly "quick fix" is a complete disaster. It will end badly!
		
Click to expand...

:thup:

Couldn't agree more.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Oct 22, 2015)

Meantime it just gives the SNP more ammunition for their twisted views, and they're not wasting any time.....




			Stewart Hosie &#8207;@StewartHosieSNP  23m23 minutes ago
When they said "better together" they meant second class. When they said "lead don't leave" they meant Scots votes don't count. #EVEL
		
Click to expand...


----------



## chrisd (Oct 22, 2015)

FairwayDodger said:



			Meantime it just gives the SNP more ammunition for their twisted views, and they're not wasting any time.....
		
Click to expand...

I'm just stunned that the SNP don't like the plan :rofl:


----------



## Duckster (Oct 22, 2015)

Personally I don't care what the SNP think about it.  Any laws effecting just England should have absolutely nothing to do with Scottish or Welsh MP's.

I'm happy with it, the lads at work have been chatting about and are all in agreement that it's about time.

Some of us are simply sick to the back teeth with all the debates going on about Scotland, Wales & NI yet finally when the English get something.....


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Oct 22, 2015)

FairwayDodger said:



			Dear god why is it so hard to understand!?

The principle of EVEL is perfectly correct but this is the wrong way to go about it. We need Scottish, English, Welsh and NI parliaments all with identically devolved powers. And preferably the members meeting up two days a week at Westminster for UK business rather than having double the MPs!

Trying to get the UK Parliament to double up as the English Parliament with some ugly "quick fix" is a complete disaster. It will end badly!
		
Click to expand...

Totally agree......I do not think you will find a sane person in the UK who would disagree to an English Parliament.
Westminster is the UK Parliament and should remain so.
If it does not there will obviously be no need for the UK.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Oct 22, 2015)

Duckster said:



			Personally I don't care what the SNP think about it.  Any laws effecting just England should have absolutely nothing to do with Scottish or Welsh MP's.

I'm happy with it, the lads at work have been chatting about and are all in agreement that it's about time.

Some of us are simply sick to the back teeth with all the debates going on about Scotland, Wales & NI yet finally when the English get something.....
		
Click to expand...

That something would be the UK Parliament.:lol:


----------



## c1973 (Oct 22, 2015)

PhilTheFragger said:



			Yes but it gives Sheriff Donkey Brain, who is his wifes  brother, and also the Mayor, loads of power in CowPat County Arizona  

Click to expand...

And? 

They let Sturgeon loose up here, what's the difference?


----------



## c1973 (Oct 22, 2015)

FairwayDodger said:



			Dear god why is it so hard to understand!?

The principle of EVEL is perfectly correct but this is the wrong way to go about it. We need Scottish, English, Welsh and NI parliaments all with identically devolved powers. And preferably the members meeting up two days a week at Westminster for UK business rather than having double the MPs!

Trying to get the UK Parliament to double up as the English Parliament with some ugly "quick fix" is a complete disaster. It will end badly!
		
Click to expand...

Yeah, but that would be too easy, it'd never work. 


The principle is sound. Execution? Not so sound.




Better still, close the wee kiddy on talking shop parliaments and go back to a single UK Government!  That'd get my vote.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Oct 22, 2015)

...and so with the vote going the governments way that's us with EVEL on it's way.  Does anyone know what it actually is; how it will work etc?  So the House of Commons of the UK Parliament that has been in place for a few hundred years has been crucially changed - almost on a whim - and with hardly a by-your-leave to the UK electorate.  That's OK then.  Well onwards - to what?  Most obvious thing is that there will most likely never again be a Prime Minister or Cabinet Member from a Scottish Westminster Parliamentary constituency - just one thing that shows that Westminster can no longer be considered a UK Parliament.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Oct 22, 2015)

c1973 said:



			Yeah, but that would be too easy, it'd never work. 


The principle is sound. Execution? Not so sound.




*Better still, close the wee kiddy on talking shop parliaments and go back to a single UK Government! * That'd get my vote.
		
Click to expand...

Can't now happen as the permanence of the Scottish parliament is enshrined in the Scottish Powers bill currently going through parliament


----------



## c1973 (Oct 22, 2015)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Can't now happen as the permanence of the Scottish parliament is enshrined in the Scottish Powers bill currently going through parliament
		
Click to expand...

Key words,  going through.  

They could (should imo) alter it and just say,  sod it sell off Holyrood for housing, pay the lot of the chancers off and go back to the real Parliament. File it under massive expensive mistake.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Oct 22, 2015)

c1973 said:



			Key words,  going through.  

They could (should imo) alter it and just say,  sod it sell off Holyrood for housing, pay the lot of the chancers off and go back to the real Parliament. File it under massive expensive mistake. 

Click to expand...

Also too late - EVEL is going through - can't have EVEL and no devolution to Scotland, NI and Wales


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Oct 22, 2015)

I wonder what difference it will really make 

As with most of the things the main desicions that effect most of us are decided by all of them anyway

How many times really will we see a situation were there will be English only voting ?


----------



## Sweep (Oct 22, 2015)

FairwayDodger said:



			Dear god why is it so hard to understand!?

The principle of EVEL is perfectly correct but this is the wrong way to go about it. We need Scottish, English, Welsh and NI parliaments all with identically devolved powers. And preferably the members meeting up two days a week at Westminster for UK business rather than having double the MPs!

Trying to get the UK Parliament to double up as the English Parliament with some ugly "quick fix" is a complete disaster. It will end badly!
		
Click to expand...

Or..... And here is a radical idea..... Just have one government for the whole nation.
Without devolution there would be no need for EVEL, so all those from Scotland, NI and Wales who wanted devolution should not utter a peep when the English want English MP's to decide on England only matters. It is only what they wanted after all. For a Scotsman who lives in England to say this is arrogant is arrogance itself.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Oct 22, 2015)

I wonder what the Queen of Scots has to say on the matter ?

I have never been a fan of the House of Lords but for once I hope they stop this madness in it's tracks.


