Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Tipping point. Why Scotland’s ultimate independence now looks

SystemSystem Posts: 11,002
edited June 2018 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Tipping point. Why Scotland’s ultimate independence now looks inevitable

Wednesday was not one of those days when it was difficult to tell the difference between a ray of sunshine and a Scotsman with a grievance.  The SNP launched a choreographed flounce from the House of Commons following a spat between their leader Ian Blackford and the Speaker over the treatment of Scotland’s position in the Brexit debates.

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517
    edited June 2018
    First.

    Unlike an independent Scotland. ;)

    Thanks, Alastair. I tend to agree with you on this.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    edited June 2018
    I just wrote a long post which has disappeared. If it finds its way back you'll be second. I'll just repeat the first line which is all I can remember. 'Excellent thread header Alastair......'

    How disappointing. i don't normally write such long posts
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517
    Roger said:

    I just wrote a long post which has disappeared. If it finds its way back you'll be second

    Only if you wrote it 23 minutes before the post I'm replying to ... ;)
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    edited June 2018
    Lazarus! It's just turned up....

    An excellent header Alastair if for no other reason than that I've been looking unsuccessfully for a clear explanation of what the Scottish walkout was all about and you've finally provided one which is clear and succinct.

    The further we travel into the murky underbelly of Brexit the more impossible it starts to look. It is like several trees which have over the years grown together and then trying to separate them without damaging the roots. It's impossible. Moreso when those doing the separating aren't experts and have little interest in the future of the trees other than wrenching them apart.

    Brexit looks like its going to fail on many levels. This would be a catastrophy under any circumstances but particularly egregious when you realize it was done for the most base of reasons
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517
    Roger said:

    Lazarus! It's just turned up....

    An excellent header Alastair if for no other reason than that I've been looking unsuccessfully for a clear explanation of what the Scottish walkout was all about and you've finally provided one which is clear and succinct.

    The further we travel into the murky underbelly of Brexit the more impossible it starts to look. It is like several trees which have over the years grown together and then trying to separate them without damaging the roots. It's impossible. Moreso when those doing the separating aren't experts and have little interest in the future of the trees other than wrenching them apart.

    Brexit looks like its going to fail on many levels. This would be a catastrophy for this country under any circumstances but particularly egregious when you realize it was done for the most base of reasons

    To extend your analogy: it may be impossible to separate them without damaging their roots, but every gardener knows that you occasionally need to separate saplings in order to give them room to grow. So you might be damaging them both slightly in the short term, but are giving them a much better long-term future. That will hopefully be true for Brexit.

    Sadly, too many Brexiteers see it as not only a separation job, but want one of the saplings ground into the dust and destroyed. They then screech and scream pathetically when they think the EU is being obstructionist. Such Brexiteers are just pathetic fools.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    edited June 2018
    The idea this farcical SNP stunt makes Scottish independence inevitable is absurd. The 5000 new SNP members are almost certainly almost all SNP voters anyway and Murray Foote has almost certainly always been a closet Nat too. Indeed the latest Yougov Scotland poll showing a plurality of Scots oppose any indyref2 even after Brexit and No still unchanged on 55% even in any indyref2 and the SNP and Greens losing their majority at the 2021 Holyrood elections only affirms that even more.

    The whole basis of the argument for the SNP's pathetic stunt is rubbish too, Westminster is already committed as it has made clear to devolving most powers reclaimed from Brussels concerning Scotland to Holyrood. However that cannot immediately include matters like EU food safety rules etc which must apply to the whole UK, in fact not assuring such rules apply UK wide would make a deal with the EU even more difficult thus defeating one of the SNP's supposed key aims in the first place
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,164
    This week may well have been the week when Scottish independence became an inevitability.

    Fingers crossed.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,080
    The underlying issue here is the same one that imperils local government - the absence of a written constitution means that no subsidiary level of government has any power or autonomy that central government cannot ultimately override.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,715
    I suspect that one of the most important sentences in Mr M’s excellent header is

    'Nevertheless, the strong impression has been given of a government that is intending to steamroller its way past the rebellious Scots by the use of its residual power and forcing a settlement on its terms.’

    The Government doesn’t really know what it wants but is bent on steam-rollering it’s way over any opposition, or even criticism, however rational and justified.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517

    I suspect that one of the most important sentences in Mr M’s excellent header is

    'Nevertheless, the strong impression has been given of a government that is intending to steamroller its way past the rebellious Scots by the use of its residual power and forcing a settlement on its terms.’

    The Government doesn’t really know what it wants but is bent on steam-rollering it’s way over any opposition, or even criticism, however rational and justified.

    I'll fix that for you:

    "Brexiteers don’t really know what they want but are bent on steam-rollering their way over any opposition, or even criticism, however rational and justified."
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,715

    I suspect that one of the most important sentences in Mr M’s excellent header is

    'Nevertheless, the strong impression has been given of a government that is intending to steamroller its way past the rebellious Scots by the use of its residual power and forcing a settlement on its terms.’

    The Government doesn’t really know what it wants but is bent on steam-rollering it’s way over any opposition, or even criticism, however rational and justified.

    I'll fix that for you:

    "Brexiteers don’t really know what they want but are bent on steam-rollering their way over any opposition, or even criticism, however rational and justified."
    Yup, that too!
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 47,787
    IanB2 said:

    The underlying issue here is the same one that imperils local government - the absence of a written constitution means that no subsidiary level of government has any power or autonomy that central government cannot ultimately override.

    This was quite shocking from a senior political journalist:

    https://twitter.com/shippersunbound/status/1006912652734533633?s=21
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Good morning, everyone.

    Not sure I buy this.

    If our departure* is essentially ok, then there won't be any drive to leave. If our departure is a mess, then that makes the SNP going for another independence referendum harder because they'll be arguing for a similar split but one that will have a deeper impact.

    *Assuming we leave.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    I'd venture to suggest that the issue is settled with a Scotland v England rugby match ....

    So that's a Scotland win then !! .... :smiley:
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,124
    I voted Remain and would do so again but I'm weary of the relentless negativity of those who cannot cope with a democratic result and now look for punishment scenarios everywhere against the effrontery of those who see a different future for the UK. All Brexiteers become thick Xenophobes leading the country to destruction. It's all over the top and reveals a profound contempt for millions of people which is distasteful. It also reveals perhaps a never to be admitted guilt that maybe, just maybe the responsibility for the decision needs to be collectively shared not just within the UK but beyond to the EU too.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    edited June 2018
    JackW said:

    I'd venture to suggest that the issue is settled with a Scotland v England rugby match ....

    So that's a Scotland win then !! .... :smiley:

    Except most Scottish rugby players and supporters are Unionists unlike the Scottish football team.

    In any case having just lost to the USA the Scottish rugby team is not exactly all conquering either

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/44465090
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517
    felix said:

    I voted Remain and would do so again but I'm weary of the relentless negativity of those who cannot cope with a democratic result and now look for punishment scenarios everywhere against the effrontery of those who see a different future for the UK. All Brexiteers become thick Xenophobes leading the country to destruction. It's all over the top and reveals a profound contempt for millions of people which is distasteful. It also reveals perhaps a never to be admitted guilt that maybe, just maybe the responsibility for the decision needs to be collectively shared not just within the UK but beyond to the EU too.

    "All Brexiteers become thick Xenophobes leading the country to destruction."

    The problem is that it is not binary. Not all Brexiteers are xenophobes (and it is crass to suggest it), but likewise it is crass to suggest that xenophobia did not play a significant role in the success of the Brexit vote. It is an elephant in the room for Brexiteers, and one they put their fingers in their ears and go la-la-la about.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    HYUFD said:

    JackW said:

    I'd venture to suggest that the issue is settled with a Scotland v England rugby match ....

