[Closed] Well scotland didnt get independance, thread

Really? Some anti-SNP sentiment,

I can only think that I should leave

[img] [/img]

I’ve just finished speaking to my wifes niece, she’s 13 years old, born in in Sheffield, Irish mother, Scottish father living in the highlands. She made the heinous mistake of posting on Facebook that she was glad that ‘No’ won, and has suffered a landslide of abuse from the ‘45’ lot. She seems to be genuinely terrified, she knows full well what division can cause (some of her other uncles are Sinn Fein supporters) . I urge anyone who is banging on about this 45% militant shite to reject it, and stop it now. We are all fully aware of what happened in Ireland and I don’t think anyone wants that again.

It depends on your perspective. Lots of no voters will obviously say everything was in the yes camps favour. Which it wasn't as it was 30% or lower for yes at times. Although near the end the momentum was with the yes voters.
No one had the bigger backing or budget than the no campaign. The only time I have seen nearly all parties get together on one agenda! With multi national corporate companies scaring people and endorsing the no vote. Not to mention nearly all media outlets!! So don't tell me everything was with the yes vote.
People say it wasn't financially driven, tell me a government agenda that isn't that involves the control of another country!!
Next people will be saying it was the yes voters that were the ones doing Nazi salutes, waving union flags and burning the ST Andrews flag while rioting in Glasgow. Which I seen with my own eyes and was sickened with there behaviour.
As to the BBC, no I wont be viewing there channels. Yes I will watch live TV on other channels but I wont be giving the BBC a penny for it. Why should I? Don't tell me its because they lobbied some MP's and lords to get a law passed to con people. That would be absurd not to mention morally unconstitutional.

Sherry. This is clearly not the place for us. There is **** all desire for change here. Dunno about you but I'm done arguing. I learned a lot over the last while mind. But now, well it's time to regroup and move forward locally. First battle, The general election, let's rout labour and the unionist parties(the self interest parties).

I'd prefer your voices remained here tbh

Just because others disagree is no reason to quit expressing your opinion. Otherwise we end up repeating the failure of social media, which only really worked for one side.

Sherry. This is clearly not the place for us. There is **** all desire for change here.

Well so much for your commitment to Scotland - the Scottish people disagree with you and you want to bugger off !

There is **** all desire for change here.

Everyone's arguing for change.

Sherry. This is clearly not the place for us. There is **** all desire for change here.

Plenty of desire for change thanks - just not exactly the change you were hoping for. No need to throw your toys out of the pram.

Molly, the Scots Nats are upset that further devolutionary powers are linked to those proposed for the other UK nations. To me this smacks of a sense that Scotland is somehow special, and that devo powers for Scotland should be apart from the argument for increasing the rights of the constituent parts of the UK.
The people of Scotland have spoken and they want to remain a part of us, so its only right that the discussions now involve all of us.
If the Scots separatists are too bitter to get involved in those discussions they should move aside and make space for those will, its not all about Scotland now. Scotland has a unique position at the moment, she can be the leader and instrument for change, but only if the Nats decide to engage with the rest of us rather than sulking in the corner.
Suppose that will be seen as anti Scottish now, its not meant that way. We (rUK) need Scotland's input.

that the vote was purposely tilted in the favour of a Yes vote, by the fact that only current residents of Scotland could vote.
So people who aren't Scottish by any definition but happen to currently be living there (they could be from anywhere in the EU) were allowed to vote, but people who were born in Scotland but now happen to live and work in other parts of the UK were not allowed to vote.

This is the weirdest allegation of gerrymandering I've ever heard - that the vote was biased because people who don't live there weren't allowed to vote.

the SNP know that the majority of those Scottish people who now happen to be living and working in other parts of the UK would probably want to vote No

I agree with your statement muddy. This can be an interesting period ahead. We need the so called 45 on board to help progress the debate throughout the UK.

People I am sure will come round. We will be the 100 again, but we are still in the immediate aftermath and I can understand how gutted some are right now. I know how I would feel if the result went the other way.

Molly, the Scots Nats are upset that further devolutionary powers are linked to those proposed for the other UK nations. To me this smacks of a sense that Scotland is somehow special, and that devo powers for Scotland should be apart from the argument for increasing the rights of the constituent parts of the UK.