----------



## Sweep (Oct 22, 2015)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			...and so with the vote going the governments way that's us with EVEL on it's way.  Does anyone know what it actually is; how it will work etc?  So the House of Commons of the UK Parliament that has been in place for a few hundred years has been crucially changed - almost on a whim - and with hardly a by-your-leave to the UK electorate.  That's OK then.  Well onwards - to what?  Most obvious thing is that there will most likely never again be a Prime Minister or Cabinet Member from a Scottish Westminster Parliamentary constituency - just one thing that shows that Westminster can no longer be considered a UK Parliament.
		
Click to expand...

That's right. The House of Commons of the UK Parliament that has been in place for a few hundred years has changed. But not by EVEL. By devolution in the first place. Until then, the UK Parliament governed the whole of the UK. And EVEL has not happened on a whim. It was in the Conservative manifesto. It had to happen because the English people, you remember them, the silent majority you never hear from, finally got sick to the back teeth of whinging Scots who would rather be run by Brussels than Westminster. Fed up hearing them bleat on about independence, but only if they could take the best of Britain with them, like the pound and relying on the UK to protect them in the event of a war, because we all know how much the Scots don't want nuclear weapons on their soil. To listen to them now, you would never believe they themselves voted against independence.
So, if English MP's can't vote on Scottish matters, what makes you think Scottish MP's should vote on English only matters? Face facts. EVEL only came about because of devolution. If you don't like it, I suggest you direct your anger at your beloved First Minister rather than Mr. Cameron.


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Oct 23, 2015)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			...and so with the vote going the governments way that's us with EVEL on it's way.  Does anyone know what it actually is; how it will work etc?  So the House of Commons of the UK Parliament that has been in place for a few hundred years has been crucially changed - almost on a whim - and with hardly a by-your-leave to the UK electorate.  That's OK then.  Well onwards - to what?  M*ost obvious thing is that there will most likely never again be a Prime Minister or Cabinet Member from a Scottish Westminster Parliamentary constituency* - just one thing that shows that Westminster can no longer be considered a UK Parliament.
		
Click to expand...

Re: the bold, why on earth would you think that?!


----------



## CheltenhamHacker (Oct 23, 2015)

FairwayDodger said:



			Dear god why is it so hard to understand!?

The principle of EVEL is perfectly correct but this is the wrong way to go about it. We need Scottish, English, Welsh and NI parliaments all with identically devolved powers. And preferably the members meeting up two days a week at Westminster for UK business rather than having double the MPs!

Trying to get the UK Parliament to double up as the English Parliament with some ugly "quick fix" is a complete disaster. It will end badly!
		
Click to expand...

This sort of comment really annoys me. Why would you even think about trying to bring "logic" and "reason" to this conversation. Just because your idea would be cheaper, easier to run, more visible as to split roles, potentially more representative, and generally better, why would you think that makes a sensible suggestion!


----------



## FairwayDodger (Oct 23, 2015)

Moreover, if people could see beyond their anti-Scottish bias they'd realise that EVEL is so poorly conceived that it's bad for England as well.

As I understand it, it gives English MPs a veto over anything Westminster passes that only pertains to England. If that's correct, what it doesn't do is allow them to vote through an English-only matter that has already been rejected by the full parliament, including Scottish/Welsh/NI votes.

Basically a rabble-rousing PR exercise by Cameron that fails to deliver devolution to England but still drives another wedge between our nations.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Oct 23, 2015)

Sweep said:



			Or..... And here is a radical idea..... Just have one government for the whole nation.
		
Click to expand...

The good old days! I totally agree.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Oct 23, 2015)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			This sort of comment really annoys me. Why would you even think about trying to bring "logic" and "reason" to this conversation. Just because your idea would be cheaper, easier to run, more visible as to split roles, potentially more representative, and generally better, why would you think that makes a sensible suggestion!
		
Click to expand...

I'm just a dreamer!


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Oct 23, 2015)

FairwayDodger said:



			Moreover, if people could see beyond their anti-Scottish bias they'd realise that EVEL is so poorly conceived that it's bad for England as well.

As I understand it, it gives English MPs a veto over anything Westminster passes that only pertains to England. If that's correct, what it doesn't do is allow them to vote through an English-only matter that has already been rejected by the full parliament, including Scottish/Welsh/NI votes.

Basically a rabble-rousing PR exercise by Cameron that fails to deliver devolution to England but still drives another wedge between our nations.
		
Click to expand...

Summed up well 

If the conservatives want the UK to stay as one they are going the wrong way about it 

Bad feelings are growing on a daily basis and it's not good


----------



## Crazyface (Oct 23, 2015)

Duckster said:



			Personally I don't care what the SNP think about it.  Any laws effecting just England should have absolutely nothing to do with Scottish or Welsh MP's.

I'm happy with it, the lads at work have been chatting about and are all in agreement that it's about time.

Some of us are simply sick to the back teeth with all the debates going on about Scotland, Wales & NI yet finally when the English get something.....
		
Click to expand...

And Cameron just goes on setting things up to make sure the Tories get in again. He's a good listener.


----------



## Sweep (Oct 23, 2015)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Summed up well 

If the conservatives want the UK to stay as one they are going the wrong way about it 

Bad feelings are growing on a daily basis and it's not good
		
Click to expand...

I don't disagree, but I don't think you can blame the Conservatives for reacting to a current situation created by others. To do so would be to say that the English should be treated unfairly in an effort to keep the peace and the Union. As it's the English who mainly pay for the Union and the fact that our TV screens are filled on a nightly basis with Nicola Cranky and Dr Spock, spouting their anti Union diatribe, you can't really blame the Conservatives for the growth of bad feelings.
The Scots had a fair vote. The Scots themselves voted to stay in the Union. It's over. Before the vote, you only heard from the Nats. Since the vote we have only heard from the Nats. Maybe it's time for the silent, sensible majority of Scots to speak up again, otherwise bad feeling will continue to grow. It's human nature, if someone tells you they hate you for long enough, you tend to start hating them.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Oct 23, 2015)

The English could set up a new parliament, overspend millions in building it, spend millions staffing it, having a new level of representatives (more cost) and on and on it goes. Alternatively, for the odd occasions when an English only issue arises the current English MP's could vote alone and decide the issue without the millions / billions required for setting up a new parliament. Unless of course the SNP would like a the Scottish parliament to receive a reduction in funding due to the UK govt having to pay to set this new parliament up?