    So that's a Scotland win then !! .... :smiley:

    Except most Scottish rugby players and supporters are Unionists unlike the Scottish football team
    There's more chance of Christopher Chope upskirting the Prime Minister in 10 Downing Street than the Scottish rugby players and supporters throwing a match against England.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,673
    HYUFD said:

    The idea this farcical SNP stunt makes Scottish independence inevitable is absurd. The 5000 new SNP members are almost certainly almost all SNP voters anyway and Murray Foote has almost certainly always been a closet Nat too. Indeed the latest Yougov Scotland poll showing a plurality of Scots oppose any indyref2 even after Brexit and No still unchanged on 55% even in any indyref2 and the SNP and Greens losing their majority at the 2021 Holyrood elections only affirms that even more.

    The whole basis of the argument for the SNP's pathetic stunt is rubbish too, Westminster is already committed as it has made clear to devolving most powers reclaimed from Brussels concerning Scotland to Holyrood. However that cannot immediately include matters like EU food safety rules etc which must apply to the whole UK, in fact not assuring such rules apply UK wide would make a deal with the EU even more difficult thus defeating one of the SNP's supposed key aims in the first place

    Along comes St Theresa to prove Alastair's point. Sneering pompous Tory clowns like you ensure that independence is just round the corner.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,673

    IanB2 said:

    The underlying issue here is the same one that imperils local government - the absence of a written constitution means that no subsidiary level of government has any power or autonomy that central government cannot ultimately override.

    This was quite shocking from a senior political journalist:

    https://twitter.com/shippersunbound/status/1006912652734533633?s=21
    Another moron who proves Alastair's point.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,673
    tlg86 said:

    This week may well have been the week when Scottish independence became an inevitability.

    Fingers crossed.

    Hear Hear
  • RogerRoger Posts: 18,891
    felix said:

    I voted Remain and would do so again but I'm weary of the relentless negativity of those who cannot cope with a democratic result and now look for punishment scenarios everywhere against the effrontery of those who see a different future for the UK. All Brexiteers become thick Xenophobes leading the country to destruction. It's all over the top and reveals a profound contempt for millions of people which is distasteful. It also reveals perhaps a never to be admitted guilt that maybe, just maybe the responsibility for the decision needs to be collectively shared not just within the UK but beyond to the EU too.

    Well you'll be pleased to know Theresa has now said she's going to implement the promise of the Brexit Bus and give the £350 million a week to the NHS.

    What a bunch of charlatans!
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,274
    Good thread header Alastair, thanks. It astonishes me that Brexiteers, most of whom are set against Scottish independence, cannot see the many parallels between it and Brexit.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 58,941

    Good thread header Alastair, thanks. It astonishes me that Brexiteers, most of whom are set against Scottish independence, cannot see the many parallels between it and Brexit.

    Are they? Most I've seen think it's for the Scots to decide.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    The idea this farcical SNP stunt makes Scottish independence inevitable is absurd. The 5000 new SNP members are almost certainly almost all SNP voters anyway and Murray Foote has almost certainly always been a closet Nat too. Indeed the latest Yougov Scotland poll showing a plurality of Scots oppose any indyref2 even after Brexit and No still unchanged on 55% even in any indyref2 and the SNP and Greens losing their majority at the 2021 Holyrood elections only affirms that even more.

    The whole basis of the argument for the SNP's pathetic stunt is rubbish too, Westminster is already committed as it has made clear to devolving most powers reclaimed from Brussels concerning Scotland to Holyrood. However that cannot immediately include matters like EU food safety rules etc which must apply to the whole UK, in fact not assuring such rules apply UK wide would make a deal with the EU even more difficult thus defeating one of the SNP's supposed key aims in the first place

    Along comes St Theresa to prove Alastair's point. Sneering pompous Tory clowns like you ensure that independence is just round the corner.
    Nothing sneering or pompous about stating the facts, the Tories are now touching a third of the vote due to the SNP's independence obsession and refusal to accept the 2014 No vote
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,274
    felix said:

    I voted Remain and would do so again but I'm weary of the relentless negativity of those who cannot cope with a democratic result and now look for punishment scenarios everywhere against the effrontery of those who see a different future for the UK. All Brexiteers become thick Xenophobes leading the country to destruction. It's all over the top and reveals a profound contempt for millions of people which is distasteful. It also reveals perhaps a never to be admitted guilt that maybe, just maybe the responsibility for the decision needs to be collectively shared not just within the UK but beyond to the EU too.

    The vast majority of Remainers accept that we have to leave; many of us would just like that to be as economically and socially painless as possible, and to maintain a close relationship with a huge trading block on our doorstep.

    Very few Remainers, on here or elsewhere, fit your description and they are imo balanced by the extreme Brexiteers who bang on about 'traitors', 'Remoaners', 'will of the people', etc.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,274
    RobD said:

    Good thread header Alastair, thanks. It astonishes me that Brexiteers, most of whom are set against Scottish independence, cannot see the many parallels between it and Brexit.

    Are they? Most I've seen think it's for the Scots to decide.
    But campaigned strongly against it - i.e. 'are set against Scottish independence' as I said.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172

    We can certainly hope and pray that -- if Scotland votes 52:48 for independence -- the losers behave with more grace that the Remainers.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,274
    So £20bn extra for the NHS by 2023/4 (good) - looks like yet another Labour-inspired policy.

    Is the choice now between New Labour (aka the Tories) and Labour?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,274


    We can certainly hope and pray that -- if Scotland votes 52:48 for independence -- the losers behave with more grace that the Remainers.

    ... and the winners will try to arrive at a settlement that respects the country is not unanimously supporting independence.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,958
    felix said:

    I voted Remain and would do so again but I'm weary of the relentless negativity of those who cannot cope with a democratic result and now look for punishment scenarios everywhere against the effrontery of those who see a different future for the UK. All Brexiteers become thick Xenophobes leading the country to destruction. It's all over the top and reveals a profound contempt for millions of people which is distasteful. It also reveals perhaps a never to be admitted guilt that maybe, just maybe the responsibility for the decision needs to be collectively shared not just within the UK but beyond to the EU too.

    Well said. Never, ever do we hear an ardent Remainer admit that maybe, just maybe, bouncing the UK into an inextricable relationship with the EU without asking for voter permission (because they knew that permission would not be forthcoming) might be a reason for Brexit. So many of them worked so hard for so long to make Brexit impossible. Then they belly ache that "Brexit is too hard". Well, yes, there's a reason for that. THEY are that reason, from the risible Article 50 on through the whole process, quite intentionally a cluster fuck of cluster mines. But just because they tried to rig the game, doesn't mean we should be bounced into eternal Remainderdom.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Pointer, you can't be a little bit pregnant.

    Mr. Mark, indeed.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,274
    edited June 2018

    felix said:

    I voted Remain and would do so again but I'm weary of the relentless negativity of those who cannot cope with a democratic result and now look for punishment scenarios everywhere against the effrontery of those who see a different future for the UK. All Brexiteers become thick Xenophobes leading the country to destruction. It's all over the top and reveals a profound contempt for millions of people which is distasteful. It also reveals perhaps a never to be admitted guilt that maybe, just maybe the responsibility for the decision needs to be collectively shared not just within the UK but beyond to the EU too.

    Well said. Never, ever do we hear an ardent Remainer admit that maybe, just maybe, bouncing the UK into an inextricable relationship with the EU without asking for voter permission (because they knew that permission would not be forthcoming) might be a reason for Brexit. So many of them worked so hard for so long to make Brexit impossible. Then they belly ache that "Brexit is too hard". Well, yes, there's a reason for that. THEY are that reason, from the risible Article 50 on through the whole process, quite intentionally a cluster fuck of cluster mines. But just because they tried to rig the game, doesn't mean we should be bounced into eternal Remainderdom.
    Here you go: Maybe bouncing the UK into an inextricable relationship with the EU without asking for voter permission (because they knew that permission would not be forthcoming) might be a reason for Brexit.