Scottish (and Welsh/NI) MPs in Westminster must have exactly the same voting rights as English MPs, which isn't necessarily what some Tories are suggesting, otherwise it would mean no Scottish (or Welsh/NI) politician could become Prime Minister or cabinet member.

England must have devolved power with separate politicians. Just like any other country within the Union. Preferably regional devolved power imo.

Fwiw, I'm all for an English parliament in say Manchester.

The best thing here would be a time out and some reflection. We have even more knee jerk politics. AS spouting more BS this overnight, Brown promising things he has no authority to promise, and CMD and EM playing games without proper debate and reference to those they serve.

What more evidence do we need to show that we want fewer not more politicians? Centralise and rationalise core departments (foreign, defence, Justice) and devolved local decision making with an aim to reduce the role of Government. The worst scenario would be four versions of Holyrood and a Westminster. Nothing would get done other than the creation of lots of non-jobs.

The best thing here would be a time out and some reflection. We have even more knee jerk politics. AS spouting more BS this overnight, Brown promising things he has no authority to promise, and CMD and EM playing games without proper debate and reference to those they serve.

Yep - from what I heard about the various pronouncements overnight it seems like our leaders don't quite get the message they've just been given by their electorate - Westminster AND Salmond. It's like they just can't help themselves... straight into playing tit for tat games, making pledges they can't guarantee, setting traps for each other etc.

It's not a good sign - UK's not in a great place right now economically and I can't imagine the electorate (Scotland AND rUK) being too impressed if Westminster fails to deliver on the pledges they made last week. Not sure how that will pan out - protests, riots, refusal to vote? Time will tell I guess.

On media bias - refusing to watch BBC because you don't agree with their view just disempowers you. Best hint I was given to protect yourself from media bias is take two papers (broadsheet, not tabloid) - one which shares your political views and one from the other side. It's a right eye opener when you compare and contrast them - not just the slant on the stories, but the prominence they give them and even the stories they include/don't include... you realise even the broadsheets can't really be trusted to inform you...

England must have devolved power with separate politicians. Just like any other country within the Union. Preferably regional devolved power imo.

The problem is that means an extra layer of politicians, hence more politicians which nobody wants, and there wasn't much appetite for regional government when the people were last asked. I suspect part of the answer to that might be a significantly scaled down Westminster - after all if most of the day to day powers are devolved then they surely don't need so many of them in the same format. The follow on from which is a complete remodelling of the UK political system (federalism anybody?) - which is I'm sure what many people would like, the question is will the turkeys vote for Christmas?

Despite the legacy of excess debt, the UK economy is fairing surprisingly well at the moment. But as for the message, apart from 1.6m Scots, who exactly has been asking for an unbalanced approach to democracy across the UK? Mainly knee-jerk nonsense so far.

One of the benefits of the economic system that is so often derided is the access to so many different views via the internet that it provides. I agree with reading different papers - I try to dip into at least four on the way to work every day. The FT probably allows a greater range of views across its columnists and contributors IMO which leads to many fun debates on their website. The Monday morning Euro-fest fed by Wolfgang the euro sceptic is always a giggle.

The economy will recover creating a tough task for labour, Europe will haunt the Tories and the lib Dems will be forgotten. Oh no, that means the media being taken over by another gobby politician spouting BS up until 2015. Aaaargggh, enough.....

But as for the message, apart from 1.6m Scots, who exactly has been asking for an unbalanced approach to democracy across the UK?

Just a hunch, I have no actual evidence for this but it seemed to me that a chunk of the rUK seemed to think that devo max was a fair enough deal to give to the Scots (after all we all sympathise with their dislike of Westminster)...

And so if Westminster failed to deliver on their promises, we'd have sympathy with those Scots who'd voted No on the strength of those promises... and you'd end up with the Yessers, the No's who voted on the strength of the promises and a chunk of rUK all throwing rotten tomatoes at Westminster for being a bunch of shysters! United in their dislike of Westminster.