Once the devolution bandwagon was set rolling then some inevitablities were set in place. Increased animosity and a split in the union are two that immediately spring to mind. Whoever thought they would not happen are deluding themselves.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Oct 23, 2015)

Lord Tyrion said:



			The English could set up a new parliament, overspend millions in building it, spend millions staffing it, having a new level of representatives (more cost) and on and on it goes. Alternatively, for the odd occasions when an English only issue arises the current English MP's could vote alone and decide the issue without the millions / billions required for setting up a new parliament. Unless of course the SNP would like a the Scottish parliament to receive a reduction in funding due to the UK govt having to pay to set this new parliament up?
		
Click to expand...

This is basically what has happened for the last 20 years......very seldom have Scots MP's [will people please stop calling then SNP MP's for this threads sanity] voted on English only matters. There are obviously some grey areas where English laws will impact on the Scots.
[Let's take the legalisation of heroin as a spoof example]
The choice to abstain from English only matters is made by the Scots MP's.......the problem is that The Tories wish to take that choice away and submit that choice to the Speaker.

Now remind me ......how is the Speaker elected or dismissed.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Oct 23, 2015)

The Speaker is neutral, currently a Conservative liked by Labour and others. Done a pretty good job of staying neutral. He will make the decision along with two other senior MP's is my understanding.

Very seldom is still too often. Choosing to abstain or not should not be an option. After all English MP's do not influence matters in the Scottish or Welsh parliaments. That is the whole point.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Oct 23, 2015)

CheltenhamHacker said:



			Re: the bold, why on earth would you think that?!
		
Click to expand...

Because he or she would not be able to vote on any matter determined to be for EVEL - so we'd have a UK PM not able to vote on a major piece of English legislation - or Cabinet Minister not able to vote on a major piece of English legislation from his own department?  And how could you have a PM or Cabinet minister expressing a view on their own legislation when they'd be told to butt out - nothing to do with them.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Oct 23, 2015)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I wonder what the Queen of Scots has to say on the matter ?

I have never been a fan of the House of Lords but for once I hope they stop this madness in it's tracks.
		
Click to expand...

Was EVEL in the Tory manifesto?  One thing reported and being discussed about the Lords is that they tend not to stop legislation arising from the governing parties previous GE manifesto.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Oct 23, 2015)

Sweep said:



			I don't disagree, but I don't think you can blame the Conservatives for reacting to a current situation created by others. To do so would be to say that the English should be treated unfairly in an effort to keep the peace and the Union. As it's the English who mainly pay for the Union and the fact that our TV screens are filled on a nightly basis with Nicola Cranky and Dr Spock, spouting their anti Union diatribe, you can't really blame the Conservatives for the growth of bad feelings.
The Scots had a fair vote. The Scots themselves voted to stay in the Union. It's over. Before the vote, you only heard from the Nats. Since the vote we have only heard from the Nats. Maybe it's time for the silent, sensible majority of Scots to speak up again, otherwise bad feeling will continue to grow. It's human nature, if someone tells you they hate you for long enough, you tend to start hating them.
		
Click to expand...

The English through their MPs have always effectively had the power to vote on what is good for England and that may not be for the rest of the UK - after all of the 650 MPs 533 are English.  England has always been able to get whatever it wants - it doesn't need 'devolution' just agreement between English MPs across parties.  And if a government can't get that - well that's democracy - but the ability to get for England whatever the government of the day wants has always been there,


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Oct 23, 2015)

Lord Tyrion said:



			The Speaker is neutral, currently a Conservative liked by Labour and others. Done a pretty good job of staying neutral. He will make the decision along with two other senior MP's is my understanding.

Very seldom is still too often. Choosing to abstain or not should not be an option. After all English MP's do not influence matters in the Scottish or Welsh parliaments. That is the whole point.
		
Click to expand...

But neither is there English representation in either of the Scottish or Welsh Parliaments.  But English MPs can and do influence what happens in the Scottish Parliament - through the decisions they make in Westminster that impact through Barnett formula funding or that possibly might mean the Scottish Parliament has to pragmatically follow the Westminster lead - even if the matter is devolved.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Oct 23, 2015)

Lord Tyrion said:



			The Speaker is neutral, currently a Conservative liked by Labour and others. Done a pretty good job of staying neutral. He will make the decision along with two other senior MP's is my understanding.

Very seldom is still too often. Choosing to abstain or not should not be an option. After all English MP's do not influence matters in the Scottish or Welsh parliaments. That is the whole point.
		
Click to expand...

....and William Hague's parting shot on the last day of the Con/Dem Parliament was to try and bring in a double sneeky motion to sack the Speaker.....disgraceful behaviour from a former Tory leader. Remember the tearful reply from the duped Tory back bencher....I'd rather be seen as a fool than a man with no integrity.

Why would the Tories want to sack a Speaker who had been widely supported by MP's as neutral and honest.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Oct 23, 2015)

Clearly there is going to be cross over. To remove that you need independence and despite what many seem to have forgotten, the Scots voted No to that. No, remember. If you work on the view that all legislation has crossover then you would need to remove devolution, not popular methinks. The reality is you have to accept that certain pieces are about one country alone and whilst there may be a financial impact on others that is just how it works when you have 4 countries living together.

Pretty certain EVEL was in their manifesto although not able to 100% confirm it, didn't read it, didn't consider it a vote changer.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Oct 23, 2015)

Lord Tyrion said:



			Clearly there is going to be cross over. To remove that you need independence and despite what many seem to have forgotten, the Scots voted No to that. No, remember. If you work on the view that all legislation has crossover then you would need to remove devolution, not popular methinks. The reality is you have to accept that certain pieces are about one country alone and whilst there may be a financial impact on others that is just how it works when you have 4 countries living together.