    It was a mistake. Crashing out on WTO terms is not the way to fix it.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,274

    Mr. Pointer, you can't be a little bit pregnant.

    Mr. Mark, indeed.

    You'll be pleased to know I am not (not even a little bit) :wink:

    Unlike pregnancy Brexit (and Sindy) can be soft or hard. Herein lies a problem some Brexiteers have though - leaving the EU with a soft Brexit is not good enough for them.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,879

    So £20bn extra for the NHS by 2023/4 (good) - looks like yet another Labour-inspired policy.

    Is the choice now between New Labour (aka the Tories) and Labour?

    Spending on the NHS will actually be going down.
    https://twitter.com/chrisgiles_/status/1008224284945403904?s=21
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172


    We can certainly hope and pray that -- if Scotland votes 52:48 for independence -- the losers behave with more grace that the Remainers.

    ... and the winners will try to arrive at a settlement that respects the country is not unanimously supporting independence.
    Do tell ... How do you make a country semi-independent?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Pointer, jein. The customs union is a red line. It's incredibly dumb to leave the EU then let the EU dictate our trade policy.

    Mr. Observer, for a start, a 70 year figure compared with a five year figure seems bloody weird. Secondly, how is a 3.4% annual real terms increase a sign of spending going down?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842

    So £20bn extra for the NHS by 2023/4 (good) - looks like yet another Labour-inspired policy.

    Is the choice now between New Labour (aka the Tories) and Labour?

    Spending on the NHS will actually be going down.
    https://twitter.com/chrisgiles_/status/1008224284945403904?s=21
    That's incorrect, any % real increase is an increase. Spending has never gone down on the NHS.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,958

    felix said:

    I voted Remain and would do so again but I'm weary of the relentless negativity of those who cannot cope with a democratic result and now look for punishment scenarios everywhere against the effrontery of those who see a different future for the UK. All Brexiteers become thick Xenophobes leading the country to destruction. It's all over the top and reveals a profound contempt for millions of people which is distasteful. It also reveals perhaps a never to be admitted guilt that maybe, just maybe the responsibility for the decision needs to be collectively shared not just within the UK but beyond to the EU too.

    Well said. Never, ever do we hear an ardent Remainer admit that maybe, just maybe, bouncing the UK into an inextricable relationship with the EU without asking for voter permission (because they knew that permission would not be forthcoming) might be a reason for Brexit. So many of them worked so hard for so long to make Brexit impossible. Then they belly ache that "Brexit is too hard". Well, yes, there's a reason for that. THEY are that reason, from the risible Article 50 on through the whole process, quite intentionally a cluster fuck of cluster mines. But just because they tried to rig the game, doesn't mean we should be bounced into eternal Remainderdom.
    Here you go: Maybe bouncing the UK into an inextricable relationship with the EU without asking for voter permission (because they knew that permission would not be forthcoming) might be a reason for Brexit.

    It was a mistake. Crashing out on WTO terms is not the way to fix it.
    Perhaps the Remainers would like to apply some of their intimate understanding of arcane EU lore in finding a way of fixing that more painless exit than. Because there has been bugger all constructive suggestions coming from the likes of Soubry and Grieve and Starmer and Clegg and Miliband. Just sucking air through teeth and a muttered "ooh, you can't do that...."

    We are playing with a marked deck. That they marked.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172

    So £20bn extra for the NHS by 2023/4 (good) - looks like yet another Labour-inspired policy.

    Is the choice now between New Labour (aka the Tories) and Labour?

    Spending on the NHS will actually be going down.
    https://twitter.com/chrisgiles_/status/1008224284945403904?s=21
    That is a suspiciously bogus statistic.

    Why has the data been divided arbitrarily into a 50 year period and a 5 year period?

    If you want to show this, take a 5 year window-function through the data, and show us the graph.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    Personally my first thought about the bus given our aging population and need to keep increasing NHS spending was that 350 million would be hit come Brexit or no Brexit, extraordinarily easily tbh
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,879
    The Conservative party is entirely under the control of right wing English nationalists. The Labour party is unelectable. It’s hard to see how that does not make Scottish independence more likely. The English and Welsh voted to make Britain poorer, but “free”; why wouldn’t the Scots do the same for Scotland? The British demos is breaking down. It’s very hard to see how it can be repaired from here. As someone who has treasured my British identity all my life that breaks my heart; but when push comes to shove I am English and it seems to me we need to find our true place in the world. Part of that will involve my country’s nationalist right confronting the realities of what the end of the Union actually involves.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,001

    Mr. Pointer, you can't be a little bit pregnant.

    Mr. Mark, indeed.

    You'll be pleased to know I am not (not even a little bit) :wink:

    Unlike pregnancy Brexit (and Sindy) can be soft or hard. Herein lies a problem some Brexiteers have though - leaving the EU with a soft Brexit is not good enough for them.
    And leaving the EU at all is uncceptable to a large number of remainers.

    TM has made a big move today by announcing the 20 billion increase for the NHS including the amount on the bus and while the amount the EU leaving dividend is is debatable the politics is terrific. The remainers debunking of the bus has just become a difficult argument to sustain
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    Pulpstar said:

    So £20bn extra for the NHS by 2023/4 (good) - looks like yet another Labour-inspired policy.

    Is the choice now between New Labour (aka the Tories) and Labour?

    Spending on the NHS will actually be going down.
    https://twitter.com/chrisgiles_/status/1008224284945403904?s=21
    That's incorrect, any % real increase is an increase. Spending has never gone down on the NHS.
    And finally, the tweet says in capitals we should look at the “ANNUAL PERCENTAGE”, and then provides a running average.

    Southam should withdraw his posting -- it really is nonsense statistics.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    edited June 2018

    Secondly, how is a 3.4% annual real terms increase a sign of spending going down?

    It isn't. It might not be considered enough given how OLD were all getting with the consequent need for shit loads of drugs to keep our infirm and decrepit selves going, but that's a different point.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172
    edited June 2018
    Deleted
  • FregglesFreggles Posts: 3,486
    edited June 2018

    felix said:

    I voted Remain and would do so again but I'm weary of the relentless negativity of those who cannot cope with a democratic result and now look for punishment scenarios everywhere against the effrontery of those who see a different future for the UK. All Brexiteers become thick Xenophobes leading the country to destruction. It's all over the top and reveals a profound contempt for millions of people which is distasteful. It also reveals perhaps a never to be admitted guilt that maybe, just maybe the responsibility for the decision needs to be collectively shared not just within the UK but beyond to the EU too.

    Well said. Never, ever do we hear an ardent Remainer admit that maybe, just maybe, bouncing the UK into an inextricable relationship with the EU without asking for voter permission (because they knew that permission would not be forthcoming) might be a reason for Brexit. So many of them worked so hard for so long to make Brexit impossible. Then they belly ache that "Brexit is too hard". Well, yes, there's a reason for that. THEY are that reason, from the risible Article 50 on through the whole process, quite intentionally a cluster fuck of cluster mines. But just because they tried to rig the game, doesn't mean we should be bounced into eternal Remainderdom.
    Here you go: Maybe bouncing the UK into an inextricable relationship with the EU without asking for voter permission (because they knew that permission would not be forthcoming) might be a reason for Brexit.

    It was a mistake. Crashing out on WTO terms is not the way to fix it.
    Perhaps the Remainers would like to apply some of their intimate understanding of arcane EU lore in finding a way of fixing that more painless exit than. Because there has been bugger all constructive suggestions coming from the likes of Soubry and Grieve and Starmer and Clegg and Miliband. Just sucking air through teeth and a muttered "ooh, you can't do that...."

    We are playing with a marked deck. That they marked.
    One minute it's "you lost, suck it up", the next it's this.

