[Closed] Election Campaign

If in doubt, INTERVENE....you know it makes sense

No leave things alone - the market [i]always[/i] knows best. That's why we've never had a banking crises or housing crises. In free market La La Land.

Except the root cause of the banking crisis lay in the deliberate distortions of interest rates, the pricing of risk and hen flooding the market artificially with liquidity. Odd definition of a free market, but full marks for the all-important "consistency"!

Housing market free....?!? No really.

Edit: keep it in bounds 😉

Hey I'm just repeating what we're told about the virtues of the free market, if you are disputing it then direct your criticism at those who are proponents of it.

Thatcher had very strong views on housing (and banking) and the free market.

If you want to make a critique of her policies and where it all went wrong then feel free and go ahead. I won't stop you.

Never a good idea to believe what your told Ernie, especially from politicians. Much better to look at the evidence and make your own mind up.

Could have sworn that you had mentioned that your poster girl had not cut government spending. Must have been mistaken. Your the resident expert on dear Maggie, so I will leave it you you. As is said before, Thatcherism was largely a myth. Sorry to prick the bubble though.

Labour oversaw the banking crises and rampant housing market having been in power for 10 years at the ports they occurred. The way to improve the availability of social housing is for the government to build more of it. This Laboir policy will be counterproductive, like their non-Dom policy which and Balls said will most likely mean less tax is collected the proposed rent control will cost the government, ie us, money as availability of rental properties to local authorities will shrink

Never a good idea to believe what your told Ernie, especially from politicians.

Thatcher was wrong? That's going to come as a terrible shock to jambalaya.

Good for him for putting her back in her rightful place.

Which place is that then? As far as I can see nothing has changed for SNP, they're hardly going to change their minds and support the Tories instead are they?

End of the day Labour know they need the SNP support but can't say that publicly as that would undermine their candidancies in Scotland. Likewise they also know that they will have that support regardless so they can afford to act the big men. They have to keep up an act otherwise what's the point?

Honestly, I think the outcome of all this will be determined by just how much the SNP are needed when the dust settles. If they are only short by a small margin then they could, in theory, rely on other minority parties on a vote by vote basis but if the SNP command a significant share of power then we may well see Ed eating his words.

Thatcher had strong views on many things, Tony Blair was smart enough to pick up on those which where successful and reposition the Labour Party in accordance and thus deliver 13 years of government.

SK - but he has made a commitment hasn't he? 😉

Good job we don't need to believe them!

While Mr Miliband had previously ruled out a Labour-SNP coalition, he had been more cautious on more informal deals. He told the BBC on Sunday, however: “No coalition, no tie-ins, I have said no deals; I have been clear about that?.?.?.?I am not doing deals with the Scottish National party.”

When asked whether this meant explicitly ruling out a confidence-and-supply agreement, he replied: “No deals”, and reiterated that in the event of a hung parliament, discussions with SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon were “not happening”.

Tuition fees anyone?

On a serious point, should the main parties be campaigning on their own policies or should they now be clear with the electorate and come clean on how they would approach forming coalitions and with whom? Otherwise, they make compromises for their expediency while ignoring the reasons why people voted for them. Clegg gets pilloried for this now, but this time it's even more blatant as the odds on any outright majority are so slim.

Labour oversaw the banking and rampant housing market.

Even though they weren't even in power in the early 1990s when the construction industry saw the the greatest turn around from profit to lose of any industry in British history, and the UK experienced the greatest repossession of homes ever as the result of a completely unsustainable housing bubble?

So previously we were blaming Labour for the global recession and international banking crises, now we're blaming them for the worse collapse ever in the housing market which occurred under a Tory government.

Just as well that the Tories had nothing to do with anything, not even when they were in government, and are completely blameless, eh?

So she cannot then vote down a potential minority labour gov and Ed know it. Good for him for putting her back in her rightful place. The poker match goes on.

Except it's perfectly possible for the SNP to vote against some of a Labour government's bills without bringing down the government. It's not all or nothing, the SNP doesn't have to support a minority Labour government in everything.

Well check out dear Nicola's views on legitimate government then Ben?

So if Labour get more seats than the Tories in the election but not an outright majority then Ed will stand by and allow the Tories and LibDems/Unionists/Ukip to form the government for the next 5 years rather than ally with the SNP (providing the numbers stack up)??

