General Election 2015

[pink_triangle]

You've just voted for a British parliament that contains devolved countries. Whether you agree or not, Scotland and Wales voted for devolution, and their MP's have a greater say in how they are governed. Is it then fair for them also to have a say in how England is governed? The UK as a whole, yes, of course.

It is fair on the basis that England is part of Britain and have not voted for devolved power. If England want some measure of devolution that's fine, but that shouldn't be using the British parliament.

[feral chile]

It is fair on the basis that England is part of Britain and have not voted for devolved power. If England want some measure of devolution that's fine, but that shouldn't be using the British parliament.

I'm confused by what you mean now - how could it not be through a British parliament if there was still a British parliament to be part of?

[pink_triangle]

I'm confused by what you mean now - how could it not be through a British parliament if there was still a British parliament to be part of?

Sorry that's me not explaining things clearly. What I meant is that English MPs elected for the British parliament should not be allowed additional powers over non English MPs in terms of what they can vote for and what they cant. Everyone has been elected as a British representative and should have equal voting status.

If England want devolved power then this should be through an English parliament and a different group of politicians. In the same way I would not have supported Welsh or Scottish devolution if it had just been a case of giving their respective MPs additional voting power, instead of the formation of a separate bodies. If Welsh or Scottish politicians don't want to be involved in English affair then the simple answer is to stand for assembly/Scottish parliament elections instead of Westminster.

[kaosmark2]

it doesn't matter. They repeatedly made it clear the circumstances under which they would vote on English matters. they had to continually justify this.

Look, Russy, I know you are really into animal rights & I understand how much you want the Tories to fail in their attempt to reintroduce hunting. As you are no doubt aware it is not such a big issue for everyone & it is completely unrealistic to expect the SNP to reverse their whole position on what they do & don't vote on for this issue. They would be crucified.

I'm genuinely sorry & would far rather this wasn't happening but to blame this on the SNP is hitting the wrong target. The Tories & the selfish bastards who vote for them are the issue. In Scotland we have ruthlessly hunted the Tories until they are nearly extinct.

Utterly agree with this.

The only thing I disagree with is the idea that Scottish Tories are extinct. They're still the 4th largest party in the country, and they still get a significant vote percentage, and a MP. Accept that.

[kaosmark2]

I personally think English vote for English laws creates two classes of mps. Its a British parliament and I'm happy for any British mp to have their voice heard and vote on any issue that comes through the parliament.

If course if there's call from an English parliament, I'm happy for a party to put it in a manifesto and put it to the electorate.

Absolutely.

The British parliament should not have a formal rejection of MPs from various regions/nations within the UK. If there's to be a federal system, reformat it and include it as a separate electoral sample. Not 2 classes of MP.

[viberunner]

I personally think English vote for English laws creates two classes of mps.

I already have 3 MPs. A member of the European Parliament. A member of the Scottish Parliament. A member of the Westminster Parliament.

The questions are if "English only" matters are a full-time job or not and does England (and let's face it, for the most part it IS England that elects the "national" parliament) want the potential to elect one type of UK government and a different one (be it more or less right-wing) for England's domestic policies.

If England voted UKIP/Tory again for Westminster, but progressive parties won Scotland, Wales, and England's "national" parliaments, does right or left economic policy deserve to be implemented?

[viberunner]

The only thing I disagree with is the idea that Scottish Tories are extinct. They're still the 4th largest party in the country, and they still get a significant vote percentage, and a MP. Accept that.

At the election just gone

#1, SNP 50%

#2, Labour 24%

#3, Conservative 15%

#4, Liberal Democrat 8%

#5, UKIP 2%

#6, Green 1%

The Scottish parliament is different but the last election was a while back, but for that mater in 2010 the Tories came 4th. Now the LD vote has collapsed, if that continues for the 2016 Scottish Parliament the Tories are back to 3rd place (though their vote has remained consistent and not particularly benefited from the LD collapse).

[pink_triangle]

I already have 3 MPs. A member of the European Parliament. A member of the Scottish Parliament. A member of the Westminster Parliament.