    You Brexit, you bought it. Own the mess you created.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679

    felix said:

    I voted Remain and would do so again but I'm weary of the relentless negativity of those who cannot cope with a democratic result and now look for punishment scenarios everywhere against the effrontery of those who see a different future for the UK. All Brexiteers become thick Xenophobes leading the country to destruction. It's all over the top and reveals a profound contempt for millions of people which is distasteful. It also reveals perhaps a never to be admitted guilt that maybe, just maybe the responsibility for the decision needs to be collectively shared not just within the UK but beyond to the EU too.

    Well said. Never, ever do we hear an ardent Remainer admit that maybe, just maybe, bouncing the UK into an inextricable relationship with the EU without asking for voter permission (because they knew that permission would not be forthcoming) might be a reason for Brexit. So many of them worked so hard for so long to make Brexit impossible. Then they belly ache that "Brexit is too hard". Well, yes, there's a reason for that. THEY are that reason, from the risible Article 50 on through the whole process, quite intentionally a cluster fuck of cluster mines. But just because they tried to rig the game, doesn't mean we should be bounced into eternal Remainderdom.
    Here you go: Maybe bouncing the UK into an inextricable relationship with the EU without asking for voter permission (because they knew that permission would not be forthcoming) might be a reason for Brexit.

    It was a mistake. Crashing out on WTO terms is not the way to fix it.
    Perhaps the Remainers would like to apply some of their intimate understanding of arcane EU lore in finding a way of fixing that more painless exit than. Because there has been bugger all constructive suggestions coming from the likes of Soubry and Grieve and Starmer and Clegg and Miliband. Just sucking air through teeth and a muttered "ooh, you can't do that...."

    We are playing with a marked deck. That they marked.
    Well I'm a remainer and I have made the point in here several times that the problem is simply the speed we are trying to leave at. We could get out with only minor disruption if we took 8-10 years to do it. It would also give us a couple of general elections to debate the details.
  • twistedfirestopper3twistedfirestopper3 Posts: 2,059
    edited June 2018
    Give the Scots a vote. If they vote to leave, we'll throw in a few legal challenges, predict a full on McPocalypse and then spend a few years telling them what a backward bunch of third rate little shits they are.Obviously, we'll have to punish them really, really hard and call them xenophobic, racist little Scotlanders, because that's how it's done.
  • Off Topic

    ***** Betting Post - World Cup *****

    In yesterday's issue of The Times, the Fink Tank gave Brazil a 35% probability of winning the World Cup, greater in fact than their next four most favoured sides combined (which included England incidentally). Such a probability equates to bookies' odds of 1.86/1 (or 2.86 expressed in decimal odds).
    It follows that If the Fink Tank have have done all their sums correctly, then the current best bookie's odds of 4/1 (or 5.0 decimal) appears to offer stonking positive value of +74.8%.
    Those of a nervous disposition might like to consider taking out an element of insurance by also backing Brazil to finish as runners-up, available at best odds of 7/1.
    The Fink Tank clearly thinks it's all over, to quote the immortal words of Kenneth Wolstenholme in 1966, but shrewd PBers should of course do their own research.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    The truth is the NHS and medicine in general is a victim of its own success in raising the average age we can all expect (In the mathematical sense of the word) to live to, so more spending is then needed to make those years as good as possible.
    But it's easier to tweet that spending is going down when it isn't.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,879

    Pulpstar said:

    So £20bn extra for the NHS by 2023/4 (good) - looks like yet another Labour-inspired policy.

    Is the choice now between New Labour (aka the Tories) and Labour?

    Spending on the NHS will actually be going down.
    https://twitter.com/chrisgiles_/status/1008224284945403904?s=21
    That's incorrect, any % real increase is an increase. Spending has never gone down on the NHS.
    And finally, the tweet says in capitals we should look at the “ANNUAL PERCENTAGE”, and then provides a running average.

    Southam should withdraw his posting -- it really is nonsense statistics.

    Calling a small, ineffectual rise in the historically low NHS spending there’s been since 2010 a Brexit bonus when it is actually funded by extra tax and borrowing sums up the duplicity of this miserable government perfectly. Sadly, thanks to Corbyn it is guaranteed power.

    If you want to know about dodgy use of stats, read the full thread from the FT’s economics editor here:

    https://twitter.com/chrisgiles_/status/1008216901376512001?s=21
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    HYUFD said:

    and Murray Foote has almost certainly always been a closet Nat too.

    When Scotland votes 100% for independence HYUFD will be there screaming "there's no mandate, they we all closet Nats anyways"
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,092
    Pulpstar said:

    The truth is the NHS and medicine in general is a victim of its own success in raising the average age we can all expect (In the mathematical sense of the word) to live to, so more spending is then needed to make those years as good as possible.
    But it's easier to tweet that spending is going down when it isn't.

    Medical advance applies everywhere and the ageing trend is also almost universal. But is the NHS more "successful" than elsewhere?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    Fresh from allowing the poor boy who came back from Canada cannabinoid oil, it looks like Javid is going to try and get to grips with the moped crime spree in the capital.
    It be a brave man who lays him for next PM
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    edited June 2018
    Mr. Putney, cheers for that suggestion.

    Edited extra bit: Mr. Pulpstar, let's hope he succeeds.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,846
    geoffw said:

    Pulpstar said:

    The truth is the NHS and medicine in general is a victim of its own success in raising the average age we can all expect (In the mathematical sense of the word) to live to, so more spending is then needed to make those years as good as possible.
    But it's easier to tweet that spending is going down when it isn't.

    Medical advance applies everywhere and the ageing trend is also almost universal. But is the NHS more "successful" than elsewhere?
    No. It is actually less successful than many other first world countries in terms of actually keeping people alive.
  • YBarddCwscYBarddCwsc Posts: 7,172

    Pulpstar said:

    So £20bn extra for the NHS by 2023/4 (good) - looks like yet another Labour-inspired policy.

    Is the choice now between New Labour (aka the Tories) and Labour?

    Spending on the NHS will actually be going down.
    https://twitter.com/chrisgiles_/status/1008224284945403904?s=21
    That's incorrect, any % real increase is an increase. Spending has never gone down on the NHS.
    And finally, the tweet says in capitals we should look at the “ANNUAL PERCENTAGE”, and then provides a running average.

    Southam should withdraw his posting -- it really is nonsense statistics.

    Calling a small, ineffectual rise in the historically low NHS spending there’s been since 2010 a Brexit bonus when it is actually funded by extra tax and borrowing sums up the duplicity of this miserable government perfectly. Sadly, thanks to Corbyn it is guaranteed power.

    If you want to know about dodgy use of stats, read the full thread from the FT’s economics editor here:

    https://twitter.com/chrisgiles_/status/1008216901376512001?s=21
    If others behave badly with numbers, it doesn’t mean we have to.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    geoffw said:

    Pulpstar said:

    The truth is the NHS and medicine in general is a victim of its own success in raising the average age we can all expect (In the mathematical sense of the word) to live to, so more spending is then needed to make those years as good as possible.
    But it's easier to tweet that spending is going down when it isn't.

    Medical advance applies everywhere and the ageing trend is also almost universal. But is the NHS more "successful" than elsewhere?
    I'm not sure to be perfectly honest. Real terms spending has probably increased on health everywhere else too. It's the system we have and changing it substantially would more than likely be a complete disaster given government form on major reorganisations.
  • peter_from_putneypeter_from_putney Posts: 6,875
    edited June 2018

    Off Topic

    ***** Betting Post - World Cup *****

    In yesterday's issue of The Times, the Fink Tank gave Brazil a 35% probability of winning the World Cup, greater in fact than their next four most favoured sides combined (which included England incidentally). Such a probability equates to bookies' odds of 1.86/1 (or 2.86 expressed in decimal odds).
    It follows that If the Fink Tank have have done all their sums correctly, then the current best bookie's odds of 4/1 (or 5.0 decimal) appears to offer stonking positive value of +74.8%.
    Those of a nervous disposition might like to consider taking out an element of insurance by also backing Brazil to finish as runners-up, available at best odds of 7/1.
    The Fink Tank clearly thinks it's all over, to quote the immortal words of Kenneth Wolstenholme in 1966, but shrewd PBers should of course do their own research.

    https://tinyurl.com/obqefg8

    Happy days!
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Scott_P said:
    Sillars still furious he's not leading the SNP then.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074
    Roger said:

    Lazarus! It's just turned up....

