Haggis_trap Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 (edited) Brown is a . He actually made a good argument today about Scots MPs not being able to vote at Westminster - his point was that England cutting spending would affect Scotland via Barnett formula (or other arrangement). Sadly for it to be valid it should have been made pre referendum! Edited October 14, 2014 by Haggis_trap Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 Brown knows he can get away with it. I know I got a row for saying Scot are (political) pussies on the poll tax thread but it is true. We take what we are given and scuttle off like beggars. Honestly... when was the last 'rebellion' in Scotland? Of any description...even a riot? We are so domesticated. (I obviously include myself in this.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pool Q Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 Whatever else happens, there is no way at all that Corporation Tax or any oil revenue will be moved from Westminster to Holyrood. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exile Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29616672 Andrew Neil completly missing the point. And trying to say The English question inevitably needed addressing and in any case 'the vow' not really a vow, because it was jusr the daily record's term. But before the referendum, I don't remember them saying the vow was just a tabloid headline, and no one had said the devo promise depended on an English solution... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clyde1998 Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 A quick point that I should point out - SNP MPs do not, and never have, voted on English matters. It's the Unionists "Scottish" MPs that vote on English matters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonnyTJS Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 A quick point that I should point out - SNP MPs do not, and never have, voted on English matters. That's since 1999, I assume. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_fadiator Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 ...but as long as the Scottish Parliament receives a block grant there are consequences on public spending in Scotland from decisions on so-called "English matters". The only solution to the West Lothian question is independence or devo max that is fully devolved tax powers and providing an agreed grant to Westminster for defence and foreign affairs. That's the only way of ensuring Scotland's funding isn't affected by "English matters" and it's why the devolution mess will continue until one of these options is chosen/granted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mariokempes56 Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 That's since 1999, I assume. How long is you're fekkin memory? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonnyTJS Posted October 14, 2014 Share Posted October 14, 2014 How long is you're fekkin memory? I'm lucky to have clear recall of the past 30 seconds these days. It was a genuine question. I'm assuming this has been SNP Westminster policy since Holyrood, but I don't know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alibi Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 I'm lucky to have clear recall of the past 30 seconds these days. It was a genuine question. I'm assuming this has been SNP Westminster policy since Holyrood, but I don't know. I think it dates back longer than that, although originally it was probably more a case of not bothering to get involved in things that had no effect on Scotland. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clyde1998 Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 I should probably reword what I said. SNP MPs already refrain from voting on exclusively English, Welsh and Northern Irish matters, which do not impact on Scotland. I can't find the last time that the SNP did vote on a matter exclusively English, Welsh or Northern Irish - so it may have never happened. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exile Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 Plans for English devolution could come earlier than new powers for Scotland with nationalist MPs backing the Conservatives, said Tory MP John Redwood. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29616673 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Extreme0 Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 Would it not make sense to have devolved Assemblies accross each region of England or at the least have a section in which North/South of England have their own parliament of sorts? But then I am assuming that common sense is not an option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonnyTJS Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 Would it not make sense to have devolved Assemblies accross each region of England or at the least have a section in which North/South of England have their own parliament of sorts? But then I am assuming that common sense is not an option. What's common sense about that? Why should the English change their system of governance to accommodate a bunch of politicians who felt the need to try and bribe the Scots regardless of its constitutional implications? Prescott's plans for English regional assemblies were rejected in referendums in 2004. It may be attempted again - a federal solution to the constitutional mess devolution has caused would require it - but as was frequently pointed out on here over the years when people pushed for a devo-max question in the Scottish referendum, it would require a UK-wide referendum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biffer Posted October 16, 2014 Share Posted October 16, 2014 What's common sense about that? Why should the English change their system of governance to accommodate a bunch of politicians who felt the need to try and bribe the Scots regardless of its constitutional implications? Prescott's plans for English regional assemblies were rejected in referendums in 2004. It may be attempted again - a federal solution to the constitutional mess devolution has caused would require it - but as was frequently pointed out on here over the years when people pushed for a devo-max question in the Scottish referendum, it would require a UK-wide referendum. There's very little that's common sense about the UK constitution. It's creaked for a long time but now it's pretty much broken. There needs to be a new constitutional settlement for the UK as a whole, but the people of Scotland are several steps ahead of the rest of the people of the UK in considering what we want and understanding what isn't working, and there's no reason for us to wait for everyone else to catch up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonnyTJS Posted October 16, 2014 Share Posted October 16, 2014 There's very little that's common sense about the UK constitution. It's creaked for a long time but now it's pretty much broken. There needs to be a new constitutional settlement for the UK as a whole, but the people of Scotland are several steps ahead of the rest of the people of the UK in considering what we want and understanding what isn't working, and there's no reason for us to wait for everyone else to catch up. Except that the opportunity to leave and show the rest of us how a proper 21st-century constitution should be created was blown. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted October 16, 2014 Share Posted October 16, 2014 What's common sense about that? Why should the English change their system of governance to accommodate a bunch of politicians who felt the need to try and bribe the Scots regardless of its constitutional implications? Prescott's plans for English regional assemblies were rejected in referendums in 2004. It may be attempted again - a federal solution to the constitutional mess devolution has caused would require it - but as was frequently pointed out on here over the years when people pushed for a devo-max question in the Scottish referendum, it would require a UK-wide referendum. Except that the opportunity to leave and show the rest of us how a proper 21st-century constitution should be created was blown. You say potato I say cheated. You say tomato I say bayonet the wounded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thorbotnic Posted October 16, 2014 Share Posted October 16, 2014 ...but as long as the Scottish Parliament receives a block grant there are consequences on public spending in Scotland from decisions on so-called "English matters". The only solution to the West Lothian question is independence or devo max that is fully devolved tax powers and providing an agreed grant to Westminster for defence and foreign affairs. That's the only way of ensuring Scotland's funding isn't affected by "English matters" and it's why the devolution mess will continue until one of these options is chosen/granted. Devo max doesn't solve the WLQ at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlfieMoon Posted October 16, 2014 Share Posted October 16, 2014 http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0046/00460563.pdf Wow if it comes off. Full fiscal responsibility for the Scottish Parliament: all tax revenues should be retained in Scotland. The Scottish Parliament should have policy responsibility for all taxes unless there is a specific reason for a continued reservation. In particular, the Scottish Parliament should have full autonomy for income tax, national insurance, corporation tax, capital gains tax, fuel duty, air passenger duty and inheritance taxResponsibility for all domestic expenditure - including welfare - with payments made to the UK government for reserved servicesA sustainable framework for public finances including the necessary borrowing powers, and an agreement with the UK Government on the overall approach to public finances, including a commitment to continue the Barnett formula during any transitional period and if the Scottish Parliament's financial powers fall short of full fiscal responsibilityResponsibility for key economic levers: such as employment policy (including the minimum wage); employability programmes; competition, energy and broadcasting policy; and the Crown Estate As others have said - it won't happen. I don't know if people missed the 'Command Paper' from the Westminster party but the responses to most areas explored for devolution have copy and paste jobs for each section for each party such as this nonsense which can be summarised by saying that the Tories want to give some powers away (but probably take more money back with the other hand and simultaneously grab power at Westminster via English votes circus), Lib Dems support home rule (similar to SNP I guess) but don't really have much punching power, and Labour - oh dearest Labour ..... well they don't really support much at all - well, we could raise the top rate of income tax of course should we be faced with a Westminster government that isn't doing such - which will really assist in making us more competitive in attracting and retaining talent and thereby business. Corporation Tax Current Situation Corporation Tax policy – including rates, allowances and reliefs – is currently set by the UK Government and is not devolved. The Prime Minister has publicly committed to deciding by Autumn Statement 2014 whether the power to set the Corporation Tax rate in Northern Ireland should be devolved to the Northern Ireland Assembly. Published proposals Conservative commission: ‘We do not recommend the devolution to the Scottish Parliament of Corporation Tax, Capital Gains Tax (‘CGT’) or Inheritance Tax (‘IHT’). Each of these taxes should remain the responsibility of the United Kingdom’. Liberal Democrat commission: ‘Corporation Tax should continue to be operated and collected at the UK level, but the proceeds raised in Scotland should be assigned to the Scottish Parliament’. Labour commission: ‘We concluded that, for a variety of good reasons, VAT, national insurance contributions, corporation tax, alcohol, tobacco and fuel duties, climate change levy, insurance premium tax, vehicle excise duty, inheritance tax, capital gains tax and tax on oil receipts should remain reserved’. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/363236/Command_paper.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted October 16, 2014 Share Posted October 16, 2014 Prime Minister blasts Labour after they boycott talks on English votes for English laws The First Minister also indicated that he did not view another referendum as completely off the agenda. "What I said was that the referendum was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity," he said. "My view is that constitutional referendums came along once every political generation - about every 20 years or so. "Circumstances obviously can change. Clearly, if you had a situation where three leaders made such a public vow - not even a political promise but a vow - in the last few desperate hours when they thought they were losing the referendum campaign and then reneged upon it, then that would obviously be a very, very substantial change of circumstances. "These matters ultimately are for the people of Scotland to decide. It is for the people of Scotland to decide whether it is satisfactory to be conned and tricked by Westminster leaders, or they will exact a revenge at the ballot box." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted October 16, 2014 Share Posted October 16, 2014 Personally I'd like to see as much outrage at the fact they made the vow "in the last few desperate hours when they thought they were losing the referendum campaign" as there will be if the renege on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Padre Andrew Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 Mark Steel on good form in the Independent: http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/with-scotland-camerons-taken-broken-promises-to-a-whole-new-level-9799747.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flora MaDonald Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 Excellent stuff fae Steel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hertsscot Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 What a shame it's tucked away on the inner pages of a paper of such limited circulation in Scotland. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flora MaDonald Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 What a shame it's tucked away on the inner pages of a paper of such limited circulation in Scotland. We had a chance to exclude ourselves from North Korean media. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.