Pretty certain EVEL was in their manifesto although not able to 100% confirm it, didn't read it, didn't consider it a vote changer.
		
Click to expand...

The conservative manifesto included bringing in a veto for English MPs 
_
EVEL: The manifesto promises English MPs a veto over matters that only affect England, and extend this policy to financial matters â€“ including the possibility of an English income tax rate if the matter has been devolved elsewhere._


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Oct 23, 2015)

Sweep said:



			I don't disagree, but I don't think you can blame the Conservatives for reacting to a current situation created by others. To do so would be to say that the English should be treated unfairly in an effort to keep the peace and the Union. As it's the English who mainly pay for the Union and the fact that our TV screens are filled on a nightly basis with Nicola Cranky and Dr Spock, spouting their anti Union diatribe, you can't really blame the Conservatives for the growth of bad feelings.
The Scots had a fair vote. The Scots themselves voted to stay in the Union. It's over. Before the vote, you only heard from the Nats. Since the vote we have only heard from the Nats. Maybe it's time for the silent, sensible majority of Scots to speak up again, otherwise bad feeling will continue to grow. It's human nature, if someone tells you they hate you for long enough, you tend to start hating them.
		
Click to expand...

I think you will find that the sensible majority of of Scots now want Independence:lol:
A few thousands more after yesterday.


----------



## ger147 (Oct 23, 2015)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I think you will find that the sensible majority of of Scots now want Independence:lol:
A few thousands more after yesterday.
		
Click to expand...

I think not...


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Oct 23, 2015)

ger147 said:



			I think not...
		
Click to expand...

Agree or disagree - I don't think it helps the Unionist cause - despite conservative protestations to the contrary,


----------



## c1973 (Oct 23, 2015)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I think you will find that the sensible majority of of Scots now want Independence:lol:
A few thousands more after yesterday.
		
Click to expand...


Oh FFS give it up. 

Polls prove nothing, voting does and we've done that. Move on.....please! 




And folk have a pop at Delc, and his threads get pulled for alleged repetitive nonsense!


----------



## ger147 (Oct 23, 2015)

c1973 said:



			Oh FFS give it up. 

Polls prove nothing, voting does and we've done that. Move on.....please! 


And folk have a pop at Delc, and his threads get pulled for alleged repetitive nonsense!
		
Click to expand...

The polls still have support for Independence lagging behind in the polls, same as they were at the time of the actual vote itself, hence my previous I think not reply.


----------



## FairwayDodger (Oct 23, 2015)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Agree or disagree - I don't think it helps the Unionist cause - despite conservative protestations to the contrary,
		
Click to expand...

This is the crux of the matter. The SNP will milk this shambles for all it's worth and, IMO, the union is less secure today as a consequence.

Not, I repeat, because of EVEL as a principle, but because of the shoddy "quick fix" the tories have tried to do with it.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Oct 23, 2015)

FairwayDodger said:



			This is the crux of the matter. The SNP will milk this shambles for all it's worth and, IMO, the union is less secure today as a consequence.

Not, I repeat, because of EVEL as a principle, but because of the shoddy "quick fix" the tories have tried to do with it.
		
Click to expand...

THis is how I see it also.  A shoddy quick fix to appease and please a section of the English electorate that will create a mess.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Oct 23, 2015)

ger147 said:



			The polls still have support for Independence lagging behind in the polls, same as they were at the time of the actual vote itself, hence my previous I think not reply.
		
Click to expand...

http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/polls_scot.html

Not this one seemingly.


----------



## ger147 (Oct 23, 2015)

Doon frae Troon said:



http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/polls_scot.html

Not this one seemingly.
		
Click to expand...

YouGov have been tracking it all year...

http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.ne...rf1qtc9id/YG-trackers-Scottish-Referendum.pdfA

And your link has nothing to do with Independence, it shows support for the various parties in an election.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Oct 23, 2015)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			THis is how I see it also.  A shoddy quick fix to appease and please a section of the English electorate that will create a mess.
		
Click to expand...

Spot on.......bound to end in a guggle.


----------



## chrisd (Oct 23, 2015)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I think you will find that the sensible majority of of Scots now want Independence:lol:
A few thousands more after yesterday.
		
Click to expand...

Does anyone else care?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Oct 23, 2015)

ger147 said:



			YouGov have been tracking it all year...

http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.ne...rf1qtc9id/YG-trackers-Scottish-Referendum.pdfA

And your link has nothing to do with Independence, it shows support for the various parties in an election.
		
Click to expand...

My link shows support for the SNP. That would be the party that wishes Independence for Scotland. 
Mind you there are some weird folk like me who support the SNP but would rather have devo max within a UK structure.

Also interesting from your You Gov poll was that Yes has increased it's support by 12 points and the No has lost 3 points from Jan 2014.

As the say momentum in politics is a strange thing.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Oct 23, 2015)

chrisd said:



			Does anyone else care?
		
Click to expand...

You do obviously hence your Homeresque reply:lol:


----------



## chrisd (Oct 23, 2015)

Doon frae Troon said:



			My link shows support for the SNP. That would be the party that wishes Independence for Scotland. 
Mind you there are some weird folk like me who support the SNP but would rather have devo max within a UK structure.

Also interesting from your You Gov poll was that Yes has increased it's support by 12 points and the No has lost 3 points from Jan 2014.

As the say momentum in politics is a strange thing.
		
Click to expand...

The poll says nothing about independence. 

Funny that you want devo max but when England want it we're wrong?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Oct 23, 2015)

chrisd said:



			The poll says nothing about independence. 

Funny that you want devo max but when England want it we're wrong?
		
Click to expand...

ahhhhh you care after all.

I would be more than happy for England to have Devo Max but as England do not have their own Parliament how would that work?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Oct 23, 2015)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I think you will find that the sensible majority of of Scots now want Independence:lol:
A few thousands more after yesterday.
		
Click to expand...