    An excellent header Alastair if for no other reason than that I've been looking unsuccessfully for a clear explanation of what the Scottish walkout was all about and you've finally provided one which is clear and succinct.

    The further we travel into the murky underbelly of Brexit the more impossible it starts to look. It is like several trees which have over the years grown together and then trying to separate them without damaging the roots. It's impossible. Moreso when those doing the separating aren't experts and have little interest in the future of the trees other than wrenching them apart.

    Brexit looks like its going to fail on many levels. This would be a catastrophy under any circumstances but particularly egregious when you realize it was done for the most base of reasons

    You may be right on Brexit. But you know little about gardening. Plants often have to be separated, sometimes quite brutally, and the roots torn or cut to stimulate new growth. What matters is whether they are alive and how they are treated after separation. All good gardeners will from time to time divide their plants and replant - usually to avoid overcrowding.

    If gardening is an analogy for anything it is for allowing living things the space to breathe and grow not for jammimg them together in an overcrowded mess.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 39,748
    edited June 2018

    Give the Scots a vote. If they vote to leave, we'll throw in a few legal challenges, predict a full on McPocalypse and then spend a few years telling them what a backward bunch of third rate little shits they are.Obviously, we'll have to punish them really, really hard and call them xenophobic, racist little Scotlanders, because that's how it's done.

    Are you suggesting that in that scenario the UK = EU or the UK = Remoaners? Seems a bit confused as a metaphor.

    In any case the original Project Fear pretty much did all the things you suggest so no need to hypothesise.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,056
    Pulpstar said:

    So £20bn extra for the NHS by 2023/4 (good) - looks like yet another Labour-inspired policy.

    Is the choice now between New Labour (aka the Tories) and Labour?

    Spending on the NHS will actually be going down.
    https://twitter.com/chrisgiles_/status/1008224284945403904?s=21
    That's incorrect, any % real increase is an increase. Spending has never gone down on the NHS.
    Well, yes and no. Any increase in real terms by definition is an increase, but the real issue is whether the increase in funds is meeting the increase in medical need of an ageing and increasingly obese population, with expensive chronic diseases.
    Pulpstar said:

    The truth is the NHS and medicine in general is a victim of its own success in raising the average age we can all expect (In the mathematical sense of the word) to live to, so more spending is then needed to make those years as good as possible.
    But it's easier to tweet that spending is going down when it isn't.

    Doctors like to claim longevity as a success of Medicine, but it is mostly a result of lifestyle and economics. For example the country of Albania has a life expectancy of 75 years for males and 80 years for females. In the UK it is 78 and 82 respectively. If we go to Glasgow, life expectancy is 71 and 78 respectively, with the differences between the West End and East End being dramatic even within Glasgow. This is despite the Scottish NHS getting more percapita funding than the English.
  • DeanoDeano Posts: 9
    The sad thing about Scotland's future is that is being decided by the liberal elite, not the people. I'd loved Scotland to go, but it should be the people, not the elite to decide. They will stay with UK, simply because it pays them to.
  • DeanoDeano Posts: 9
    Pulpstar said:

    geoffw said:

    Pulpstar said:

    The truth is the NHS and medicine in general is a victim of its own success in raising the average age we can all expect (In the mathematical sense of the word) to live to, so more spending is then needed to make those years as good as possible.
    But it's easier to tweet that spending is going down when it isn't.

    Medical advance applies everywhere and the ageing trend is also almost universal. But is the NHS more "successful" than elsewhere?
    I'm not sure to be perfectly honest. Real terms spending has probably increased on health everywhere else too. It's the system we have and changing it substantially would more than likely be a complete disaster given government form on major reorganisations.
    At this rate, there will come a day when 100% of all taxes and earnings will be spent on the NHS. It's a political body. People die. And the NHS spends most of its cash to keep them alive, paying too many staff fat salaries to keep dead bodies breathing. One day, the world will wake up to this. People die, stop wasting money on trying to pretend they will live forever, because it ruins the lives of the living.
  • DeanoDeano Posts: 9
    geoffw said:

    Pulpstar said:

    The truth is the NHS and medicine in general is a victim of its own success in raising the average age we can all expect (In the mathematical sense of the word) to live to, so more spending is then needed to make those years as good as possible.
    But it's easier to tweet that spending is going down when it isn't.

    Medical advance applies everywhere and the ageing trend is also almost universal. But is the NHS more "successful" than elsewhere?
    Check the average age in USA. Lower than ours, and more spent on health.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    Foxy said:

    Pulpstar said:

    So £20bn extra for the NHS by 2023/4 (good) - looks like yet another Labour-inspired policy.

    Is the choice now between New Labour (aka the Tories) and Labour?

    Spending on the NHS will actually be going down.
    https://twitter.com/chrisgiles_/status/1008224284945403904?s=21
    That's incorrect, any % real increase is an increase. Spending has never gone down on the NHS.
    Well, yes and no. Any increase in real terms by definition is an increase, but the real issue is whether the increase in funds is meeting the increase in medical need of an ageing and increasingly obese population, with expensive chronic diseases.
    Pulpstar said:

    The truth is the NHS and medicine in general is a victim of its own success in raising the average age we can all expect (In the mathematical sense of the word) to live to, so more spending is then needed to make those years as good as possible.
    But it's easier to tweet that spending is going down when it isn't.

    Doctors like to claim longevity as a success of Medicine, but it is mostly a result of lifestyle and economics. For example the country of Albania has a life expectancy of 75 years for males and 80 years for females. In the UK it is 78 and 82 respectively. If we go to Glasgow, life expectancy is 71 and 78 respectively, with the differences between the West End and East End being dramatic even within Glasgow. This is despite the Scottish NHS getting more percapita funding than the English.
    To note Deanos point, clearly spending 100% of our GDP on the NHS would be too much. How much cash do you think would be appropriate for the NHS. It can not go up in real terms forever.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 39,748
    Alistair said:

    Scott_P said:
    Sillars still furious he's not leading the SNP then.
    Still, he has the massive satisfaction of his preferred option of Brexit being imposed upon Scotland against its democratic will.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    edited June 2018
    I just want to make the generic "The NHS is appallingly inefficient and we spend too much money on it, we should have the health system of country X. I will ignore the fact that country X spends much more on overall healthcare as a percentage of GDP than we do in the UK." post before we are bombarded by them.
  • Give the Scots a vote. If they vote to leave, we'll throw in a few legal challenges, predict a full on McPocalypse and then spend a few years telling them what a backward bunch of third rate little shits they are.Obviously, we'll have to punish them really, really hard and call them xenophobic, racist little Scotlanders, because that's how it's done.

    Are you suggesting that in that scenario the UK = EU or the UK = Remoaners? Seems a bit confused as a metaphor.

    In any case the original Project Fear pretty much did all the things you suggest so no need to hypothesise.
    I'm just predicting what the next 10 years on PB will be like if there is ever a successful Scots Independence yes vote. If we still have internet after Brexit.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 49,958
    Freggles said:

    felix said:

    I voted Remain and would do so again but I'm weary of the relentless negativity of those who cannot cope with a democratic result and now look for punishment scenarios everywhere against the effrontery of those who see a different future for the UK. All Brexiteers become thick Xenophobes leading the country to destruction. It's all over the top and reveals a profound contempt for millions of people which is distasteful. It also reveals perhaps a never to be admitted guilt that maybe, just maybe the responsibility for the decision needs to be collectively shared not just within the UK but beyond to the EU too.

