The Dirty Independence Question

[eFestivals]

I think Neil would prefer pretty much anyone alive or dead over Salmond.

I prefer the honest over charlatans, yep.

Any decent Scottish politicians who *REALLY* cares about the Scottish people wouldn't happily let Scotland walk to disaster.

For him, any disaster for Scotland is a price worth paying for his indy nightmare.

It's a shame that yes supporters in Scotland can't do basic maths.

Edited February 5, 2015 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

So, you've given lots of good reasons why a lab/Snp deal won't work, but you have still failed to come up with an answer to who is going to prop up the Tories, given that it looks unlikely there will be enough lib dems or ukippers to do so.

The largest party wins, propped up or not.

If the SNP are going to prop up Labour, will they be doing that for free or for a price?

Labour won't pay the price, so either the SNP become Labour's lapdogs (and so you might as well have voted Labour anyway), or the SNP don't support Labour at all.

So either way, Scotland gets nothing out of voting SNP.

Not even listened to.

[eFestivals]

Scotland will be fine with full fiscal autonomy.

After all, in a 25 year period it's had seven years where its deficit has been very slightly lower than whole-UK, and the other 18 years don't count at all for balancing the books.

Vote SNP for 10% bigger cuts than the tories will give you. You know it makes sense. :lol:

[russycarps]

So, you've given lots of good reasons why a lab/Snp deal won't work, but you have still failed to come up with an answer to who is going to prop up the Tories, given that it looks unlikely there will be enough lib dems or ukippers to do so.

I think in this circumstance they will go back to the polls, and gain an overall majority the second time round.

A tory government in charge for 5 years with not even the spineless libdems to keep them in check is a chilling thought. The majority of the cuts are still to come. Osborne will bend us over and fuck us all mercilessly. Then in 5 years time, boris johnson will step into the leader of the party role and romp home. 10 years of the torys beckons...

That being said, I saw jim murphy on newsnight last night and he is a loathesome phoney who made my skin crawl.

[LJS]

I think in this circumstance they will go back to the polls, and gain an overall majority the second time round.

A tory government in charge for 5 years with not even the spineless libdems to keep them in check is a chilling thought. The majority of the cuts are still to come. Osborne will bend us over and fuck us all mercilessly. Then in 5 years time, boris johnson will step into the leader of the party role and romp home. 10 years of the torys beckons...

That being said, I saw jim murphy on newsnight last night and he is a loathesome phoney who made my skin crawl.

So, in other words, Labour's unwillingness to consider any sort of deal with the SNP will not only result in them losing the opportunity to form a government, but also lead to 5 more years of Tory rule.

Quite plausible, which is why I think Labour will at least try & cobble something together with the SNP. I'm not saying they'll succeed - there are many obstacles.

[LJS]

The largest party wins, propped up or not.

If the SNP are going to prop up Labour, will they be doing that for free or for a price?

Labour won't pay the price, so either the SNP become Labour's lapdogs (and so you might as well have voted Labour anyway), or the SNP don't support Labour at all.

So either way, Scotland gets nothing out of voting SNP.

Not even listened to.

Yeah, Neil, we know this is your opinion. Other opinions are, of course, available.

I wonder what the squirrels think.

[eFestivals]

I think in this circumstance they will go back to the polls, and gain an overall majority the second time round.

if there's a 2nd election shortly after the first, the tories will win it, I guarantee.

'The people' will vote for a solid govt in those circumstances, rather than have no govt.

It's depressing, but I'm willing to take bets on that.

[LJS]

Scotland will be fine with full fiscal autonomy.

After all, in a 25 year period it's had seven years where its deficit has been very slightly lower than whole-UK, and the other 18 years don't count at all for balancing the books.

Vote SNP for 10% bigger cuts than the tories will give you. You know it makes sense. :lol:

The more recent years would of course be more relevant. When I posted figures showing Scotland doing better than rUK for 4 of the past 5 years you rubbished them. Now you post a graph showing exactly the same thing.

Maybe you brain wasn't working at the time.

[eFestivals]

Yeah, Neil, we know this is your opinion. Other opinions are, of course, available.

You clearly don't realise how toxic that marriage would be to so many.

The SNP are not just "a Scottish Party within the UK". They are a party whose remit is to destroy the UK, and therefore any involvement in govt is about destroying that govt and doing the worst for the people of the UK.

If Scotland are too daft to recognise this, the error is Scotland's.

In May, i'll look forwards to you admitting I called it right, and all those SNP voting Scots called it wrong.