The questions are if "English only" matters are a full-time job or not and does England (and let's face it, for the most part it IS England that elects the "national" parliament) want the potential to elect one type of UK government and a different one (be it more or less right-wing) for England's domestic policies.

If England voted UKIP/Tory again for Westminster, but progressive parties won Scotland, Wales, and England's "national" parliaments, does right or left economic policy deserve to be implemented?

Your right the question is,do the English people want their own government. Not being English, I wouldn't feel I can make that choice for them. However if they don't, I don't think they can assume that they can just use our government for certain people to splinter off.

Out of interest do the snp mps hand back some of their British tax payer funded salary if they don't want to play a full role in British parliament. Do the party hand back some of the money they get allocated for having mps in Westminster?

I'm not criticizing the snp for being inflexible with their policy to not vote on matters that don't concern them, I'm criticizing the policy. If plaid and the northern itudg do the same, I'm just as critical with those.

If your elected to the British parliament your on the same pay scale as your English counterpart, so you should do the same job. England is part of Britain, so any mp in the parliament should feel a responsibility to aid in its legislation.

[eFestivals]

You support EVEL you plonker. but you slay the SNP for not voting to protect English foxes.

eh? Where have I said I support EVEL?

I don't. I merely pointed out the flaws in the SNP's anti-EVEL argument, to show that it doesn't stand up in real terms. You know, that thing I explained which you couldn't fiund a counter-argument for.

What I very definitely don't support is Scotland dictating to the rest of the UK how the UK should be reformed as a result of Scotland getting and wanting devolution, which it's since discovered isn't what it wanted at all.

Just because Scotland's own wants have fucked up shouldn't give Scotland the right to fuck up other places as well. For a start, if Scotland has fucked things up for itself it's not going to do any better in other places.

If England wants reform that's England's business and not a devolved Scotland's.

Personally, I would rather Fox hunting stayed banned & I would be perfectly happy for the SNP to vote against it, but if you can't see the logic in their position, you are more stupid than you think I am:)

And if you think there wouldn't be massive outrage if they did vote then you are even more stupid tHan that.

The SNP said they'd play a full and contructive role in UK politics. Now they're saying they won't.

And yes, I'm also aware that they'd also said they wouldn't play a full and constructive role in UK politics.

I'm allowed to point out the dupliciousness of their words.

Edited May 17, 2015 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

I do sympathise with those who want to see stronger regional representation, however, because deprived areas (whichever part of the UK) get neglected.

yeah, cos with the country divided into competing segments they'll stand so much stronger against the tories.

Now, just think back 10 days or so, and see how that's worked out.

Edited May 17, 2015 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

Animal rights ....Fucked

Human rights... Fucked

Worker's rights.... Fucked

Extreme right.... Rampant

a self-funded Scotland.... Fucked.

You can have animal rights, you can have human rights, you can have workers rights.

You just can't have all the same public services with which to support those things.

'Better' is never just a one-way street.

[LJS]

Utterly agree with this.

The only thing I disagree with is the idea that Scottish Tories are extinct. They're still the 4th largest party in the country, and they still get a significant vote percentage, and a MP. Accept that.

Cheers, Kaos.

the bit about the Tories was a bit tongue in cheek.

Whilst we disagree on much, Kaos, I appreciate the fact that, unlike certain others, you are big enough to say when we agree.

Respect.

[LJS]

a self-funded Scotland.... Fucked.

You can have animal rights, you can have human rights, you can have workers rights.

You just can't have all the same public services with which to support those things.

'Better' is never just a one-way street.

There is no post that Neil cannot use to slip in his demented hatred of the SNP!

[kaosmark2]

Cheers, Kaos.

the bit about the Tories was a bit tongue in cheek.

Whilst we disagree on much, Kaos, I appreciate the fact that, unlike certain others, you are big enough to say when we agree.

Respect.

I don't like or trust the SNP. I think I've explained the reasons fairly well. They're being consistent with their stance here though, and there's no point criticising them when it isn't warranted. In fact, picking at bad opportunities to criticise them only weakens the times you do which are valid.

Of course, that goes both ways, and is a large part of why I don't pay any attention to viberunner's anti-English bollocks.