So ironically, the result of the referendum would be a more united UK 🙂

apart from 1.6m Scots, who exactly has been asking for an unbalanced approach to democracy across the UK?

Most people haven't been asked.

Possibly, we shall see, but as I said earlier best to have a brief time out and period of reflection. Policy made on the hoof is generally bad policy.

The irony of AS bleating about unkept promises etc is brilliant. The sooner he drifts on to marketing his book the better. A filler for the fiction section at Xmas.

Exactly aracer, so why all the promises. Bloody politicians.

@Tifted Ernie is quoting from a readers letter in The Herald not an editorial.

apart from 1.6m Scots, who exactly has been asking for an unbalanced approach to democracy across the UK?

Exactly aracer, so why all the promises. Bloody politicians.

I see stuff like this at work. People making all kinds of promises to their bosses which they have absolutely no chance of being able to keep.

It's like they've operated for so long in a world of smoke and mirrors, game-playing and dishonesty that they actually don't realise that it's bleeding obvious to everyone else that they're lying and they're setting a trap for themselves - total self-deception.

It was a desperate step when the penny finally dropped that the electorate really have had enough of their self-obsession and complete lack of respect for their job description - to provide leadership and good governance and I'm really not sure they quite know how to cope with it...

I think I may have eaten some of what Binners has been eating 🙂

I can't imagine the electorate (Scotland AND rUK) being too impressed if Westminster fails to deliver on the pledges they made last week. Not sure how that will pan out - protests, riots, refusal to vote?

On the contrary, the polls suggest that many non Scots were fed up with the lack of balance in many of AS's BS. He thought he could twist everything in his favour and any attempt for rUK to resist was dismissed (wrongly) as bullying. Unions require maturity which was clearly beyond him.

Don't forget that a central threat during the campaign was to technically default on debt outstanding.

Quite correct that CMD should tie these changes together. Arrogant of one country to think this should only apply to them. As always, the mirror doesn't lie.

Blatant self interest oozes from each pronouncement over the past 24 hours. Time, gentlemen, please.

New thread same old THM bs
1 ignore the point raised about yes voters wanting to leave the Uk.
2 Personal attack on Alex Salmond because he

thought he could twist everything in his favour

Quite correct that CMD should tie these changes together.

Just remember Gordi, this is not a McFly song, it's not just "all about you" despite what AS liked to pretend.

Yes voters wanting to leave. True. They were the minority. Get over it FFS, you are already getting more that most. Be grateful not spoilt. More Scots wanted the union.

Personalising things after a campaign of personalised attacks - the STW irony meter ticking on overtime now

Did you notice, I wasnt praising CMD or EM? But if they stand up for wider interests good for them. Listening to the one-sided diatribe from yS gets on your ****s

the Scots Nats are upset that further devolutionary powers are linked to those proposed for the other UK nations. To me this smacks of a sense that Scotland is somehow special, and that devo powers for Scotland should be apart from the argument for increasing the rights of the constituent parts of the UK.

I see no reason why the two need to be done concurrently tbh and giving the extra to the scots allows time to solve the west lothian issue which is far more complicated and requires far more thought

They don't HAVE to be done concurrently but its politically unwise to do that for CMD as he will incur the wrath of middle England. He won't lose votes (as Scotland doesn't vote tory) by tieing devolution together but he will if he is seen to be giving Scotland something without giving it to the rest.
Cynical? Of course, he's a politician. However I do think that rushed legislation will have unintended consequences so it needs a cool, calm approach in order to avoid this. Its 3 days after the referendum for gods sake, even if the vote had been YES then even AS was looking at 18 months of negotiations before final independence. I understand the hurt and the desire/need to see the hand of the enemy at every turn but come on, lets get some perspective. Its time for the Nats to join in, if they continue in this vein they will be sidelined and that's dangerous - unless the plan is to deliberately stand aside & do a Provo - "we do not recognise the legitimacy of this court".

Tempers are too high right now IMO, we need a time of standing still and gathering our thoughts before taking the new path that lies before us all. Lets not allow this current temporary division to become permanent.

What muddydwarf said.
I also would have sworn that Salmond said something about respecting the result? Clearly my mistake.