A Labour minority government without a formal SNP coalition coes not suit Alex Salmond as they can't play the "nasty Tories we didn't vote for" card nor can they get the additional devolved powers / another referendum they crave. The only party which was going to grant the Scots a binding referendum was the Tories as Labour have too much to lose (did and swill still do in the future). Labour are doing the right thing with the SNP by pointing out clearly that a vote for trim is not a transferable AV style vote for labour

THM can you stop the "Dear Nicola" line please? It looks rather sexist and dismissive. It also looks like the sort of thing people start doing when they're worried....

I really hope the Tories are removed from power, utterly. In cahoots with their revolting press-buddies they're setting the social progress and cohesion in this country back decades.

A Labour minority government without a formal SNP coalition coes not suit Alex Salmond

Alex Salmond is no longer leader of the SNP.

I had a bit of a chuckle at Milliband saying no deal with the SNP. He's let himself be manipulated into political harikari by Tory pressure.

I was just imagining a scenario after the election where the Tories have more seats but Labour is close and could form a govt by making alliances.

Scenario 1: No deal, and Milliband lets the Tories in for another 5 years. I suspect English Labour voters would then gut the party like Scottish Labour voters have done up here. It would effectively be the end of Labour. The SNP use this as an excuse for a UDI. Meanwhile Milliband gets quickly replaced as party head.

Scenario 2: Nicola rings up Labour HQ. "Any of you guys want to be in govt? Come talk to us - but not Ed Milliband because he's made his opinion clear." I reckon there would be a stampede. Milliband has probably just killed his prospects of being the next Labour PM unless he does a humiliating U-turn.

bencooper - Member

Alex Salmond is no longer leader of the SNP.

Aw now, don't stop Jambalaya from trying to scare the kids with the big bogeyman

THM can you stop the "Dear Nicola" line please?

He will probably change to it DN quite soon. Which of course will be as hysterically funny as his use of DO for Alex Salmond*.

*In case you don't understand the joke DO stands for Deceitful One.

No joke there Ernie. Don't you remember the independence debate? Hardly a straight line uttered throughout including the one that cost him the result.

Here.s the deal then stripes, I will trade " dear" with "fiscal responsibility". That seems fair. Is independence cohesive BTW?

Epic, do you actually think that Ed was telling the truth? Ditto the Tories with UKIP. Commeth the hours they will get into bed who whoever is required. Power is the ultimate objective.

teamhurtmore - Member
...Epic, do you actually think that Ed was telling the truth?...

No, that's what amused me. Ms Sturgeon has a remarkable similarity to a certain UK lady politician of a few decades ago.

Charmingly unforgiving and tough as nails.

Refusing to deal with Milliband would be an excellent way of cracking the whip at the start of the relationship. There's enough people in the Labour party willing to knife him in the back and crawl over hot coals for the chance of being PM for a tactic like that to work. All for the good of the party, of course. 🙂

If there hasn't been some informal chats already, the Labour party contenders have changed their spots.

Let's not forget Sturgeon has many years of experience at the top of her game.

No joke there Ernie. Don't you remember the independence debate? Hardly a straight line uttered throughout including the one that cost him the result.

Yes I remember the independence debate and I agree that the SNP were less than honest, as they are now in this election promising opposition to austerity while maintaining the same levels of revenue collection as Labour and the Tories. I have repeatedly said that the SNP want to mix social democratic policies with neoliberal economic policies - at least Labour if you listen to what they are saying are no longer claiming to be social democrats (let alone God forbid socialists) they support Tory cuts and spending levels.

But firstly it doesn't mean that Labour deserves support for fully embracing right-wing policies, the argument against austerity is the correct one imo and it needs to be backed up with the argument against neoliberal economic policies such as privatisation - use the wealth created by the nation to pay for the nation's assets, for example. So on that basis if I was living in Scotland I would probably vote SNP as they represent half the battle won.

And secondly I can make my point without resorting to silly childish name taunting or tediously repeating a joke that if it was ever actually funny a year ago no longer is. Specially if at the same time I wanted to also make the point that everyone else is daft.

Epic, do you actually think that Ed was telling the truth? Ditto the Tories with UKIP.