[russycarps]

They aren't being consistent here though because they've said they will now play a full and constructive role in UK politics

[feral chile]

eh? Where have I said I support EVEL?

I don't. I merely pointed out the flaws in the SNP's anti-EVEL argument, to show that it doesn't stand up in real terms. You know, that thing I explained which you couldn't fiund a counter-argument for.

What I very definitely don't support is Scotland dictating to the rest of the UK how the UK should be reformed as a result of Scotland getting and wanting devolution, which it's since discovered isn't what it wanted at all.

Just because Scotland's own wants have fucked up shouldn't give Scotland the right to fuck up other places as well. For a start, if Scotland has fucked things up for itself it's not going to do any better in other places.

If England wants reform that's England's business and not a devolved Scotland's.

The SNP said they'd play a full and contructive role in UK politics. Now they're saying they won't.

And yes, I'm also aware that they'd also said they wouldn't play a full and constructive role in UK politics.

I'm allowed to point out the dupliciousness of their words.

That's probably a question of semantics. UK politics, not English politics.

I definitely think there should be some level of autonomy on a regional basis. We only get a 16% discount on council house purchase, for instance. Despite being in a position to benefit from buying our council house, I fully support this, and while sympathetic to people who want to buy the family home for a level of security, I disagree with making a profit out of something that's in place to help people in need.

And with the issues around housing that Wales has, a uniform UK policy might not be appropriate.

[eFestivals]

We only get a 16% discount on council house purchase, for instance.

cos destroying the social housing stock is such a good idea you should get an even bigger freebie?

(yes, I know bigger discounts are available in some places. The whole idea is wrong, not that the discounts are diffeent in different places).

[eFestivals]

They're being consistent with their stance here though

except they're not, because there's now three different versions of what the SNP will do, with the latest Sturgeon tweet demonstrating that their yo-yo has yet to settle in the most popularist place.

(the yo-yo only ever does settle in the popularist place).

It's called "making it up as you go along".

What it very definitely isn't is ""principled".

[zero000]

They only care about scottish people. What made you think they'd start caring about anything other than scottish foxes too?

The awful c**ts.

What's worse, perpetrating a vile act or standing by and doing nothing to prevent it?

Quite. I'm no PETA member,but fox hunting is utterly vile. Grown men wooping at dogs ripping an animal apart to entertain themselves.

[LJS]

They aren't being consistent here though because they've said they will now play a full and constructive role in UK politics

eh? Where have I said I support EVEL?

I don't. I merely pointed out the flaws in the SNP's anti-EVEL argument, to show that it doesn't stand up in real terms. You know, that thing I explained which you couldn't fiund a counter-argument for.

What I very definitely don't support is Scotland dictating to the rest of the UK how the UK should be reformed as a result of Scotland getting and wanting devolution, which it's since discovered isn't what it wanted at all.

Just because Scotland's own wants have fucked up shouldn't give Scotland the right to fuck up other places as well. For a start, if Scotland has fucked things up for itself it's not going to do any better in other places.

If England wants reform that's England's business and not a devolved Scotland's.

The SNP said they'd play a full and contructive role in UK politics. Now they're saying they won't.

And yes, I'm also aware that they'd also said they wouldn't play a full and constructive role in UK politics.

I'm allowed to point out the dupliciousness of their words.

except they're not, because there's now three different versions of what the SNP will do, with the latest Sturgeon tweet demonstrating that their yo-yo has yet to settle in the most popularist place.

(the yo-yo only ever does settle in the popularist place).

It's called "making it up as you go along".

What it very definitely isn't is ""principled".

OK, Firstly Neil, I seem to remember some chat about whether SNP mp's should or shouldn't vote on English NHS matters. I got the impression you though they shouldn't. If I misinterpreted that, then I apologise. So just for clarity, do you think it is acceptable for Scottish mp's to vote on issues that do not affect Scotland e.g hunting ban?

Secondly, does Neil or anyone else think there is anything wrong with the long held position of the SNP that they don't vote on matters that have no impact on Scotland?