Cynical? Of course, he's a politician

I do think that rushed legislation will have unintended consequences so it needs a cool, calm approach in order to avoid this. Its 3 days after the referendum for gods sake

Tempers are too high right now IMO, we need a time of standing still and gathering our thoughts before taking the new path that lies before us all

As i said delivering on the pledge to scotland is fairly simple - here have these extra power - there you go job done as we promised. Now lest sort the inequalities out. Working out how to make england equal is problematic and . IMHO requires a parliament other than westminster - it will hardly be seen as fair if westminster is the UK and the english parliament as well.

You are correct folk need to calm down and it requires time unfortunately the three westminster partes set the timeline in a pledge and only delivering on it on time will bring calm.

I also would have sworn that Salmond said something about respecting the result? Clearly my mistake

Essentially folk here are turning a blind eye to "their side" having lied and still, god know how, using it as method to criticise AS for having not stuck to his word 😯

I am sure he will respect the judgement but in order to do that it has to be delivered.

Amazing that so many know what Lord Smith of Kelvin is going to say/do already!

A quick lesson for AS, sometimes it pays to think about things first, that way you don't get caught with your pants down.

Despite all the headwinds behind you, most Scots rejected your BS. You have had your time. Now STFU and retire gracefully to your book. It will be riveting. How about the "Magic Roundabout", to reflect the spinning and nursery stories? Or "Which way is the wind blowing" for the opportunism and flip flopping over policy.

The problem is that means an extra layer of politicians, hence more politicians which nobody wants, and there wasn't much appetite for regional government when the people were last asked.

It's not an "extra layer" of politicians, the politicians who previously took centralized decisions are simply replaced by ones from the devolved legislatures. For example there isn't an "extra layer" of politicians which is responsible for the NHS in Scotland, just the one in the Scottish Parliament.

And I would dispute that 'nobody wants more politicians'. The peoples of Scotland, Wales, and NI, appear to be very happy indeed with the extra politicians that the end of direct rule has brought them.

There is every indication that there is growing support in England for an English Parliament, and no evidence that calls by senior politicians for devolved powers for England are out of step with public opinion, which presumably is why they are making them. Things have moved on in the last 10 years.

[url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/active/11107428/Give-English-regions-the-same-powers-as-Scotland-says-Local-Government-Association.html ]Devolution genie is out of the bottle[/url]

I am saying the pledge made no mention of a reciprocal tie in with English powers.

I think that lesson needs to be told to westminster as they are the ones struggling to deliver their pledge - just as AS would be had he won.

teamhurtmore - did Alex Salmond shag your wife or something?
You're so busy telling yes voters, again and again, to get over it, that you haven't seemed to notice that we have.

As far as putting us back in our box - that's really not for you or anyone else to say is it? If we learned anything last week it's that we do still live in a deocracy. If I don't want to give up on independence and want to continue to support politicians that share that goal then that's exactly what I'll do thank you very much.

Always read the small print - bit like don't ask, don't tell. Pays to know what words mean.

Anyway, can the yessers also tell us what exactly is going to be presented to parliament tomorrow for discussions?

If this is getting over it......lasted less that 24 hours and we have all kinda of accusations flying. None that stand up in a gentle breeze.

Only told AS to STFU no one else. Always fun to listen to the rest of it. But AS has had his chance.

We do live in a democracy and the people of Scotland have spoken.

You don't get it do you? It's a moment in time - what an absolute nonsense to suggest that the issue be put to bed for eternity. Labour lost the last general election - should no-one ever vote for them again? And why the hell did we have a devo referendum in 1997 - we'd already had one in 1979 after all.

What you're seeing now is post-referendum, no-one's asking for another vote next week or next year. The issues being discussed now relate to whether certain promises are being kept (which, objectively, they are not so far). No-one is disputing the result, like it or not this is busines as usual politics now.

[quote=unknown ]teamhurtmore - did Alex Salmond shag your wife or something?
I prefer to think that Alex Salmond once spurned THMs sexual advances and that this is the bunny-boiler in him playing up.