So in the same post that you explain why you call Alex Salmond 'Deceitful One' you accuse Labour, the Tories, and UKIP, of all being deceitful. Yeah, good point well made 🙂

FACE PALM.

Amusing self pwn though

Yes, epic and she has experience of "legitimate" minority governments too!! Hmmmm.....

Good to see the HRMC pointing out a higher tax take with a lower MRT of tax and the fact that the rich are paying more in terms of tax. And under a Coaliton government. Who would have thought it? Half of tax coming from 3% of earners.

But firstly it doesn't mean that Labour deserves support for fully embracing right-wing policies, the argument against austerity is the correct one imo and it needs to be backed up with the argument against neoliberal economic policies such as privatisation - use the wealth created by the nation to pay for the nation's assets, for example. So on that basis if I was living in Scotland I would probably vote SNP as they represent half the battle won.

Welcome aboard! Now if that mindset could only migrate South.

Alex Salmond will be the leader of the SNP at Westminster. Sturgeon is head of the party and has a full time job as First Minister at Holyrood. Salmond is just keeping his head down following party strategy as he is electorial poison South of the border.

Just over a week to go

bencooper - Member

A Labour minority government without a formal SNP coalition coes not suit Alex Salmond

Alex Salmond is no longer leader of the SNP.

Edit: Jambalaya got there first...

Ernie, always a mistake to take these folk at face value. Just read what the IFS said about the SNP so called end of austerity - no really. And as the FT noted today, they are smart at shifting the narrative away from a scrutiny of what they do since according to them, "there is a world of difference between Ms Sturgeon’s rhetoric and her party’s work in office....The SNP has not governed as progressively as she implies..."

What would Dr Watson be saying!

Salmond is just keeping his head down following party strategy as he is electorial poison South of the border.

Incoherent argument

The Scottish National party’s spending plans imply the same cuts, if not more, than Labour’s plans over the next five years, the Institute for Fiscal Studies said on Thursday, highlighting a “considerable disconnect” between the nationalists’ rhetoric on austerity and their policies.

So should folk be voting labour to minimise the effects SNPs austerity plans? Honestly those RW SNP folk, they will be arguing for the removal of lenders of last resort next. Austrian school economics anyone!! Form an orderly queue after the fiscal responsibility line.

Perhaps they will hold the same hard line as the (not very LW) folk in Syriza who would never put austerity ahead of defending the people that voted them in. Pension pot, what pension pot? We are just borrowing your money to pay those nasty creditors back. Excuse us.....

Anyway back to minority governments and never doing deals with Tories, always worth checking what spots a leopard is wearing. From the Scottish government

Minority Government
After the 2007 election, the SNP won the most seats, but did not have an overall majority. They chose not to enter into a coalition with another party to give them an overall majority. Instead they formed a minority government. This meant that the other parties in the Parliament have more seats altogether than the SNP, and can vote against the government.

What have been some of the effects of a minority government?

The government is more likely to have to give concessions in order to pass their main policies – for example, in the 2009 budget the SNP conceded funding for town regeneration projects in return for the support of the ....(wait for it)......Conservative Party MSPs.

The ends justify the means....

I think its looking increasingly likely that when we go to vote in May, it won't be for the last time this year.

It'll just be interesting to see who's leading the main parties when we get to go to the polls again. All the Tory contenders would probably be even more toxic than Dave outside their South Eastern Tory heartlands

For those saying Miliband has just committed harikiri, have a read of [url= http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/apr/17/general-election-2015-if-this-deadlock-holds-a-battle-is-coming-over-ed-milibands-legitimacy ]that guardian article[/url]. Labour's best, and possibly only chance of forming a minority govt is to be the largest party. They don't need a deal with the SNP to form a minority govt, they just need to have confidence that they won't vote against them in a queen's speech or budget vote, which I think we can all agree is very unlikely.

They don't need a deal with the SNP to form a minority govt, they just need to have confidence that they won't vote against them in a queen's speech or budget vote, which I think we can all agree is very unlikely.

Admittedly I read your link quickly but I can't see where that is mentioned, he mentions a minority Labour government "tacitly sustained by the SNP".

Why is it "very unlikely" that the SNP would vote against them in a queen's speech or budget vote ? What would the SNP have to lose ? How would a constitutional crises and a second snap election be detrimental to the SNP ? Why is it particularly in the SNP's benefit to have a stable government in Westminster ? Do you think that a quick second general election would drive support away from the SNP, if so, what's that based on ?

