Scotland Debate

[CMAC]

I'm now told Salmond has a speech impediment, is that to get the sympathy vote I wonder? or sympafy if Salmond said it.

I always assumed it was laziness or upbringing as he can say then and there and the but not commonwealf

Mark Crossfield is pretty bad for that, nightmare when he says he used a free wood at a par free and was out in firty free.

is this an actual recognised speech impediment? didn't know that.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

MoD is one of the Departments that adopts the (slightly arrogant) approach that they can simply requisition certain things without going through 'normal' procedure. They quite possibly have contingency plans for those Faslane and Coulport being out of commision for a period, but it wouldn't surprise me (and as you say, we'll never find out) if there a plans to cover permanent loss.

Business, on the other hand, is legally required to identify all major risks and develop plans to mitigate them - which is why the likes of Standard Life et al identified and documented them in their Annual Report. The news media simply leaped on these an (distortadly in several cases) reported their 'plans to move'! Headline grabbing of the worst kind imo!

Agree completely. The fact that company X has identified the risk associated with YES and stated what they MIGHT do does not actually mean they'd do. All risk management and assessment is about mights and maybes. What you actually do in the event of a risk occurring is pretty much always contingent on the detailed circumstances pertaining around the risk event at the time of the event. And those circumstances are uncertain at best - and often unknown.

 

[Doon frae Troon]

I'm now told Salmond has a speech impediment, is that to get the sympathy vote I wonder? or sympafy if Salmond said it.

I always assumed it was laziness or upbringing as he can say then and there and the but not commonwealf

Mark Crossfield is pretty bad for that, nightmare when he says he used a free wood at a par free and was out in firty free.

is this an actual recognised speech impediment? didn't know that.

He does the Glasgow thing by saying uz instead of us which annoys me.

He also managed to pronounce England very well in his debate when he should have been saying rUK.
That annoyed me even more.

 

[MegaSteve]

He also managed to pronounce England very well in his debate when he should have been saying rUK.

Doubt if that was a slip of the tongue either...

Still not convinced Mr Salmond actually desires independence... Just using this entire 'exercise' to see how much Westminster is willing to offer up for his preferred option...

 

[CheltenhamHacker]

So SILH, have you joined "Yes London" yet?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27655496

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

So SILH, have you joined "Yes London" yet?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27655496

I'm actually more 'undecided' than Yes.

Anyway they certainly have a more valid voice than the 200 mostly non-Scottish non-voting celebs reported in headlines today as supporting BT - I wonder if any of them know anything at all about the issues - but they grab a headline. And I wonder how many non-Scottish non-voting celebs actually support YES. Not many - but then you wouldn't expect there to be very many would you.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Still reading a lot of stuff implying that a YES will have Alex Salmond as Scotland First Minister - good ploy if you think Alex Salmond is a disingenuous self-serving wide-boy. Well he might be FM be for a short while but maybe not for that long if a Scottish Labour party got it's act together for the first Scottish General Election - besides if YES then job done for Wee Eck and he can hand the reins over to Daphne as leader of SNP.

Also note John Redwood making noises about Scotland losing Westminster representation following a NO due to the West Lothian question and putting up strong opposition to any further devolution of tax raising powers under a devo max scenario. Maybe not the best time to start on about potential negatives for Scotland in Westminster around a NO.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/polit...scottish-mps-voting-on-english-taxes.24996540

 

[Val]

Still reading a lot of stuff implying that a YES will have Alex Salmond as Scotland First Minister - good ploy if you think Alex Salmond is a disingenuous self-serving wide-boy. Well he might be FM be for a short while but maybe not for that long if a Scottish Labour party got it's act together for the first Scottish General Election - besides if YES then job done for Wee Eck and he can hand the reins over to Daphne as leader of SNP.