Either that or he is jealous that someone with the same education managed to become leader of his country, against a system designed to avoid just that, and is widely regarded as one of the most astute politicians of his generation whereas THM is just a no-mark spouting crap on a mountainbike forum.

teamhurtmore - Member
We do live in a democracy and the people of Scotland have spoken.

It's transient.

I'm off to Sevenoaks next week. I hope that the ****tish EN-GER-LUND attitude here isn't too fully represented, otherwise I'll be ordering my pints by writing on a piece of paper, fully avoiding the word "yes".

Something that seems to have been missed by many of my Southern counterparts in all of this is the lost benefits to them if Scotland had split.

if you don't mind me saying- (and this is definitely a huge aside): -this has been a massive, massive missed opportunity, not just for Scotland, but for anyone who believes in some form of social democracy for the remainder UK.

So, I'm not going to comment any more on any of this, as you guys are in full bluster mode, except to say:

If Scotland had become independent, and ultimately achieved its goals, anyone with a sense of the wrongness of things in the rUK would only have had to look a wee bit further north to see how things could be done with a bit more justice, fairness, and a bit less craven respect for naked capital.

I know some of you will be laughing into your Yorkshire puds when you read this, but a wee beacon of hope for those who believe it still can be better (is that you, dear reader?) got snuffed out on Friday, not just for Scots but for all of us. Stop slagging each other for a couple of minutes and think about how little The Man would have enjoyed seeing it done the way it should be, 400 miles to the north.

And, I suppose, welcome to more of the same as you had 2 weeks ago.

Ernie, I'm not sure that the welsh are particularly happy. Few voted for their parliment (which they only have themselves to blame for, at least the Scotts didn't make that mistake and the vast majority voted). From albeit anecdotal evidence from family in South Wales there is an incredibly divisive welsh speaking (minority) running things in their interests, for example succesful English speaking schools are being turfed out of their buildings and combined with poor performance schools to allow new Welsh speaking schools to be created.

It would be more correct to say the extra layer of politicians is already there in Wales and NI, devolved regions in England would create more politicians.

FWIW there are some Yes campaigners coming over as very spiteful losers on here. There also seems to be confusion over many who support the union being supporters of Westminster. For many of us we want the Union, we don't want the Westminster politicians and we certainly don't want more mini CMDs and EMs locally. We want Westminster politics to be less about process and more about ideology and practical improvements to peoples lives. The referendum was really a costly exercise in arguing over who was going be in charge with little substance from either side. They money could have been spent far more productively.

teamhurtmore - Member
We do live in a democracy and the people of Scotland have spoken.
aye and we are allowed to try and change the mind of the 55% if we like. That's called, you know, democracy.
It's transient.

I am saying the pledge made no mention of a reciprocal tie in with English powers.

The pledge didn't say there [i]wouldn't[/i] be a reciprocal tie in either though, did it?

Or do you think Scottish people wouldn't have voted for it if they thought it meant English people might get the same?

Whats truly hilarious is watching all the same people (here and elsewhere) who were spouting that they saw this referendum as the beginning of a popular shift towards political engagement and major changes in the political regime in the UK start bitching because they've realised it would be good for the Tories 😆

The pledge didn't say there wouldn't be a reciprocal tie in either though, did it?

For example you did not say you were not a troll who did not believe a word they have just typed who lives on mars and eats gerbils. It would be foolish of me to claim this on the grounds you have not not said it in your post 😉

I dont think Scots cared much if there was a quid pro quo with england - though of course this would have been a threat had AS said it before hand and a deceiving lie had he not said it and then done it.

A separate england/ednig nthe est lothian question/ fairness whatever you call it is fine with me tbh but they cannot have westminster as the chamber anf they cannot make it conditional with the scottish pledge

I prefer to think that Alex Salmond once spurned THMs sexual advances and that this is the bunny-boiler in him playing up.

About as grown up as the rest of the yS debate. Well done for keeping the standards constant.

Either that or he is jealous that someone with the same education managed to become leader of his country, against a system designed to avoid just that, and is widely regarded as one of the most astute politicians of his generation whereas THM is just a no-mark spouting crap on a mountainbike forum.