Sorry for all the questions but I don't quite understand all this talk about how the SNP "must" support Labour in Westminster.

I am pretty certain I have read that trident,or a lack of, is going to be one of NS's main demands to supporting the Labour Government. I can't see how this is surmountable.

Labour's best, and possibly only chance of forming a minority govt is to be the largest party

we can all agree is very unlikely

Re Binners point

Interestingly we could see all the leaders go

CMD if he does not get a majority/form the govt
Nigel if not an MP
Ed - well for being ed [ crosses fingers]
Nick - lose seat or party revolt as IMHO he is far more Tory than they are and they may stick in the knives when they get slaughtered in the election

Interesting times ahead.

ernie_lynch - Member
...Why is it particularly in the SNP's benefit to have a stable government in Westminster ?..

If a Labour govt won't cooperate, it's not in the SNPs interests.

A refusal by Labour to cooperate would justify a vote of no confidence initiated by the SNP. Either the Tories would support Labour, thus proving to Scots they are one and the same party, just different colours or there would be another General Election. Either would probably just increase the SNP majority in Scotland.

At the moment judging by the mass media, Scots are being told that while we're wanted in the Union, we're not allowed to influence govt policy or have anything but tame sheep representation, and it's becoming obvious to the dumbest voter that UK actually means England in Westminster speak.

JY, the strength of the SNP is affecting voting intentions South of the border no doubt about it in my mind. Both the Lib Dems and the tories are campaigning with this very much in mind

The SNP would vote with Labour on many things and both sides would just kick the can down the road on Trident for example.

As stated above SNP budget/manifesto and their actions whilst in power in Scotland have shown they are very much a party of "austerity" - not surprising as in reality there is little choice.

What's happened to the Scottish Greens? In the independence aftermath it seemed they might become a force to be reckoned with.

THE SNP will not support the Tories this fact alone does not mean they MUST support Labour.

I actually think that unconditional support by the SNP for a minority Labour government could be hugely detrimental to the SNP.

All those Scottish former Labour voters will wonder why they abandoned Labour and switched to the SNP if the result is simply a guaranteed Labour government.

And if that's the case they would probably be better off getting a Labour Party member to represent them in Westminster.

At least there would be a vague chance that Miliband might offer a Labour MP a sympathetic ear. If he's in a good mood and feels generous.

All those Scottish former Labour voters will wonder why they abandoned Labour and switched to the SNP if the result is simply a guaranteed Labour government. And if that's the case they would probably be better off getting a Labour Party member to represent them in Westminster.

the strength of the SNP is affecting voting intentions South of the border no doubt about it in my mind.

As for austerity we all know they are doing this the only debating point is the speed at which it is being done.

Sorry for all the questions but I don't quite understand all this talk about how the SNP "must" support Labour in Westminster.

They don't need to support them, they just need not to vote against them in a confidence vote. Even if they abstained labour could probably count on support from the lib dems and other parties to win a confidence vote. So labour could probably form a minority govt without SNP 'support' as long as they are the largest party.

Why is it particularly in the SNP's benefit to have a stable government in Westminster ? Do you think that a quick second general election would drive support away from the SNP, if so, what's that based on ?

It's in the SNPs benefit to have a labour govt as opposed to the tories. Bringing down a labour govt would probably result in a tory govt in a subsequent election so I don't see why they'd even risk that.

At the moment judging by the mass media, Scots are being told that while we're wanted in the Union, we're not allowed to influence govt policy or have anything but tame sheep representation, and it's becoming obvious to the dumbest voter that UK actually means England in Westminster speak.

I don't think this is the case, the problem is more that it brings the West Lothian question into stark relief if Labour are going to be relying on SNP votes to get policy through that does not effect Scottish voters. The SNP seem to have changed tack, they will be willing to vote on these matters, which they haven't in the past. Of course, if Labour did not collapse in Scotland, but the other seat projections were right, similar issues would arise as it appears Labour will not gain a majority of the MPs in the other England, Wales and NI.

EDIT: It is very difficult to work out what might happen as the Fixed Parliament Act fundamentally changes the terms of trade as the Prime Minister is unable to call an election.