Thirdly, Is playing a " full and constructive role in UK politics." necessarily incompatible with the SNP's position? By including stuff that impacts on Scotland's budget in their list of stuff they will vote on, they have effectively increased their sphere of influence to cover most policy matters.

Finally, I have seen the Blessed Nicola's tweet & also one form Angus Robertson saying they haven't made their mind up on the hunting issue. I guess it's politically quite a tough decision as if they abstain people like Russy will paint them as being pro-hunting whilst if they vote, the other side will paint them as undemocratic.

For me they have a simple choice, they stick with their long held principle & abstain or they change their policy & use their right to vote on all Westminster legislation.

[kaosmark2]

Quite. I'm no PETA member,but fox hunting is utterly vile. Grown men wooping at dogs ripping an animal apart to entertain themselves.

If you can't watch lesser beings violently tear into each other how else are you going to get off on being superior?

Fox-hunting, war, creating bullying policies that incite riots, or drive people into fighting over food. All classic hobbies that involve the upper classes having a w*nk over suffering.

[feral chile]

cos destroying the social housing stock is such a good idea you should get an even bigger freebie?

(yes, I know bigger discounts are available in some places. The whole idea is wrong, not that the discounts are diffeent in different places).

I agree, see my post. The left wing dominated Welsh Assembly have stricter rules, which I support, I personally don't think they go far enough, as a council tenant who would like to buy a house, and having lived in this house for nearly 20 years, I consider this home, so I can see the conflict. In this case, social need overrides personal interest, for me.. I can understand why some people might want to buy their home, you can't modernise it, or improve it, (see edit) so you have little control over your housing conditions, and there's no sense of security for your children etc. - they should pay full market value and the funds put back into housing. If it's allowed at all. We already get subsidised rent.

(edit - Bearing in mind we only had indoor toilets put into the houses in 1995, we have a sewer running through the back gardens).

Edited May 17, 2015 by feral chile

[pink_triangle]

Secondly, does Neil or anyone else think there is anything wrong with the long held position of the SNP that they don't vote on matters that have no impact on Scotland?

I personally think it's wrong, same with Welsh and northern Ireland mps if they do the same. I think if something comes through the British parliament, then British mps should all be willing to debate and vote. If Welsh or Scottish politicians want to just vote on their own affairs, they are probably best sticking to their own parliament/assemblys.

[russycarps]

OK, Firstly Neil, I seem to remember some chat about whether SNP mp's should or shouldn't vote on English NHS matters. I got the impression you though they shouldn't. If I misinterpreted that, then I apologise. So just for clarity, do you think it is acceptable for Scottish mp's to vote on issues that do not affect Scotland e.g hunting ban?

Secondly, does Neil or anyone else think there is anything wrong with the long held position of the SNP that they don't vote on matters that have no impact on Scotland?

Thirdly, Is playing a " full and constructive role in UK politics." necessarily incompatible with the SNP's position? By including stuff that impacts on Scotland's budget in their list of stuff they will vote on, they have effectively increased their sphere of influence to cover most policy matters.

Finally, I have seen the Blessed Nicola's tweet & also one form Angus Robertson saying they haven't made their mind up on the hunting issue. I guess it's politically quite a tough decision as if they abstain people like Russy will paint them as being pro-hunting whilst if they vote, the other side will paint them as undemocratic.

For me they have a simple choice, they stick with their long held principle & abstain or they change their policy & use their right to vote on all Westminster legislation.

But 'the other side' is the tories. Why would they give a single shit if the tories paint them as undemocratic? The tories already hate them.

Surely they are only interested in what scots think, as they are the only people who can vote for them.

If scotland is the country you say it is, surely scots will want sturgeon to vote for the ban? It's not an english issue, it's a fox issue.

Or do you think the majority of scots don't care either way?

[feral chile]

I personally think it's wrong, same with Welsh and northern Ireland mps if they do the same. I think if something comes through the British parliament, then British mps should all be willing to debate and vote. If Welsh or Scottish politicians want to just vote on their own affairs, they are probably best sticking to their own parliament/assemblys.

We haven't voted for independence,, I don't think a one size fits all approach is best, so devolving some responsibility to those best placed to understand the issues involves seems like a sensible option.