Just as they're doing with the SNP's plans of 'full fiscal autonomy'. There might be different opinions, but there's only one duff sottish economy, as outlined within GERS.

[eFestivals]

The more recent years would of course be more relevant.

Like 2012-13 - with its bigger deficit?

Like 2013-14 - with its bigger deficit?

Like 2014-15 - with its bigger deficit?

Those recent years you mean? Then why aren't you giving them relevance?

When I posted figures showing Scotland doing better than rUK for 4 of the past 5 years you rubbished them.

I did initially, then I realised my error an admitted it, but don't let that stop you making it up.

Meanwhile, they're not "4 of the last 5 years" that you're talking about, are they? They're 4 of the last 8 years, where the other 4 years show Scotland in deeper shit, and the shit getting deeper.

Maybe you brain wasn't working at the time.

No, my brain was, which i why I'm happy to admit my errors, and to always reference the facts.

You know, the facts of all the other years that you pretend are an irrelevance.

[russycarps]

if there's a 2nd election shortly after the first, the tories will win it, I guarantee.

'The people' will vote for a solid govt in those circumstances, rather than have no govt.

It's depressing, but I'm willing to take bets on that.

[LJS]

You clearly don't realise how toxic that marriage would be to so many.

The SNP are not just "a Scottish Party within the UK". They are a party whose remit is to destroy the UK, and therefore any involvement in govt is about destroying that govt and doing the worst for the people of the UK.

If Scotland are too daft to recognise this, the error is Scotland's.

In May, i'll look forwards to you admitting I called it right, and all those SNP voting Scots called it wrong.

Just as they're doing with the SNP's plans of 'full fiscal autonomy'. There might be different opinions, but there's only one duff sottish economy, as outlined within GERS.

[eFestivals]

I think Labour will at least try & cobble something together with the SNP.

Have you not noticed what's happened to the LibDems for cosying up with 'the hated'?

From Scotland, the SNP cannot cosy up with the hated Labour Party without paying the ultimate penalty.

From England, Labour cannot cosy up with the hated SNP without paying the ultimate penalty.

Reality is nothing to the new Scottish politics.

[eFestivals]

Yup, there are lots of reasons why a deal would be very difficult. But if it's the only show in town as looks quite possible, Labour would be crazy not to st east explore the possibility.

So if after the election there is no labsnp deal, this would not be proving me wrong at all as I have consistently said it is unlikely.

But it's not the only show in town.

Firstly, there's also the tory show which Scottish votes will try to endorse.

And secondly, a Lab/SNP coalition has a price - a price that neither party can afford to pay if they want a life beyond 2020.

Labour would be crazy to explore the possibility. Even a slightest hint that they're dancing to the SNP's tune will destroy them forever in England.

And you say it's unlikely, so you're clearly happy to get the alternative that your vote will cause - the tories ruling over you.

But pretend that you'd hate that, yeah? But not do anything to stop it.

Vote SNP, get tories, or get nothing at all. That's what your "unlikely" is saying.

Edited February 5, 2015 by eFestivals

[kaosmark2]

Anyone who thinks SNP in coalition is an actual possibility is deluded. It cannot happen. The SNP aren't just another party, they are, as has been mentioned several times before, THE party focused on splitting the UK.

[LJS]

Anyone who thinks SNP in coalition is an actual possibility is deluded. It cannot happen. The SNP aren't just another party, they are, as has been mentioned several times before, THE party focused on splitting the UK.

Yup, a formal coalition is pretty much a non starter.

[eFestivals]

Yup, a formal coalition is pretty much a non starter.

and what's in for the SNP with an informal one? Nothing at all.

The best it can get is "vote on policies", which will mean that Labour gets to do everything it wants - because if there's a policy that's to-the-right that the SNP won't support, it's likely that the tories would to avoid a more-left policy in its place.

If Scotland votes SNP, they might as well not vote at all. It's a vote to marginalise themselves from the UK political process.

Edited February 5, 2015 by eFestivals

[gary1979666]

What's going to happen with the EVEL proposals that Hague came out with this week? Are there any plans for the coalition to push them through or at least be debated? Could they be passed before May?

[eFestivals]

What's going to happen with the EVEL proposals that Hague came out with this week? Are there any plans for the coalition to push them through or at least be debated? Could they be passed before May?

not a chance of happening before May, as the LibDems won't support them. They'll only happen if the tories get a majority.

But the purpose of EVEL isn't only about getting that passed into law, it's also about getting across that a Labour govt might have the tail wagging the dog, to try and get more votes for the tories.