Can you provide the proof to back up the statement please :thup:


----------



## Paul77 (Oct 23, 2015)

If we can't have a say or a vote on what goes n down south, then is it fair that we help pay for anything that comes out of it as a result? I.E. things that only affect England. Why should Wales, NI and Scotland pay for that? Works the other way around too. This is why it's all totally bonkers.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Oct 23, 2015)

chrisd said:



			Does anyone else care?
		
Click to expand...

Cameron does - he tells us that EVEL is intended to counter devolution and strengthen the UK bond.


----------



## ger147 (Oct 23, 2015)

Doon frae Troon said:



			My link shows support for the SNP. That would be the party that wishes Independence for Scotland. 
Mind you there are some weird folk like me who support the SNP but would rather have devo max within a UK structure.

Also interesting from your You Gov poll was that Yes has increased it's support by 12 points and the No has lost 3 points from Jan 2014.

As the say momentum in politics is a strange thing.
		
Click to expand...

Thank you for confirming that the link you posted does not support your statement re. a majority of Scots now support Independence. 

The link I posted to opinion polls carried out throughout 2015 suggests that current support is the same as it was in Sept 2014 when the No's won.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Oct 23, 2015)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Can you provide the proof to back up the statement please :thup:
		
Click to expand...

How about 55/6/7 MP's out of 59.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Oct 23, 2015)

Paul77 said:



*If we can't have a say or a vote on what goes n down south*, then is it fair that we help pay for anything that comes out of it as a result? I.E. things that only affect England. Why should Wales, NI and Scotland pay for that? Works the other way around too. This is why it's all totally bonkers.
		
Click to expand...

But you already do...there are 533 English MPs out of 650 - anything England really wants it can already get - all that is required is for one party in England to have a large enough majority or for the parties to agree, and there would be nothing Scotland (NI and Wales) could do about it.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Oct 23, 2015)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Can you provide the proof to back up the statement please :thup:
		
Click to expand...

Wouldn't take much though - a 0.1% increase in support for independence would yield over 4000 votes (that'll take care of Doon's _A few thousands more after yesterday._)


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Oct 23, 2015)

ger147 said:



			Thank you for confirming that the link you posted does not support your statement re. a majority of Scots now support Independence. 

The link I posted to opinion polls carried out throughout 2015 suggests that current support is the same as it was in Sept 2014 when the No's won.
		
Click to expand...

Shall we wait and see what the next one is


----------



## c1973 (Oct 23, 2015)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Can you provide the proof to back up the statement please :thup:
		
Click to expand...

Obviously not judging by the attempts so far. :smirk:


----------



## ger147 (Oct 23, 2015)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Shall we wait and see what the next one is

Click to expand...

Maybe you should have waited before you made your statement.


----------



## ger147 (Oct 23, 2015)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Wouldn't take much though - a 0.1% increase in support for independence would yield over 4000 votes (that'll take care of Doon's _A few thousands more after yesterday._)
		
Click to expand...

It would need a 5.1% increase for the "majority of Scots" statement to be true which it clearly isn't at present.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Oct 23, 2015)

Doon frae Troon said:



			How about 55/6/7 MP's out of 59.
		
Click to expand...

Sorry that's not proof to back up your statement in regards the majority want independence 

Please provide proof to back up your statement


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Oct 23, 2015)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Wouldn't take much though - a 0.1% increase in support for independence would yield over 4000 votes (that'll take care of Doon's _A few thousands more after yesterday._)
		
Click to expand...

Irrelevant 

Doon says that the majority support independence 

Would like to see proof of that


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Oct 23, 2015)

ger147 said:



			It would need a 5.1% increase for the "majority of Scots" statement to be true which it clearly isn't at present.
		
Click to expand...

I was commenting on Doon's statement _that'll take care of Doon's A few thousands more after yesterday_

Of course there is no proof that it will (how can you prove the future anyway) - but it wouldn't be difficult

The Scottish electorate is about 4.4m - the arithmetic is easy.

(5.1% swing would require nett 220,000 changes of mind - but that's the answer to a different question)


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Oct 23, 2015)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Irrelevant 

Doon says that the majority support independence 

Would like to see proof of that
		
Click to expand...

Not irrelevant in response to '_a few thousand more'_.

And a bit soon to see proof of anything following yesterday's announcement - though I don't think in the short term EVEL will make that much difference to the  numbers in the YES camp.


----------



## ger147 (Oct 23, 2015)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			I was commenting on Doon's statement _that'll take care of Doon's A few thousands more after yesterday_

Of course there is no proof that it will (how can you prove the future anyway) - but it wouldn't be difficult

The Scottish electorate is about 4.4m - the arithmetic is easy.

(5.1% swing would require nett 220,000 changes of mind - but that's the answer to a different question)
		
Click to expand...

And I was replying to his statement that the majority of Scots now support Independence. There is no evidence to support this statement, indeed all available evidence suggests the opposite is true.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Oct 23, 2015)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Not irrelevant in response to '_a few thousand more'_.

And a bit soon to see proof of anything following yesterday's announcement - though I don't think in the short term EVEL will make that much difference to the  numbers in the YES camp.
		
Click to expand...

It really is quite simple

Doon said - I think you will find that the sensible majority now want independence or words to that effect 

A number have asked for proof to back up the statement 

You going on about stuff that is irrelevant to the question I asked makes no difference

Would like to see Doon prove his statement is factually correct 

Have seen proof from another poster that shows that Doon's statement is false 

Unless you can provide proof ?


----------



## Val (Oct 23, 2015)

Doon frae Troon said:



			How about 55/6/7 MP's out of 59.
		
Click to expand...

Support for the SNP is not support for independence, I said it prior to the GE and you agreed. I would argue that support for the SNP increased due to failure of Labour rather than what the Torries or the SNP themselves did. The SNP are the only alternative to Labour in Scotland, that does mean it is support for independence.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Oct 23, 2015)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I think you will find that the sensible majority of of Scots now want Independence:lol:
*A few thousands more after yesterday*.
		
Click to expand...

0.1% of Scottish electorate is over 4000 - that is 'A few thousands more' and won't seem to be too difficult to find.  I do not know if the first part of the statement is true or not.