    Well said. Never, ever do we hear an ardent Remainer admit that maybe, just maybe, bouncing the UK into an inextricable relationship with the EU without asking for voter permission (because they knew that permission would not be forthcoming) might be a reason for Brexit. So many of them worked so hard for so long to make Brexit impossible. Then they belly ache that "Brexit is too hard". Well, yes, there's a reason for that. THEY are that reason, from the risible Article 50 on through the whole process, quite intentionally a cluster fuck of cluster mines. But just because they tried to rig the game, doesn't mean we should be bounced into eternal Remainderdom.
    Here you go: Maybe bouncing the UK into an inextricable relationship with the EU without asking for voter permission (because they knew that permission would not be forthcoming) might be a reason for Brexit.

    It was a mistake. Crashing out on WTO terms is not the way to fix it.
    Perhaps the Remainers would like to apply some of their intimate understanding of arcane EU lore in finding a way of fixing that more painless exit than. Because there has been bugger all constructive suggestions coming from the likes of Soubry and Grieve and Starmer and Clegg and Miliband. Just sucking air through teeth and a muttered "ooh, you can't do that...."

    We are playing with a marked deck. That they marked.
    One minute it's "you lost, suck it up", the next it's this.

    You Brexit, you bought it. Own the mess you created.
    The "mess" was created over decades by Remainers. Just a bit of democracy along the way - and there wouldn't have been this problem....

    But no, the people weren't to be allowed a say on the Grand European House of Cards. Because, you know, they might just blow it over.....
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,715
    Deano said:

    geoffw said:

    Pulpstar said:

    The truth is the NHS and medicine in general is a victim of its own success in raising the average age we can all expect (In the mathematical sense of the word) to live to, so more spending is then needed to make those years as good as possible.
    But it's easier to tweet that spending is going down when it isn't.

    Medical advance applies everywhere and the ageing trend is also almost universal. But is the NHS more "successful" than elsewhere?
    Check the average age in USA. Lower than ours, and more spent on health.
    Inequitably though. IIRC people in higher social classes in the US have similar rates to the UK, due to be able to afford medical care.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,056
    Pulpstar said:

    Foxy said:

    Pulpstar said:

    So £20bn extra for the NHS by 2023/4 (good) - looks like yet another Labour-inspired policy.

    Is the choice now between New Labour (aka the Tories) and Labour?

    Spending on the NHS will actually be going down.
    https://twitter.com/chrisgiles_/status/1008224284945403904?s=21
    That's incorrect, any % real increase is an increase. Spending has never gone down on the NHS.
    Well, yes and no. Any increase in real terms by definition is an increase, but the real issue is whether the increase in funds is meeting the increase in medical need of an ageing and increasingly obese population, with expensive chronic diseases.
    Pulpstar said:

    The truth is the NHS and medicine in general is a victim of its own success in raising the average age we can all expect (In the mathematical sense of the word) to live to, so more spending is then needed to make those years as good as possible.
    But it's easier to tweet that spending is going down when it isn't.

    Doctors like to claim longevity as a success of Medicine, but it is mostly a result of lifestyle and economics. For example the country of Albania has a life expectancy of 75 years for males and 80 years for females. In the UK it is 78 and 82 respectively. If we go to Glasgow, life expectancy is 71 and 78 respectively, with the differences between the West End and East End being dramatic even within Glasgow. This is despite the Scottish NHS getting more percapita funding than the English.
    To note Deanos point, clearly spending 100% of our GDP on the NHS would be too much. How much cash do you think would be appropriate for the NHS. It can not go up in real terms forever.
    I would suggest that about 10% of GDP needs to be spent on healthcare (note; not just the NHS) in a developed country with an age profile like ourselves, but projecting forward to the age profile of 2030, when the population over 65% will have increased by about 3 million, that will need revision as time goes on.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,136
    On topic, this all seems totally plausible but the problem is that despite a clealrly incompetent Tory government of English nostalgics arguing with each other when they're supposed to be negotiating with the EU, there is absolutely zero movement towards independence in the polling. Why aren't we seeing the movement now, and when is it going to start showing up?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Divvie, by that choice of words every government since WWII (possibly with one exception) was 'imposed upon the country against its will'.

    Scotland voted to remain part of the UK. The UK voted to leave the EU. The fact that England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland voted in differing ways doesn't matter because every Briton's vote counted equally.

    The alternatives to your grumpy SNP take on the result would be either for Scotland to have a veto, which would work wonderfully for stoking internal UK resentment and division, or for Scottish votes to be weighed more heavily than English ones, which would have a similar result.

    It's also rather odd that the SNP and their ilk are grumpy about leaving the EU, when their victory in 2014 would have ensured Scotland leaving the EU. It's almost as if leaving the EU without England, Wales and Northern Ireland is wonderful, and leaving it with England, Wales and Northern Ireland is catastrophic. Which is a nonsensical position to hold.
  • hunchmanhunchman Posts: 2,591
    Cyclefree said:

    Roger said:

    Lazarus! It's just turned up....

    An excellent header Alastair if for no other reason than that I've been looking unsuccessfully for a clear explanation of what the Scottish walkout was all about and you've finally provided one which is clear and succinct.

    The further we travel into the murky underbelly of Brexit the more impossible it starts to look. It is like several trees which have over the years grown together and then trying to separate them without damaging the roots. It's impossible. Moreso when those doing the separating aren't experts and have little interest in the future of the trees other than wrenching them apart.

    Brexit looks like its going to fail on many levels. This would be a catastrophy under any circumstances but particularly egregious when you realize it was done for the most base of reasons

    You may be right on Brexit. But you know little about gardening. Plants often have to be separated, sometimes quite brutally, and the roots torn or cut to stimulate new growth. What matters is whether they are alive and how they are treated after separation. All good gardeners will from time to time divide their plants and replant - usually to avoid overcrowding.

    If gardening is an analogy for anything it is for allowing living things the space to breathe and grow not for jammimg them together in an overcrowded mess.
    Quite right. Has Woger ever gardened before? ! In the whole Brexit debate it's remarkable how little attention is paid to the EU and it's coming demise. Will Merkel still be around in a fortnight let alone a years time?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    Mr. Mark, the promised Lisbon referendum would've done the trick.

    Although it'd be interesting to know if we'd've ended up with a second referendum there, after a fresh change of font to the text.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,401
    Cheers for the article, Alastair, but I disagree. Firstly, I don't think this week will have had any long-term effect: it will mostly confirm people in their earlier beliefs.

    The reality that anyone sensible must see is that Brexit has to be handled by the UK government and that internal (re)arrangements must come afterwards. It's therefore not a 'normal' (to use the Sewel terminology) circumstance and Holyrood's opinion cannot override Westminster's as that would amount to a veto by a devolved assembly on a decision taken across the whole country. No doubt some would like that. Ultra-Remainers and Scots Nationalists both have their reasons for dismissing the previous logic but the majority will not. The outcomes of UK referendums need to be resolved at Westminster.

    Politically, it would be sensible for the government to have committed at an early stage to early devolution of returned powers, consistent with existing arrangements. It would still be sensible now. But that's a different point.

    To address the bigger issue, devolution is and always was legally ultimately contingent on Westminster's goodwill. In theory, it could always be abolished by a simple Act of Parliament. In reality, it is the political situation in Scotland which determines how devolution develops. For as long as there is strong support for devolution, Westminster will not dare to override a Holyrood decision except where Holyrood extends itself beyond its remit - as here.

    There is no inevitable in this matter. Brexit is demonstrating the difficulty of untangling 40 years of interaction with Europe; how much more difficult untangling more than 300 years of union? And that's before the more pragmatic questions of money have to be asked and answered (it's not just about how much of 'Scotland's oil' is left; it's about how relevant that'll be in a future where diesel is already being phased out and electric making great gains).