This is an idea I've been rising for months, which some dismissed back then as "just an opinion" which didn't mean anything. And yet it seems to mean quite a lot to the tory's election campaign, because they've measured its effect and found it to be more than "just an opinion".

Still, with views of a meaningful Labour/SNP coalition (either formal or informal) being slowly recognised as ever-more unlikely, perhaps there's hope yet? The hope is that Scotland doesn't want to cause itself to be ruled by the tories, but it's still only a minor hope.

[LJS]

The simple maths that Neil continues to ignore is that if Scotland elects 30 or 40 Snp mps & thereby prevents Labour gaining an overall majority, the Tories by simple arithmetic will be unable to form a government because, again by simple arithmetic, they will face defeat on anything opposed by both Labour & the Snp.

The way things look at the moment, I find it hard to imagine how the Tories will be able to form a workable government.

Of, course things will doubtless change during the campaign, but that's how it looks to me right now.

The extent to which all parties other than lab & con are squeezed the more the electorate hear messages like Neil's will be highly significant.

The sad thing is that outwith Scotland we are in danger of returning to the old 2 party system.

[LondonTom]

While I remember, read today that the only corners of the UK that favour being in Europe are Scotland and London. I think I`m right in saying that London also don`t vote Tory. Anyone know if this is true and if so why ? Don`t feel so bad about paying towards their fancy train sets now

Some of the richer areas do but most of the pooer parts don't but there is an awful lot of London that people outside of it like to ignore when moaning about it. The majority of Londoners are just average workers and not the bankers/political elite. (Though sadly with house prices rising and 'regneration' areas this is going become less common as the rich move into them after fucking up the mainline trains from the country side. So its hard for them to get into London on business.)

We only got Borris, as most people are to thick to realise that the London Mayor actually effects their lives and isn't just a "jovial" spokesperson.

I miss Ken .

[kaosmark2]

The simple maths that Neil continues to ignore is that if Scotland elects 30 or 40 Snp mps & thereby prevents Labour gaining an overall majority, the Tories by simple arithmetic will be unable to form a government because, again by simple arithmetic, they will face defeat on anything opposed by both Labour & the Snp.

The way things look at the moment, I find it hard to imagine how the Tories will be able to form a workable government.

Of, course things will doubtless change during the campaign, but that's how it looks to me right now.

The extent to which all parties other than lab & con are squeezed the more the electorate hear messages like Neil's will be highly significant.

The sad thing is that outwith Scotland we are in danger of returning to the old 2 party system.

I find it implausible that the SNP will get substantially more mps than the Lib dems, let alone all other minor parties put together.

[eFestivals]

The simple maths that Neil continues to ignore is that if Scotland elects 30 or 40 Snp mps & thereby prevents Labour gaining an overall majority, the Tories by simple arithmetic will be unable to form a government because, again by simple arithmetic, they will face defeat on anything opposed by both Labour & the Snp.

But if the SNP won't support either the tories or Labour?

They've said they won't support the tories. They've said they'll only support Labour for a price that Labour cannot afford.

So what then?

The SNP will sit on their hands, and the tories have it.

The way things look at the moment, I find it hard to imagine how the Tories will be able to form a workable government.

and neither will Labour without unqualified SNP support.

You know, with the SNP acting *exactly* as the Labour party do.

The only way to get the Labour govt you want is to vote Labour. A vote for another party and a fingers-crossed that Labour win anyway is risking punching yourself in the face.

If you were confident in your version of things, you wouldn't feel the need to keep repudiating me saying that Scootland stands a big chance of creating a tory govt to rule over Scotland. It's like you're trying to convince yourself.

(I have confidence in none of the possibilities. I keep raising this because Scotland changing it's mind is the only way to get confidence in Labour being the govt).

Of, course things will doubtless change during the campaign, but that's how it looks to me right now.

It should change when the next GERS comes out and the full horror of the SNP's proposed "full fiscal autonomy" hits home - but that would require nats to do the maths, and they've already shown themselves to be numerically dyslexic.

The extent to which all parties other than lab & con are squeezed the more the electorate hear messages like Neil's will be highly significant.

Yep, I made it up out of nothing, the tories have heard me, and so they've made it their campaign platform.

Or alternatively, everything about what I've been saying for months and you've been saying "that's just your opinion" to is something that everyone in England already knows but no one in Scotland can see.

Take your pick. Only one of those is right. Can you guess which it is yet?

The sad thing is that outwith Scotland we are in danger of returning to the old 2 party system.