Bringing down a labour govt would probably result in a tory govt in a subsequent election so I don't see why they'd even risk that.

Because only a Tory government would replace Trident and instigate spending cuts every year, despite Labour promising exactly the same?

Is that why it's too risky ?

I'm not sure why you think it would "probably" result in a Tory government in any subsequent election btw.

Because only a Tory government would replace Trident and instigate spending cuts every year, despite Labour promising exactly the same?

Yes, I agree with you on the lack of difference between labour and the tories on trident, austerity, and many other things. But are you really arguing that the SNP wouldn't prefer labour over the tories? Given that a huge number of SNP voters are ex-labour voters, and following the anti-tory promises from NS, I don't think the SNP would ever risk enabling a tory govt through a lack of support for labour.

I'm not sure why you think it would "probably" result in a Tory government in any subsequent election btw.

Aside from the fact that the tories would campaign on basis that labour had their chance and screwed it up. Historical precedent would suggest that incumbent parties are usually defeated if the govt collapses before a full term. The tories also have the money to finance a new campaign where labour doesn't, so yes I'd say 'probably' is a fair assumption.

ninfan - Member

What's happened to the Scottish Greens? In the independence aftermath it seemed they might become a force to be reckoned with.

They missed having an MEP by a couple of percent and out-polled the Lib Dems, FPTP means they'll get nowt at Westminster and their voters will mostly transfer to the SNP I reckon. Too far out to really make sensible predictions for 2016 but the last poll I saw had them 4th party, and only narrowly behind the Tories.

Oh and presumably at some point Patrick Harvie'll get headhunted off to run the national party.

Anyone excited by Ed's new announcements? The one below seems barmy and an example of political ideas at their very worst. We need less fiddling from all parties and more big thinking and plans.

Ed Miliband says Labour would exempt first-time buyers in England and Wales from paying stamp duty when buying homes below £300,000, for three years.
Locals would also get "first call" on half of new homes in their area while foreign buyers would face more tax.

The election is getting us all worked up. How about we have a cuppa while our masters sort it all out...

[img] ?oh=08817ad2c7041d97521ca9f76b8aa2ab&oe=55DFA0E9&__gda__=1440740886_18920a4fbc1514d58b849a0bb42f4071[/img]

😆

JY the people running the campaigns of the Lib Dems and the Tories are not daft, they know the SNP are electorial poison South of the border that's why they are focusing on them so much. You only have to speak to people here to hear again and again how much they are disliked after the lies of the Referendum campaign and the constant whining after regarding "the vow"

I am pretty certain I have read that trident,or a lack of, is going to be one of NS's main demands to supporting the Labour Government. I can't see how this is surmountable.

One face-saving option for everyone would be to just kick it into the long grass - put off renewal decisions for the moment citing "the economic climate" and let it fade away. Never actually have a vote on renewal, just keep saying that more studies are needed.

We're getting pretty close to unprecendented territory here, though - Tories, Lib Dems and Labour are now all saying that they think SNP MPs shouldn't somehow be valid MPs. The Tories have even apparently approached the Queen to see if she'll intervene to keep Cameron in power. There's a word for what happens when you try to subvert the democratic will of the people - that word is "coup".

jambalaya - Member
...You only have to speak to people here to hear again and again how much they are disliked after the lies of the Referendum campaign and the constant whining after regarding "the vow"

Just curious, has there been any polls on that?

We keep hearing it's very much a mixed reception - right wingers (Tories and Blairites) hate us, the old Labour folk think we may put some backbone into Labour policies.

But are you really arguing that the SNP wouldn't prefer labour over the tories?

No I'm not arguing that at all, as you've probably noticed.

I'm arguing that your claim that the SNP must, under all conditions, always support the Labour Party's ability to form a government is unconvincing.

For the reasons given including the fact it could be electorally detrimental to them.

Oh and presumably at some point Patrick Harvie'll get headhunted off to run the national party

Shame they haven't done it already, however much I disagree with him, he comes across a lot better than the shrill Aussie bird.

Saying that, I'm surprised we haven't seen Ruthie elevated to the front of the Tories national campaign, would have done a lot of good there.