    Besides, the simple maths is that unless the SNP can find a way to gain a second referendum before 2021, they need to generate another nationalist majority in Holyrood at the next election, having been in power for 14 years at that point. That's a huge ask and if they fail, the chances are that they won't get another chance until they've lost power altogether and then returned again - a process which would take us well into the 2030s.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    While there's much I would agree with in this piece - that the SNP continue to strike a chord, that England has not given due care to devolution matters, that economic difficulties of separation will not by itself prevent independence winning - and have long lamented that I think Scottish independence may be inevitable in the long run given how popular the SNP and their grievances remain even when they are not riding as high as 2015, I do think a case that independence looks inevitable is not made in the header itself.

    Does it look more likely for the reasons given? I'd say yes. Are some unionists still complacent? Undoubtedly. Do I still think it will happen? Regretfully so. But I do think that independence has looked closer before and didn't come to pass and this case presumes no fightback is possible on some arguments which I think there will be.
  • hunchmanhunchman Posts: 2,591

    felix said:

    I voted Remain and would do so again but I'm weary of the relentless negativity of those who cannot cope with a democratic result and now look for punishment scenarios everywhere against the effrontery of those who see a different future for the UK. All Brexiteers become thick Xenophobes leading the country to destruction. It's all over the top and reveals a profound contempt for millions of people which is distasteful. It also reveals perhaps a never to be admitted guilt that maybe, just maybe the responsibility for the decision needs to be collectively shared not just within the UK but beyond to the EU too.

    Well said. Never, ever do we hear an ardent Remainer admit that maybe, just maybe, bouncing the UK into an inextricable relationship with the EU without asking for voter permission (because they knew that permission would not be forthcoming) might be a reason for Brexit. So many of them worked so hard for so long to make Brexit impossible. Then they belly ache that "Brexit is too hard". Well, yes, there's a reason for that. THEY are that reason, from the risible Article 50 on through the whole process, quite intentionally a cluster fuck of cluster mines. But just because they tried to rig the game, doesn't mean we should be bounced into eternal Remainderdom.
    Excellent post.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 7,095
    edited June 2018
    Just seen Polly Toynbee talking bollocks on Marr.. She said that the evidence suggests(via polls) that people were happy to pay more for the NHS and Social Care if taxes went up and people had to pay.. The Tories tried that at GE 2017.. it was a sub optimal outcome.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709

    Just seen Polly Toynbee talking bollocks on Marr.. She said that the evidence suggests(via polls) that people were happy to pay more for the NHS and Social Care if taxes went up and people had to pay.. The Tories tried that at GE 2017.. it was a sub optimal outcome.

    Polls show only a minority of voters will pay a wealth tax, a 'dementia tax' or higher income tax for the NHS and Social Care but over 50% of voters will pay more National Insurance for the NHS and Social Care
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,008
    I think the author may be reading a bit too much into this.

    It was obvious from the day the Brexit referendum result was announced that Nicola Sturgeon would do anything she could to crowbar the political crack it opened between England and Scotland into a new full blown drive for independence. But, the polling on independence doesn't support anything other than "no change" since 2014.

    Scottish Independence isn't inevitable. And, if it ever becomes so, it won't be because the SNP have done a carefully choreographed flounce out of Westminster.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392

    Just seen Polly Toynbee talking bollocks on Marr.. She said that the evidence suggests(via polls) that people were happy to pay more for the NHS and Social Care if taxes went up and people had to pay.. The Tories tried that at GE 2017.. it was a sub optimal outcome.

    The specific tax and how well it is presented matters perhaps.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    Alistair said:

    HYUFD said:

    and Murray Foote has almost certainly always been a closet Nat too.

    When Scotland votes 100% for independence HYUFD will be there screaming "there's no mandate, they we all closet Nats anyways"
    Given Nats and Remainers have never stopped whinging after they lost their referendums don't think Unionists will just pack up and go home either if there was ever an independence vote
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,842
    HYUFD said:

    Just seen Polly Toynbee talking bollocks on Marr.. She said that the evidence suggests(via polls) that people were happy to pay more for the NHS and Social Care if taxes went up and people had to pay.. The Tories tried that at GE 2017.. it was a sub optimal outcome.

    Polls show only a minority of voters will pay a wealth tax, a 'dementia tax' or higher income tax for the NHS and Social Care but over 50% of voters will pay more National Insurance for the NHS and Social Care
    First step equalise it for all employed and self employed
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,056

    Deano said:

    geoffw said:

    Pulpstar said:

    The truth is the NHS and medicine in general is a victim of its own success in raising the average age we can all expect (In the mathematical sense of the word) to live to, so more spending is then needed to make those years as good as possible.
    But it's easier to tweet that spending is going down when it isn't.

    Medical advance applies everywhere and the ageing trend is also almost universal. But is the NHS more "successful" than elsewhere?
    Check the average age in USA. Lower than ours, and more spent on health.
    Inequitably though. IIRC people in higher social classes in the US have similar rates to the UK, due to be able to afford medical care.
    Though even the highest Quintile in the USA is just about the same as the UK average. Even the mid Quintile is worse than the UK.

    As I pointed out below, most of this is due to lifestyle factors, rather than health care.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,008

    So £20bn extra for the NHS by 2023/4 (good) - looks like yet another Labour-inspired policy.

    Is the choice now between New Labour (aka the Tories) and Labour?

    Spending on the NHS will actually be going down.
    https://twitter.com/chrisgiles_/status/1008224284945403904?s=21
    Spending on the NHS will not be going down.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 50,762
    May not come as a surprise that I totally disagree with this.

    There are really 2 issues. The first is that in a series of devolved matters many of the decisions have not been made by Holyrood but by Brussels. The Scottish government has been responsible for the administration but not the rules. That is about to change as the rule maker will now be British, not European. This creates an opportunity for a much more meaningful devolution of powers than we have had to date. The Scottish government wants those powers and are concerned that they will simply replace a Brussels regulator for a Westminster one. This is a legitimate concern and needs more discussion between the British and Scottish governments.

    The second issue is the much more technical one about the return of those powers to the U.K. On one view this should be simple but it is not. It’s not because we have yet to work out what our relationship with the EU is going to be after Brexit. What will happen to the rights to fish in our waters currently owned by Spanish fishermen? How do we have a FTA without agreement about what is an acceptable farming subsidy and what is not? How much regulatory alignment are we going to need on, say, environmental matters? This will determine the scope and extent of the powers that any domestic regulator can have, devolved or not.

    The British government as negotiator needs control of these issues now. If they don’t have them they can’t negotiate. Once we have the deal the internal application of those powers will have to be made. At that point it should be made clear that where the matter is devolved the decision making powers will be devolved too, at least within the context of the deal with the EU.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,614

    Mr. Divvie, by that choice of words every government since WWII (possibly with one exception) was 'imposed upon the country against its will'.

    Scotland voted to remain part of the UK. The UK voted to leave the EU. The fact that England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland voted in differing ways doesn't matter because every Briton's vote counted equally.

    The alternatives to your grumpy SNP take on the result would be either for Scotland to have a veto, which would work wonderfully for stoking internal UK resentment and division, or for Scottish votes to be weighed more heavily than English ones, which would have a similar result.

    It's also rather odd that the SNP and their ilk are grumpy about leaving the EU, when their victory in 2014 would have ensured Scotland leaving the EU. It's almost as if leaving the EU without England, Wales and Northern Ireland is wonderful, and leaving it with England, Wales and Northern Ireland is catastrophic. Which is a nonsensical position to hold.

    Mr Dancer, you forget that stoking internal UK resentment and division is exactly what the SNP want.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,933
    edited June 2018
    Mr. Pulpstar, disagree with you entirely on that. It may well happen, but the self-employed don't have company pensions, paid sick days, paid holidays. It's entirely correct we pay lower NI contributions, because we don't have the same benefits as the employed.