Also note John Redwood making noises about Scotland losing Westminster representation following a NO due to the West Lothian question and putting up strong opposition to any further devolution of tax raising powers under a devo max scenario. Maybe not the best time to start on about potential negatives for Scotland in Westminster around a NO.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/polit...scottish-mps-voting-on-english-taxes.24996540

So can you tell me where in the article it says Scotland d could lose Westminster representation post No? I don't see anywhere it days that.

I do see it saying Scottish MP's shouldn't get a vote on taxes that don't affect Scotland though.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

So can you tell me where in the article it says Scotland d could lose Westminster representation post No? I don't see anywhere it days that.

I do see it saying Scottish MP's shouldn't get a vote on taxes that don't affect Scotland though.

Maybe I shouldn't go by what I hear on the radio (though I thought I read it also). Though maybe what I heard was removing Scottish MPs voting rights on English only matters - thereby losing representation in votes on such matters.

As it happens I wasn't disagreeing with him just thinking that maybe he should keep quiet on this sort of stuff until after the NO vote.

 

[SocketRocket]

Maybe I shouldn't go by what I hear on the radio (though I thought I read it also). Though maybe what I heard was removing Scottish MPs voting rights on English only matters - thereby losing representation in votes on such matters.

As it happens I wasn't disagreeing with him just thinking that maybe he should keep quiet on this sort of stuff until after the NO vote.

It seems quite reasonable to me that Scottish MP's should not vote on English only matters. If they disagree with this then it would be very hypocritical.

 

[Deleted member 18588]

I'm actually more 'undecided' than Yes.

Anyway they certainly have a more valid voice than the 200 mostly non-Scottish non-voting celebs reported in headlines today as supporting BT - I wonder if any of them know anything at all about the issues - but they grab a headline. And I wonder how many non-Scottish non-voting celebs actually support YES. Not many - but then you wouldn't expect there to be very many would you.

How is their voice any more valid when the issue in question refers to the union that is the UK. Place of birth is totally irrelevant and you of all those of we UK citizens who are disenfranchised should realise this.

 

[delc]

So can you tell me where in the article it says Scotland d could lose Westminster representation post No? I don't see anywhere it days that.

I do see it saying Scottish MP's shouldn't get a vote on taxes that don't affect Scotland though.

Surely if Scotland votes for independence, why should they have any representation in the Westminster Government, any more than having English and Welsh representatives in the Edinburgh Government? They would become a separate sovereign state with its own parliament. :mmm:

 

[Val]

Surely if Scotland votes for independence, why should they have any representation in the Westminster Government, any more than having English and Welsh representatives in the Edinburgh Government? They would become a separate sovereign state with its own parliament. :mmm:

I assume you don't understand what post NO means

 

[Old Skier]

I assume you don't understand what post NO means

Have a like

 

[Old Skier]

I assume you don't understand what post NO means

That was quick, liked the first post.

 

[Val]

That was quick, liked the first post.

Changed my mind, I didn't want banned but glad someone spotted it and understood

 

[delc]

I assume you don't understand what post NO means

Surely if the Scots vote NO, then things will more or less continue as they are now? I've never been sure why Scotland should have its own regional government as part of the UK, whereas England doesn't! I would much prefer it if Scotland stays part of the UK. We are stronger together I believe.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Surely if the Scots vote NO, then things will more or less continue as they are now? I've never been sure why Scotland should have its own regional government as part of the UK, whereas England doesn't! I would much prefer it if Scotland stays part of the UK. We are stronger together I believe.

Well they might. But if a NO is encouraged by promises of moves towards devo max then there may well be some form of adjustment to such as block grant funding and Westminster voting rights for Scottish MPs. Also with the risk of independence quashed by a NO vote there would be opportunity to address the West Lothian question and as the Scottish Secretary has indicated put 'measures' in place that tie Scotland closer to Westminster in some way to remove the possibility of future demand for a further referendum vote.

 

[Andy808]

Haven't they gone yet?

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

Haven't they gone yet?

If they can't take it with them then they're not going.