----------



## Val (Oct 23, 2015)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			0.1% of Scottish electorate is over 4000 - that is 'A few thousands more' and won't seem to be too difficult to find.  I do not know if the first part of the statement is true or not.
		
Click to expand...

It's not true, it's the type of statement we've seen from him without substance for the best part of 18 months now.


----------



## ger147 (Oct 23, 2015)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			0.1% of Scottish electorate is over 4000 - that is 'A few thousands more' and won't seem to be too difficult to find. *I do not know if the first part of the statement is true or not*.
		
Click to expand...

It's not.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Oct 23, 2015)

ger147 said:



			It's not.
		
Click to expand...

We all know it isn't and it's another statement from Doon without factual basis or evidence - hence the silence


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Oct 23, 2015)

Liverpoolphil said:



			We all know it isn't and it's another statement from Doon without factual basis or evidence - hence the silence
		
Click to expand...


Ah - but polls are just that.  They are estimates and not the fact.  Nobody actually knows the fact of the matter as it is today - it was Reagan I think who said _'the truth is what the people believe'_


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Oct 23, 2015)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Ah - but polls are just that.  They are estimates and not the fact.  Nobody actually knows the fact of the matter as it is today.
		
Click to expand...

What does that have to do with what I said ?


----------



## PhilTheFragger (Oct 23, 2015)

Im fed up of certain people continually asking for proof when it is clear that someone has voiced an opinion that simply cannot be substantiated, therefore what is the point of asking.

It happens again and again and it needs to stop please

have your opinions and agree to disagree, just stop this relentless quest for proof coz its doing my chuffing head in and no doubt many others too:rant:


----------



## Fish (Oct 23, 2015)

PhilTheFragger said:



			Im fed up of certain people continually asking for proof when it is clear that someone has voiced an opinion that simply cannot be substantiated, therefore what is the point of asking.

It happens again and again and it needs to stop please

have your opinions and agree to disagree, just stop this relentless quest for proof coz *its doing my chuffing head in and no doubt many others too*:rant:
		
Click to expand...

Prove it :ears:


----------



## c1973 (Oct 23, 2015)

PhilTheFragger said:



			Im fed up of certain people continually asking for proof when it is clear that someone has voiced an opinion that simply cannot be substantiated, therefore what is the point of asking.

It happens again and again and it needs to stop please

have your opinions and agree to disagree, just stop this relentless quest for proof coz its doing my chuffing head in and no doubt many others too:rant:
		
Click to expand...

Can't say I agree. 

It's pretty clear that the poster is (and has for quite some time in these type of threads) puting opinion out as a factual statement. 

And it's plainly clear that it does quite a few posters chuffing heads in as well. :thup:


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Oct 23, 2015)

PhilTheFragger said:



			Im fed up of certain people continually asking for proof when it is clear that someone has voiced an opinion that simply cannot be substantiated, therefore what is the point of asking.

It happens again and again and it needs to stop please

have your opinions and agree to disagree, just stop this relentless quest for proof coz its doing my chuffing head in and no doubt many others too:rant:
		
Click to expand...

Thank you Phil.  
I have not responded as I am not able to see into the future.

Right then........everyone happy that from now on we will only have English PM's and top four cabinet post holders.
I'm not, but I seem to be alone.


----------



## chrisd (Oct 23, 2015)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Doon said - I think you will find that the sensible majority now want independence
		
Click to expand...

I've sussed it - I think he means that the Scots are devided into sensible and not sensible and, assuming the mid point is 50% that are deemed sensible then the majority of sensibles could be 51% of that 50%.  Therefore the non sensible 50% plus 24% of the sensibles who dont want independence are nearly three quarters of the total Scots vote = no independence!

Easy!


----------



## Fish (Oct 23, 2015)

chrisd said:



			I've sussed it - I think he means that the Scots are devided into sensible and not sensible and, assuming the mid point is 50% that are deemed sensible then the majority of sensibles could be 51% of that 50%.  Therefore the non sensible 50% plus 24% of the sensibles who dont want independence are nearly three quarters of the total Scots vote = no independence!

Easy!
		
Click to expand...

:rofl:


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Oct 23, 2015)

chrisd said:



			I've sussed it - I think he means that the Scots are devided into sensible and not sensible and, assuming the mid point is 50% that are deemed sensible then the majority of sensibles could be 51% of that 50%.  Therefore the non sensible 50% plus 24% of the sensibles who dont want independence are nearly three quarters of the total Scots vote = no independence!

Easy!
		
Click to expand...

:rofl:


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Oct 23, 2015)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Thank you Phil.  
I have not responded as I am not able to see into the future.

Right then........everyone happy that from now on we will only have English PM's and top four cabinet post holders.
I'm not, but I seem to be alone.
		
Click to expand...

Your statement of fact wasn't suggesting the future it was suggesting right now - hence why people wanted to see some substance behind it 

If you posted it about the future , then it becomes an opinion and you should have worded it as such - but it was clear by the responses by a number of people that it read as a statement of fact right now and you went silent due to a failure to back it up 

Right now the "polls" which a good judgement suggest that the people of Scotland right now still don't wan independence.


----------



## c1973 (Oct 23, 2015)




----------



## Fish (Oct 23, 2015)

c1973 said:



View attachment 17309

Click to expand...


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Oct 23, 2015)

Seen it suggested here and on Twitter that this means there will no longer be anything but an English PM - I'm struggling to understand that bit ?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Oct 23, 2015)

c1973 said:



View attachment 17309

Click to expand...

I know, I got the same sort of response when I predicted the SNP would take 40 seats in the last GE.
How wrong was that.

So....no future Irish, Scots Or Welsh MP's able to become PM.
How do we all feel about that ?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Oct 23, 2015)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I know, I got the same sort of response when I predicted the SNP would take 40 seats in the last GE.
How wrong was that.

So....no future Irish, Scots Or Welsh MP's able to become PM.
How do we all feel about that ?
		
Click to expand...

Has a rule been changed to stop there being a Scottish or Welsh etc future Pm then ?