So you know so much about me. Wouldn't swap a thing with AS. I have reached higher status in my chosen profession but didn't need to rely on bullying, lies and deceit to get there. I can sleep easily at night, thank you very much. Plus at least I can still remember what I was taught.

Notice through your inability to be specific on any so-called crap. Glad to see you keeping standards consistent.

Anyway, bitter loses in a bitter and unpleasant battle. All very apt. [s]you[/s] Youse represent your country well?!?

Better get ready for a proper job tomorrow now.

There also seems to be confusion over many who support the union being supporters of Westminster. For many of us we want the Union, we don't want the Westminster politicians and we certainly don't want more mini CMDs and EMs locally. We want Westminster politics to be less about process and more about ideology and practical improvements to peoples lives.

Some sound insight in there. I suspect Westminsterites of all colours are going to find it even harder to win the respect of the electorate. UKIP are full of populist nonsense so they're hardly any panacea.

I suspect most of the UK wants better-quality leadership but frankly I don't know where to go for it. I believe having a vote is a very very precious thing so I don't want to refuse to use it next May as some kind of protest but for the first time in my life I really don't know who to give it to, whilst still having some faith there's any point in voting...

Basically our politicians have no idea how to deal with the ageing population, the debt, and globalisation, and I don't know who does...

Either that or he is jealous that someone with the same education managed to become leader of his country, against a system designed to avoid just that, and is widely regarded as one of the most astute politicians of his generation whereas THM is just a no-mark spouting crap on a mountainbike forum.

Haha, quality. I think you might just have that spot on.

A separate england/ednig nthe est lothian question/ fairness whatever you call it is fine with me tbh but they cannot have westminster as the chamber

Well, Westminster remains the chamber for non devolved issues - I see no problem with separate English and UK parliament sittings & votes taking place in the same chamber, and I think its perfectly logical if SMP's and NI & Welsh members take the place of their respective current MP's in meetings of the full UK parliament (rather than duplication of one elected member in each as at the moment)

anf they cannot make it conditional with the scottish pledge

I don't think anyones suggested that its conditional, but in tandem

Of course, if Labour block progress, then you would have to take that up with them...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11111705/Alex-Salmond-says-No-voters-were-tricked.html

cue sniping for the next 20 years

+1 brooess.

Ninfan- the big problem with that is- who decides what's 'purely' English? Other than stuff about badger culls, I can think of nowt. Will the Tories stop at blocking a Scots MP from deciding which areas of Surrey get a badger cull next year?

As if! It will be widespread, it will be sweeping, it will be catch-all, it will benefit the Tories. Of course.

Listen- Scotland f*cked it up for all of us last week- you just haven't realised yet- aided and abetted by media, business, and the usual political sh*te. I'm sorry about that. We thought we could make it good for you, starting with us- your lords and masters would have felt shame, and trembled at our passing. Within 20 years, you would have been saying: if the Jock Kilt-Wearers can have a decent NHS, no tuition fees, no nukes, decent pensions, cheap, green energy, then why not us, Gideon?

Instead, we've got banks that still hold us to ransom (nothing's moved on since 2010), nuclear weapons we don't need (other than for status), ever rising costs of every damned thing, itchy feet to get back into Iraq, an NHS carve up, infrastructure projects that largely benefit the SE, and cheap, cheap debt for those who'd buy a one-bed flat in Battersea for £450k.

Just everybody keep the heid, and do yir old pal here a massive favour- keep the eye on the ball, remember the shame of seeing them (not you!) humbled when they thought they'd lose Morlock status, and keep asking them- why?

Good job no one thought this was a vote about whether Scotland should be an independent country or not.... 😉

Details become all important all of a sudden, despite being dismissed throughout the campaign. Brilliant.

If you can meet with triumph and disaster and treat those two impostors both the same.

Well, Westminster remains the chamber for non devolved issues - I see no problem with separate English and UK parliament sittings & votes taking place in the same chamber, and I think its perfectly logical if SMP's and NI & Welsh members take the place of their respective current MP's in meetings of the full UK parliament

Youse need your own chamber but it is an interesting one to replace westminster with members from all the others - problem then is how do we/parties/ the monarch select UK ministers and PM's? etc
a two chamber solution is inevitable IMHO with devolved assemblies sitting wherever - why not the middle like say Birmingham?

who decides what's 'purely' English? Other than stuff about badger culls, I can think of nowt.