Oh and presumably at some point Patrick Harvie'll get headhunted off to run the national party

It's a separate party.

see labour have gone for a bit of the 'ol housing ladder flim flam with their stamp duty cap up to 300k

not sure that bubble needs inflating any more!

@epic the parties do their own private polling, I have no doubt it will be showing that as that all the "pub talk" I am hearing and it makes perfect sense. SNP have to appreciate some of their language and policy stances during the referendum where very negatively received in the UK. In the same way the Labour party have suffered as being seen to have stood with the Tories the SNP are deeply unpopular with the center/right leaning voters the Lib Dems and Tories need to win over to win seats from Labour.

not sure that bubble needs inflating any more!

Why ever not? What could possibly go wrong?

Just curious, has there been any polls on that?

He supports this with the evidence of polls he neither trusts nor has he seen [ though he does not doubt what they say ]

😆
Some days I just love STW

First post by him on this thread
opening line

Do we need another thread ?

I am sceptical of opinion polls, proved to be very inaccurate in Scotland for the referendum.

http://singletrackmag.com/forum/topic/election-campaign#post-6837785

Why ever not? What could possibly go wrong?

I am not sure which part of the policy is most flawed, the further inflation of the bubble, or the "local homes for local [s]inbred[/s]people.

mefty - Member

It's a separate party.

Er, yes. That's why they'd have to headhunt him. What's your point caller?

Well the whole local homes for local people thing does immediately beg the obvious question....

How are you going to enforce that then?

It seems to me like everyone has kind of assumed that nobody is going to get a majority, therefore all manifesto's become null and void, as they enter coalition negotiations

So you might as well promise everyone a gold-plated unicorn - or increased public spending AND tax cuts - because you're never going to get the chance to do any of it anyway. Which is handy.

He does not trust them but his own random haphazard and unevidenced poll of people he knows is proof.

That's life, when you're 100% accurate!

JY Why don't you explain why Salmond has been pretty much invisible during this campaign, aside of course from joking that he would be writing the Labour party budget. He's invisible as the SNP well know the level of his unpopularity South of the border. You might also like to pick an argument with me on a topic you have a chance of being proven correct on, this one is another where you are out on your own.

That's why they'd have to headhunt him. What's your point caller?

I've never heard of a political party headhunting for a party leader, usually they emerge from the existing organisation, not from another political party.

I took your comment "headhunted off to run the national party" as meaning that, as did Z-11, and mefty, perhaps you meant something different ?

That's life, when you're 100% accurate!

As an aside did you see Varoufakis has been demoted and is not conducting the negotiations, this after being openly called an amateur by the eurogroup finance ministers. He reminds me of Salmond during the election campaign on the whole currency issue.

How are you going to enforce that then?

+1

You only have to be resident for 3 years to be classed as local, but in effect the Labour party would be deliberately reducing people movement within the UK, which is possibly the worst policy I've ever heard of outside the cr*p the extremist parties come up with.

The Miliband in Salmond's poster has been widely recognised as one of the most most effective of the election so far, forcing an immediate reaction from Miliband to rule out a coalition with the SNP

Quote from the Guardian below, I recalled reading that Lib Dem and Tory private polls and focus groups had confirmed what frankly we all know that Salmond is a liability to the SNPs strategy South of the Border.

[i]There is genuine anger within the Labour ranks about the Tories’ divide-and-conquer strategy, which they regard as cynical and incredibly damaging to the wider unionist cause. On one level it is Lynton Crosby-inspired genius: focus groups have revealed that Alex Salmond, though still wildly popular north of the border, is markedly less so south of Berwick-upon-Tweed.[/i]

There you go again stating that a party with NO MPS standing south of the border has a strategy for there
They do its to not stand there.

Quoting polls that are private [ have you now changed your mind and think you have seen them ?] whilst also stating how you dont believe polls 😀

You might also like to pick an argument with me on a topic you have a chance of being proven correct on, this one is another where you are out on your own.

If you wont budge when the evidence is so strong [ re polls] it really is pointless engaging with you as your views are not factually based and they are not consistent as you are now citing polls as your evidence when you say you dont believe them.