Oh FFS.

We *ONLY* have a two party system under FPTP, there is nothing else that is possible from the result.

You seem to have got confused by the presence of another different system also operating in Scotland - but for a completely different thing.

Vote SNP, get tory.

You can throw that line off easily; a tory govt you can't.

[LJS]

But it's not the only show in town.

Firstly, there's also the tory show which Scottish votes will try to endorse.

And secondly, a Lab/SNP coalition has a price - a price that neither party can afford to pay if they want a life beyond 2020.

Labour would be crazy to explore the possibility. Even a slightest hint that they're dancing to the SNP's tune will destroy them forever in England.

And you say it's unlikely, so you're clearly happy to get the alternative that your vote will cause - the tories ruling over you.

But pretend that you'd hate that, yeah? But not do anything to stop it.

Vote SNP, get tories, or get nothing at all. That's what your "unlikely" is saying.

depending on how the votes pan out it may well be the only show in town because it seems perfectly plausible that there will be enough labour & snp MP's to prevent the Tories being able to form any sort of workable government - looking around various prediction sites virtually none are predicting a scenario where the Tories could govern without the support of at least 2 other parties and on some they would need 4 or 5 parties supporting them.

In ruling out any chance of some kind of deal between labour & the SNP you seem to be making a number of assumptions - if they are wrong, then you might well be wrong.

1: The SNP will demand a price which is more than Labour will be prepared to pay:

Will they? Are you really sure about that? I assume you are talking about Trident, the scrapping of which has been touted as the SNP's price for a deal. I agree that Labour (tragically) will almost certainly be unwilling to deliver that but when the whiff of power is in the air, Politicians have a great knack of finding compromises (fudges to you & me). We might see a royal commission on whether we should renew Trident with the promise of a referendum afterwards. Sorted! I seem to remember the SNP has talked about demanding an "end to austerity" a phrase so vague & meaningless that agreement could be fudged reached in a matter of minutes. Of course the whole project could be scuppered from the outset if the SNP make crazy demands - like another referendum. Sturgeon gives every indication of being a fairly shrewd political operator & the leader of the SNP in the house of Commons will almost certainly be St Alec & for all your criticisms of him, I guess you would credit him with a fair amount of tactical acumen. If they decide they want to deal with Labour, they are well capable of tempering their demands to suit. Maybe they will even demand electoral reform, Neil. That would give you a bit of a quandary, wouldn't it?

2: A coalition would be political suicide for the SNP

well, firstly there won't be a coalition: that much we are agreed on. Some sort of confidence & supply arrangement is not impossible. The notions that this would be suicide for the SNP is based on the expected impending disaster for the Lib Dems. The problem is that this is the only example of coalition politics that we have at Westminster. So to draw the conclusion that any party that becomes the junior partner in a coalition (or similar) is doomed to failure, is not in any way a certainty. It isn't hard to find examples of where the Libdems went wrong. It certainly doesn't seem impossible that the SNP might learn from the Libdem's errors.

3. Labour would be irrevocably damaged by doing a deal with a Party dedicated to the destruction of the UK or as you put it "Even a slightest hint that they're dancing to the SNP's tune will destroy them forever in England."

Well, this again hangs, to a great extent on how high a price the SNP try to extract for whatever support they offer to Labour. And the whole thing could be scuppered if they ask for too much. But on the other hand, you all begged us to stay. You told us how important a part of the Union we were. You told us how diminished you would be if we left...I take it from your comment that that was all bullshit. And if you think that all the spin doctors etc can't dress a deal up as "saving" the UK from 5 more years of the evil Tories, then maybe you're right

Just for absolute clarity, I am not suggesting for a minute that any Lab SNP deal will be easy: there is real animosity on both sides & there would be membership cards ripped up on both sides if a deal was done, but where politicians are concerned, it would be unwise to underestimate the allure of power especially as Labour hardly bothered to try the last time .

[LJS]

I did initially, then I realised my error an admitted it, but don't let that stop you making it up.

Meanwhile, they're not "4 of the last 5 years" that you're talking about, are they? They're 4 of the last 8 years, where the other 4 years show Scotland in deeper shit, and the shit getting deeper.

I went with your graph... of the five most recent years you chose to post, Scotland was better off the the UK. Only going with your figures

Also in 17 of the 32 years covered in your graph , we were better off, whihch I'm pretty sure contradicts your claims, but hey, I won't pmsl or insult your intelligence cos i'm not an arrogant Twat (in my opinion)

Edited February 5, 2015 by LJS