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Oct 23, 2015)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Seen it suggested here and on Twitter that this means there will no longer be anything but an English PM - I'm struggling to understand that bit ?
		
Click to expand...

I'll make it simple for you.
He or she would not be able to speak on English only matters


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Oct 23, 2015)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I'll make it simple for you.
He or she would not be able to speak on English only matters
		
Click to expand...

And ? That still doesn't stop a Scot being elected as PM if his or her party got elected


----------



## Fish (Oct 23, 2015)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I'll make it simple for you.
He or she would not be able to speak on English only matters
		
Click to expand...




Liverpoolphil said:



			And ? That still doesn't stop a Scot being elected as PM if his or her party got elected
		
Click to expand...

I'm confused by this, I haven't read up on it all so forgive my ignorance.

Are you saying that if a Scottish person was elected as PM, and irrelevant of their party, just because he/she was Scottish, Irish or Welsh they wouldn't be able to speak on English matters only, even though they were the elected PM of the UK, which obviously includes England?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Oct 23, 2015)

Fish said:



			I'm confused by this, I haven't read up on it all so forgive my ignorance.

Are you saying that if a Scottish person was elected as PM, and irrelevant of their party, just because he/she was Scottish, Irish or Welsh they wouldn't be able to speak on English matters only, even though they were the elected PM of the UK, which obviously includes England?
		
Click to expand...

I'm going to guess that as an MP if the PM was Scottish he wouldn't be able to vote on a matter that is for an English Constitutional Area possibly ? 

It appears it would be the same as the current PM can't vote on something the Scottish Office vote on ?


----------



## NWJocko (Oct 23, 2015)

Fish said:



			I'm confused by this, I haven't read up on it all so forgive my ignorance.

Are you saying that if a Scottish person was elected as PM, and irrelevant of their party, just because he/she was Scottish, Irish or Welsh they wouldn't be able to speak on English matters only, even though they were the elected PM of the UK, which obviously includes England?
		
Click to expand...

Only if they are an MP for a non-English constituency


----------



## NWJocko (Oct 23, 2015)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I'll make it simple for you.
He or she would not be able to speak on English only matters
		
Click to expand...

In the same way as the PM currently has no voice on Scottish/Welsh only matters I guess?

They are the PM of the UK government, not the devolved governments/assemblies.


----------



## c1973 (Oct 23, 2015)

Doon frae Troon said:



			I'll make it simple for you.
He or she would not be able to speak on English only matters
		
Click to expand...

Yes they would.

I'd suggest you actually find out a bit more on the actual subject matter, other than what you glean from your usual wings over Scotland source.
It's blatantly obvious you have no idea as to the facts but would rather spout ill conceived and contrived claptrap, passed off as facts (until challenged, whereupon you disappear after a bit of floundering around for an out). 

Move on from the nationalists propaganda and see if you can absorb some factual information for a change.


----------



## NWJocko (Oct 23, 2015)

c1973 said:



			Yes they would.

I'd suggest you actually find out a bit more on the actual subject matter, other than what you glean from your usual wings over Scotland source.
It's blatantly obvious you have no idea as to the facts but would rather spout ill conceived and contrived claptrap, passed off as facts (until challenged, whereupon you disappear after a bit of floundering around for an out). 

Move on from the nationalists propaganda and see if you can absorb some factual information for a change.
		
Click to expand...

It's funny when I pop in on Wings over Scotland now and again it's like an echo from Doon's posts on here!!


----------



## c1973 (Oct 23, 2015)

NWJocko said:



			It's funny when I pop in on Wings over Scotland now and again it's like an echo from Doon's posts on here!!
		
Click to expand...

Is it Wings or Whinge?


----------



## Fish (Oct 23, 2015)

NWJocko said:



			Only if they are an MP for a non-English constituency
		
Click to expand...

So if Gordon Brown was still PM he wouldn't have a vote because his constituency was Kirkcaldy & Cowdenbeath but if it was Luton, and even though he was Scottish, he then could vote?


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Oct 23, 2015)

Fish said:



			So if Gordon Brown was still PM he wouldn't have a vote because his constituency was Kirkcaldy & Cowdenbeath but if it was Luton, and even though he was Scottish, he then could vote?

Click to expand...

Think that sums it up :thup:


----------



## Val (Oct 23, 2015)

Doon, you'd get more credibility if you backed up your suggestions or even just said that you suggestions were your opinions but you don't and here lies everyone's beef with you.

Help yourself man


----------



## NWJocko (Oct 23, 2015)

Fish said:



			So if Gordon Brown was still PM he wouldn't have a vote because his constituency was Kirkcaldy & Cowdenbeath but if it was Luton, and even though he was Scottish, he then could vote?

Click to expand...

That's my understanding. Nationality has nowt to do with it.

Does anyone know how many times over the last, say, 2 years this would actually have been used!?


----------



## Fish (Oct 23, 2015)

c1973 said:



			Is it Wings or Whinge? 

Click to expand...

aren't they lady things 

:smirk:


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Oct 23, 2015)

NWJocko said:



			That's my understanding. Nationality has nowt to do with it.

Does anyone know how many times over the last, say, 2 years this would actually have been used!?
		
Click to expand...

The same question was asked by a caller into the radio 

The MP couldn't remember one time over the last couple years


----------



## ger147 (Oct 23, 2015)

NWJocko said:



			That's my understanding. Nationality has nowt to do with it.

Does anyone know how many times over the last, say, 2 years this would actually have been used!?
		
Click to expand...

Health and Education would be the biggies off the top of my head. So deffo not great if a PM finds himself on the outside looking in on the latest NHS or Education debate.


----------



## Ethan (Oct 23, 2015)

This Govt's entire platform consist of pandering to specific interest groups, in this case little Englanders and those who have always mistrusted the Scots. The NHS reforms are pandering to private healthcare companies posted to swoop in in due course and the Europe thing is pandering to anti-European sentiment on the right.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Oct 23, 2015)

ger147 said:



			Health and Education would be the biggies off the top of my head. So deffo not great if a PM finds himself on the outside looking in on the latest NHS or Education debate.
		