    Ed Miliband did have a policy of apparently giving such benefits to the self-employed but I don't think any details actually emerged, and the basic idea sounded utterly bonkers in any case. [Which makes it mildly surprising May hasn't copied it].

    Edited extra bit: Mr. Sandpit, one had not forgotten that :)
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,583
    hunchman said:

    felix said:

    I voted Remain and would do so again but I'm weary of the relentless negativity of those who cannot cope with a democratic result and now look for punishment scenarios everywhere against the effrontery of those who see a different future for the UK. All Brexiteers become thick Xenophobes leading the country to destruction. It's all over the top and reveals a profound contempt for millions of people which is distasteful. It also reveals perhaps a never to be admitted guilt that maybe, just maybe the responsibility for the decision needs to be collectively shared not just within the UK but beyond to the EU too.

    Well said. Never, ever do we hear an ardent Remainer admit that maybe, just maybe, bouncing the UK into an inextricable relationship with the EU without asking for voter permission (because they knew that permission would not be forthcoming) might be a reason for Brexit. So many of them worked so hard for so long to make Brexit impossible. Then they belly ache that "Brexit is too hard". Well, yes, there's a reason for that. THEY are that reason, from the risible Article 50 on through the whole process, quite intentionally a cluster fuck of cluster mines. But just because they tried to rig the game, doesn't mean we should be bounced into eternal Remainderdom.
    Excellent post.
    Not from my side of the argument!
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,715
    hunchman said:

    felix said:

    I voted Remain and would do so again but I'm weary of the relentless negativity of those who cannot cope with a democratic result and now look for punishment scenarios everywhere against the effrontery of those who see a different future for the UK. All Brexiteers become thick Xenophobes leading the country to destruction. It's all over the top and reveals a profound contempt for millions of people which is distasteful. It also reveals perhaps a never to be admitted guilt that maybe, just maybe the responsibility for the decision needs to be collectively shared not just within the UK but beyond to the EU too.

    Well said. Never, ever do we hear an ardent Remainer admit that maybe, just maybe, bouncing the UK into an inextricable relationship with the EU without asking for voter permission (because they knew that permission would not be forthcoming) might be a reason for Brexit. So many of them worked so hard for so long to make Brexit impossible. Then they belly ache that "Brexit is too hard". Well, yes, there's a reason for that. THEY are that reason, from the risible Article 50 on through the whole process, quite intentionally a cluster fuck of cluster mines. But just because they tried to rig the game, doesn't mean we should be bounced into eternal Remainderdom.
    Excellent post.
    I have clear memories of campaigning in 1975 to stay in the Common Market and of winning a clear victory. I have no memory of objection from any major section of the public to our continued participation in the development towards increased union, until very, very recently.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392

    .

    The reality that anyone sensible must see is that Brexit has to be handled by the UK government and that internal (re)arrangements must come afterwards. It's therefore not a 'normal' (to use the Sewel terminology) circumstance and Holyrood's opinion cannot override Westminster's as that would amount to a veto by a devolved assembly on a decision taken across the whole country. No doubt some would like that. Ultra-Remainers and Scots Nationalists both have their reasons for dismissing the previous logic but the majority will not. The outcomes of UK referendums need to be resolved at Westminster.

    Politically, it would be sensible for the government to have committed at an early stage to early devolution of returned powers, consistent with existing arrangements. It would still be sensible now. But that's a different point.

    To address the bigger issue, devolution is and always was legally ultimately contingent on Westminster's goodwill. In theory, it could always be abolished by a simple Act of Parliament. In reality, it is the political situation in Scotland which determines how devolution develops. For as long as there is strong support for devolution, Westminster will not dare to override a Holyrood decision except where Holyrood extends itself beyond its remit - as here.

    There is no inevitable in this matter. Brexit is demonstrating the difficulty of untangling 40 years of interaction with Europe; how much more difficult untangling more than 300 years of union? And that's before the more pragmatic questions of money have to be asked and answered (it's not just about how much of 'Scotland's oil' is left; it's about how relevant that'll be in a future where diesel is already being phased out and electric making great gains).

    Besides, the simple maths is that unless the SNP can find a way to gain a second referendum before 2021, they need to generate another nationalist majority in Holyrood at the next election, having been in power for 14 years at that point. That's a huge ask and if they fail, the chances are that they won't get another chance until they've lost power altogether and then returned again - a process which would take us well into the 2030s.

    I hope you are right, although if you are the SNP will become increasingly desperate and throw everything at the wall in the next few years to get that referendum.

    I'd also assume when the next recession hits the economic price of sindy will seem less important to people, which is a major worry.

    There's a lot riding on the Scottish unionists. We cannot rely on the negative case for the union and leave the positive case too late, we need the existence of the UK continually justified.

    It won't be easy though. NI and Scotland both look on the edge. Good old Wales though. But apathy for the union in England has long been my major concern.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709

    Good thread header Alastair, thanks. It astonishes me that Brexiteers, most of whom are set against Scottish independence, cannot see the many parallels between it and Brexit.

    It is not true that most Brexiteers are staunch Unionists and 'set against Scottish independence.'

    Indeed 79% of those who see themselves as English not British were Leavers as were 66% of those who see themselves as more English than British.

    By contrast 60% of those who see themselves as British not English voted Remain as did 63% of those who see themselves as more British than English.

    http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2016/06/how-the-united-kingdom-voted-and-why/
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,401
    HYUFD said:

    Just seen Polly Toynbee talking bollocks on Marr.. She said that the evidence suggests(via polls) that people were happy to pay more for the NHS and Social Care if taxes went up and people had to pay.. The Tories tried that at GE 2017.. it was a sub optimal outcome.

    Polls show only a minority of voters will pay a wealth tax, a 'dementia tax' or higher income tax for the NHS and Social Care but over 50% of voters will pay more National Insurance for the NHS and Social Care
    About 50% of the electorate won't pay NI, will they?
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,074
    Can I be a little provocative?

    I can. Good!

    Sure: good to see the NHS getting some extra funding.

    But ..... deep breath .....

    1. I’m sure I remember a few years ago Brown announcing some fantastic NHS settlement which would settle things for years and then again under the coalition. So how soon will the NHS be back asking for more? There must come a time when we say: “ Enough”.

    2. Is this really the most important priority to be spending our money on? Especially now at the start of an uncertain future outside the structures we have been used to for 4 decades. What about social care? Or education, skills training, apprenticeships, AI, technology, housing etc? Shouldn’t we be aiming for more than an an economy consisting of coffee shops staffed by people living in overcrowded rented flats who are able to get seen in A&E in less than 4 hours? Health is important but it is not - for an economy - the most important thing. And much of good health for an individual depends on their own choices.

    3. So maybe we should be thinking about what individuals should be doing for and spending on their own health. And maybe, just maybe, if they make stupid choices, they have to bear the consequences. You know, like adults.

    I hope this money is spent wisely and on those areas of health which need it - mental health, for instance - but I can’t help feeling that in a few years we’ll be back in the same place with yet more demands, more crises, more plugging of gaps. And so some hard thinking is needed about what an NHS should do and what it shouldn’t and what people may have to do and pay for themselves.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,056
    kle4 said:

    Just seen Polly Toynbee talking bollocks on Marr.. She said that the evidence suggests(via polls) that people were happy to pay more for the NHS and Social Care if taxes went up and people had to pay.. The Tories tried that at GE 2017.. it was a sub optimal outcome.

    The specific tax and how well it is presented matters perhaps.
    The vast majority of those needing costly NHS care are not taxpayers, though they maywell have been in the past, and their families may continue to be paying tax. This is the nature of being elderly, or chronically physically or mentally ill. All universal systems, whether governmental or compulsory insurance based wrestle with the issue that those that use rarely pay in, and those that pay in rarely use.
This discussion has been closed.