Well, the same type of stuff thats currently devolved to the regions

highways, housing, tourism, health etc.

It will hardly reduce the power of england if they always sit there and are permanently based there no will it ?

What powers does Westminister have on devolved issues?

Its utterly pointless for everyone having an MP and an MSP both sharing the same job and responsibilities as done by one English MP at the moment, not least the electorate who has a problem that needs support/representation on.

Ernie, I'm not sure that the welsh are particularly happy.

Well they appear to unhappy because they want [i]more[/i] devolution, not less.

[url= http://commissionondevolutioninwales.independent.gov.uk/2013/08/13/beaufort-poll-shows-support-for-national-assembly-for-wales-and-further-powers-continues-to-grow/ ]Beaufort Poll shows support for National Assembly for Wales and further powers continues to grow[/url]

[i]"According to an opinion survey undertaken by Beaufort Research on behalf of the Commission on Devolution in Wales, a majority of the Welsh public believe the National Assembly for Wales (NafW) has provided a strong voice for Wales and would like to see further powers devolved over a period of time".[/i]

Devolution has been a success story and support for it continues to grow.

I was making a badly-put facetious argument there, Ninfan- apologies.

OK, so Scots MPs don't get to vote on 'English' matters.

My questions:

1)Who gets to decide what's just English? Would this mean purely reserved matters?

2)When would the Scottish Parliament be conferred full status, as, at present, it can still be overridden (though rarely is) by Westminster?

Who gets to decide what's just English? Would this mean purely reserved matters?

It's the opposite, reserved matters are not "just English".

What is devolved and reserved is all fairly straight forward, as this Scottish Gov. webpage shows

[url= http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/visitandlearn/25488.aspx ]Devolved and reserved matters[/url]

Ninfan I am bitching because the 3 amigos lied

I'm Welsh and quite happy. I want the same devolved powers for our govt as the Scotts have, will have, for theirs.

I am bitching because the 3 amigos lied

Lied about what ?

Mr Cameron made no mention of tying increased devolution for Scotland and Mr Miliband didnt mention his english constitutional convention, It is not normally good practice to make hurried legislation but that being so they should not have signed up for Mr Browns "timetable".
from the guardian

The letter, signed by David Cameron, Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg, appears on the front page of Tuesday's Daily Record newspaper. It promises "extensive new powers" for the Scottish parliament "delivered by the process and to the timetable agreed" by the three parties,

Ninfan I am bitching because the 3 amigos lied

& that led to you voting No?

Mr Cameron made no mention of tying increased devolution for Scotland and Mr Miliband didnt mention his english constitutional convention

The letter... ...promises "extensive new powers" for the Scottish parliament "delivered by the process and to the timetable agreed" by the three parties,

I see nothing contradictory between those two positions

Delivering one does not exclude or prevent delivering the other.

It is not normally good practice to make hurried legislation but that being so they should not have signed up for Mr Browns "timetable".

You didn't seem overly worried by the bloke who was going to rush through independence in 18 months...

Perhaps you need to stop worrying about what is being promised to English voters and concentrate on whether anyone has said they plan to stop Scotland having more powers as promised, or on the timetable promised. I've yet to see anything pointing to this other than hysterical ranting from a bunch of sore losers!

To repeat Ernie's question - lied about what? Simple question.

Possibly ninfan but they are not identical statements
I will help you move house tomorrow does not preclude it being conditional on you paying me and me not being hungover [ and a million other caveats we could create] but most would assume it means I will turn up and do it for free

FWIW he has backpedalled away from Goves statement

His chief whip Michael Gove said it would be "impossible to move forward" without being certain of change in Scotland and England

Downing Street has made it clear that David Cameron's Scottish devolution pledge does not depend on giving more powers to English MPs at the same time.

Mr Cameron vowed to give tax-raising powers to the Scottish Parliament "in tandem" with moves to restrict Scottish MPs from voting on English matters.

But No 10 sources insist that "one is not conditional upon the other".