If your logic was half as good as your confidence you would be Plato instead you act moire like Pluto.
I withdraw from this game of #pidgeonchess

You only have to speak to people here to hear again and again how much they are disliked after the lies of the Referendum campaign and the constant whining after regarding "the vow"

What; as opposed to the factual and accurate information that came from the Unionists side from day one? And sorry for expecting the changes that were promised to be introduced,although that nice man David Cameron is going to introduce the findings in the next session.He said he was,so even though he is tearing the SNP a new one on a daily basis,I am sure he will put it all behind him and do as he says.

Alex Salmond, though still wildly popular north of the border

He is divisive north of the border also, very Marmite.

[quote=jambalaya ] Salmond the most likely leader of the SNP in WestminsterYou got that straight from Angus Robertson I guess?

As an aside did you see Varoufakis has been demoted and is not conducting the negotiations, this after being openly called an amateur by the eurogroup finance ministers.

I don't think people like Dijsselbloem are in much position to call Varoufakis an amateur. At least YV doesn't have to fake his CV.
[url= http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/dutch-finance-minister-amends-cork-university-degree-error-29195279.html ]http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/dutch-finance-minister-amends-cork-university-degree-error-29195279.html[/url]

The Eurogroup are good at calling names and leaking their politically motivated stories to the press, not so good at solving real problems.

jambalaya - Member
JY Why don't you explain why Salmond has been pretty much invisible during this campaign...

He doesn't have to do a thing. The red and blue Tories give him all the publicity he needs south of the border, and it keeps his profile high in Scotland.

With Sturgeon fronting the SNP campaign even though she won't be in Westminster, Salmond gets a free hand to concentrate on running for a seat up here and helping out other candidates. I'm sure Nick Clegg would like that luxury...

not sure that bubble needs inflating any more!

Why ever not? What could possibly go wrong?

I'm all for it, I've just bought 50 rabbit hutches and will be selling them on for £200k a piece post election....

as much as i think the monsterring of the SNP and Sturgeon by the rightwing press has been predictably unpleasant and a depressing indictment of Tory tactics, i saw this on facebook and it made me chuckle

[img] [/img]
[img] [/img]

^nice 😀

jambalaya - Member
JY Why don't you explain why Salmond has been pretty much invisible during this campaign...

Maybe he's keeping out of it since the new leader might want to be reinforcing that fact rather than being cast as some sort of puppet by types like yourself?

The fact is it matters not a jot what anyone south of the border thinks, what does matter is how we vote. Popularity doesn't come into it else you might as well just dissolve the union tomorrow.

One face-saving option for everyone would be to just kick it into the long grass - put off renewal decisions for the moment citing "the economic climate" and let it fade away. Never actually have a vote on renewal, just keep saying that more studies are needed.

they are already spending the money for the renewal and the existing boats/ systems won't last five more years, and it ultimately will make the cost of procurement higher

We're getting pretty close to unprecendented territory here, though - Tories, Lib Dems and Labour are now all saying that they think SNP MPs shouldn't somehow be valid MPs.

The Tories have even apparently approached the Queen to see if she'll intervene to keep Cameron in power. There's a word for what happens when you try to subvert the democratic will of the people - that word is "coup".

if Cameron can't get a Queens speech through he'll not be able to govern

big_n_daft - Member

where has that been explicitly stated?

David Cameron:
"You cannot let the people who want to break up our country into the government of our country."

Theresa May: Abdication Mad Screeching

[quote=big_n_daft ]

The Tories have even apparently approached the Queen to see if she'll intervene to keep Cameron in power. There's a word for what happens when you try to subvert the democratic will of the people - that word is "coup".

David Cameron:
"You cannot let the people who want to break up our country into the government of our country."

so please don't vote for them?

it's not exactly an order to all the Queen's armies is it? just yet another campaign speech by a politician

as for

On Sunday, the "coup" stepped up a gear. In a fascinating piece in the Sunday Times, we learn that the Queen – who technically has the power to choose who forms the government – has had to make clear she will not get involved in propping up a government that does not have the support of the majority of MPs. It stresses that we don't know whether it's Miliband or Cameron who asked the question, but there is one revealing quote from a Palace source: "Cameron remains Prime Minister but he can't borrow the Queen for support".

There's good reason for believing the real story here is that it is the Conservatives who have approached the Palace about shoring up a potential Tory minority government that cannot command a majority.

everything else is conjecture and more likely relates to the work of the Civil Servants planning the various permutations of results............or you could put on your tin foil hat