Click to expand...

The PM would still be able to be part of the discussion with his PM hat on 

Maybe the PM would have two votes - one for the PM hat and one for the MP hat ?


----------



## ger147 (Oct 23, 2015)

Liverpoolphil said:



			The PM would still be able to be part of the discussion with his PM hat on 

Maybe the PM would have two votes - one for the PM hat and one for the MP hat ?
		
Click to expand...

Just my opinion but I think it drives a cart & horses through all sorts of current precedents in Westminster e.g. the notion of collective responsibility, you can't hold the cabinet responsible for a policy they as a government don't support but has been forced on them by the English MP's. The same story at PMQ's, how can you hold the PM to account for his policies when some of them aren't his and he didn't vote to implement them? You effectively give the UK PM the same out that the SNP are criticised for in Scotland i.e. not my fault as I don't have the final say.

I am in favour of matters only affecting the English electorate to be decided in England but I can't envisage anything other than this approach ending up a complete disaster.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Oct 23, 2015)

ger147 said:



			Just my opinion but I think it drives a cart & horses through all sorts of current precedents in Westminster e.g. the notion of collective responsibility, you can't hold the cabinet responsible for a policy they as a government don't support but has been forced on them by the English MP's. The same story at PMQ's, how can you hold the PM to account for his policies when some of them aren't his and he didn't vote to implement them? You effectively give the UK PM the same out that the SNP are criticised for in Scotland i.e. not my fault as I don't have the final say.

I am in favour of matters only affecting the English electorate to be decided in England but I can't envisage anything other than this approach ending up a complete disaster.
		
Click to expand...

I guess right now the finer details etc aren't known because being simple it looks no issue but reality - well that's a different thing as I expect it to be a total mess of procedure that hasn't been thought through in any way


----------



## Hobbit (Oct 23, 2015)

Val said:



			Support for the SNP is not support for independence, I said it prior to the GE and you agreed. I would argue that support for the SNP increased due to failure of Labour rather than what the Torries or the SNP themselves did. The SNP are the only alternative to Labour in Scotland, that does mean it is support for independence.
		
Click to expand...

The voice of commonsense, which Doon is ignoring again.



Doon frae Troon said:



			Thank you Phil.  
I have not responded as I am not able to see into the future.

Right then........everyone happy that from now on we will only have English PM's and top four cabinet post holders.
I'm not, but I seem to be alone.
		
Click to expand...

Didn't see you whinging and whining when Labour were in power with the top table made up of Scottish MP's. 

As for another one of your comments about the *sensible ones* going over to the SNP. Its really sad when someone thinly suggests that those that don't support the SNP are idiots.

Appreciate its your opinion, but its so far out in left field it really doesn't do the Scottish argument any favours.


----------



## Sweep (Oct 23, 2015)

Ethan said:



			This Govt's entire platform consist of pandering to specific interest groups, in this case little Englanders and those who have always mistrusted the Scots. The NHS reforms are pandering to private healthcare companies posted to swoop in in due course and the Europe thing is pandering to anti-European sentiment on the right.
		
Click to expand...

You mean the specific interest groups that elected them, otherwise known as the majority?


----------



## bluewolf (Oct 24, 2015)

Sweep said:



			You mean the specific interest groups that elected them, otherwise known as the majority?
		
Click to expand...

Do the majority want an independent England, a Privatised NHS and out of Europe?  Or is this just what those with the loudest voices want?


----------



## Sweep (Oct 24, 2015)

bluewolf said:



			Do the majority want an independent England, a Privatised NHS and out of Europe?  Or is this just what those with the loudest voices want?
		
Click to expand...

If you listen to the loudest voices, you would think that Scotland would vote for independence. Even the politicians thought they were going to. This issue is nothing to do with an independent England. The English are the only people in the Union who have not debated independence or their own Parliament. No loud voice there. Despite what the loony left tell you, the NHS is not being privatised. They used to say that about the Thatcher and Heath governments, but it's still here. As for Europe, well let's wait and see where the majority stands on that, but the Tories are favouring staying in, albeit with significant changes.
The loudest voice is heard at the ballot box. Scotland voted to remain in the Union. The UK elected a Conservative government. Like it or not, those are the facts.


----------



## bluewolf (Oct 24, 2015)

Sweep said:



			If you listen to the loudest voices, you would think that Scotland would vote for independence. Even the politicians thought they were going to. This issue is nothing to do with an independent England. The English are the only people in the Union who have not debated independence or their own Parliament. No loud voice there. Despite what the loony left tell you, the NHS is not being privatised. They used to say that about the Thatcher and Heath governments, but it's still here. As for Europe, well let's wait and see where the majority stands on that, but the Tories are favouring staying in, albeit with significant changes.The loudest voice is heard at the ballot box. Scotland voted to remain in the Union. The UK elected a Conservative government. Like it or not, those are the facts.
		
Click to expand...

I can't argue with the result of a national vote obviously, but I will respectfully disagree with you on the point regarding who our government (and previous governments) truly represent. They may make policy that occasionally suits, but they aren't making it for you or me.


----------



## jp5 (Oct 24, 2015)

Sweep said:



			You mean the specific interest groups that elected them, otherwise known as the majority?
		
Click to expand...

Those that elected them were far from a majority.


----------



## chrisd (Oct 24, 2015)

jp5 said:



			Those that elected them were far from a majority.
		
Click to expand...

Yes it was, a majority as recognised by the system in place

It's a fair system.  Everyone has a right to vote if people are too apathetic to wander to the polling station once every 5 years then it's their look out if the government elected is not of their choosing.


----------



## jp5 (Oct 24, 2015)

chrisd said:



			Yes it was, a majority as recognised by the system in place

It's a fair system.  Everyone has a right to vote if people are too apathetic to wander to the polling station once every 5 years then it's their look out if the government elected is not of their choosing.
		
Click to expand...

The system in place produced a majority of MPs in the HoC.

I contested the point that "the majority" were those that elected them. They weren't.


----------