May be some facts may come out to see whether there have been lies or not. Tomorrow might be a start. So next weeks lottery numbers.....?

@imnotverygood I voted yes.

Mr Cameron made no mention of tying increased devolution for Scotland and Mr Miliband didnt mention his english constitutional convention

I don't know what you're talking about, presumably you're hoping that the pledge made by the 3 party leaders will be broken so you can cry foul.

[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29300084 ]Scottish devolution pledge stands insists No 10[/url]

[i]Downing Street has made it clear that David Cameron's Scottish devolution pledge does not depend on giving more powers to English MPs at the same time.[/i]

It is perfectly reasonable that as well as increased devolved powers for Scotland the West Lothian Question be resolved - the two issues are clearly closely related.

The Referendum result was announced on Friday, we've had the weekend and now tomorrow morning the following motion will be put before the House of Commons :

[b]That this House...

* welcomes the result of the Scottish independence referendum and the decision of the people of Scotland to remain part of the United Kingdom;

*recognises that people across Scotland voted? for a Union based on the pooling and sharing of resources and for the? continuation of devolution inside the United Kingdom;

*notes the statement by the prime minister, deputy prime minister and leader of the opposition regarding the guarantee of and timetable for further devolution to Scotland;

*calls on the government to lay before Parliament a Command Paper including the proposals of all three UK political parties by 30th October and to consult widely with the Scottish people, civic Scotland and the Scottish Parliament on these proposals;

*further calls on the government to publish heads of agreement by the end of November and draft clauses for the new Scotland Bill by the end of January 2015.[/b]

If things aren't moving fast enough for you then that's kinda tuff because they can't move any faster.

@imnotverygood I voted yes.

I think that is my point.

Maybe Gove is playing games too - I really wouldn't put it past him to be making a play for the Tory leadership...

That ll be the motion that was supposed to have been presented on Friday.

supposed to have been presented on Friday.

[img] [/img]

a childish ad hom straw man
You are spoiling us ninfan

The House of Commons was in recess last week.

I'm so glad this thread is still going! I've been watching Annoying Orange all day so I feel I'm ready for the level of debate here.

scotroutes - Member
just a no-mark spouting crap on a mountainbike forum

That ll be the motion that was supposed to have been presented on Friday.

No that'll be the motion that according to the timetable for a new constitution was to be published on the 19th September and voted on by MPs "at the first opportunity".

You are desperately hoping that Westminster will break its pledges aren't you gordimhor ?

I fear you will be deeply disappointed. Remember that it was Westminster which gave devolved powers to Scotland and it was Westminster which gave the Scottish Parliament the legal authority to hold a referendum.

Who else could have done it but westminster? I am not sure what the point is there ernie tbh, its what the word devolved means.

Interesting Guardian article on what has happened today
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/21/cameron-pressure-scotland-devolution-alexander

"It is deeply frustrating that briefings over the last 48 hours have distracted from the crystal-clear commitment of all parties to deliver the change Scotland voted for last week," Alexander, the chief secretary to the Treasury, told the Guardian. He is likely to sit on a cabinet committee overseeing devolution.

An 11th-hour vow by the three Westminster leaders last week, promising more devolution if Scotland rejected independence, has been in disarray after Cameron appeared to attach new conditions. The prime minister said on Friday that negotiations on only English MPs voting on English laws "must take place in tandem with, and at the same pace, as the settlement for Scotland".

Fears that the Tories were planning to renege on the pledge were fuelled when the Scottish-born Conservative chief whip, Michael Gove, said on Saturday that it would be "impossible" to devolve further powers to Scotland without addressing the position of Scottish MPs at Westminster.

No 10 moved to distance itself from Gove, saying the prime minister was committed to the timetable agreed by the three main UK party leaders to hand greater powers over tax and welfare to the Scottish parliament. A government source said: "There was an unambiguous commitment by the party leaders to deliver more devolution to Scotland on a clear timetable. That is not conditional on anything else. No ifs, no buts – that will occur."

Hopefully this will explain why folk were unhappy, including coalition ministers, and how the tories have had to change tack from changing tack
I am not sure how AS can get the blame for any of this.