Jump to content

Zern

Gold Members
  • Posts

    598
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Zern

  1. 1 hour ago, Scott Steiner said:

    OK, I'll try again.

    When I referred to talking sensibly, I mean digesting points, responding to them and basically acting in good with without snideyness.

    I'm not about to state the rumours because there might be legal ramifications, but many people have heard them.  Given how widespread they are, I reckon they're true.

    I'm not saying this as a 'gotcha' or to try and show you up, but it's where I'm coming from.

    Legal ramifications.. of the truth?

    I can understand how you may be reluctant to write something untrue as that would carry the legal ramification of libel.

    Truth is not actionable.

    So you must not be in possession of the truth.

    Hence your coyness.

  2. 13 minutes ago, Scott Steiner said:

    Look mate, you're not interested in talking sensibly.

    Can't be bothered entertaining utter nonsense.. well most of the time anyway.

    If you want to change your tone/patter whilst digesting what I say and reflecting on it accordingly then let me know.

    Talking sensibly would amount to something more than rumours that, you say, you are unprepared to talk about.

    Why are you unprepared to talk about it sensibly?

  3. 7 minutes ago, Scott Steiner said:

    If the rumours are true, and I believe they are, then the manipulation is off the scale.  I have good reason to believe them, and that's all I'm prepared to say.

    Pretty sure SNP candidates, staffers etc sign a disclosure, so we're not about to hear her colleagues bad mouth her.

    Off the scale.

    Oh my.

    That is usually a sign of mis-calibration. Get your gullibometer checked today.

    I don't believe that this is in fact all that you are prepared to say and i am certain you will a make liar of yourself in no time.

  4. 7 minutes ago, Scott Steiner said:

    I think her persona has indeed come about through artful manipulation.  Her makeover is absolutely wild.  It's just not her, if you know what I'm saying.

    As for the scandal, well she's managed to keep it out the press, but personally I believe the rumours.

    Who do you think could eventually take over from her?

    What manipulation? Her tenure in politics has been accompanied by the glare of an overtly hostile press and media coverage which has seen the demise of many a political leader over her career. What evidence we have heard regarding how Nicola Sturgeon conducts herself comes from people who have worked with her and they all admit to her acting in a professional and respectful manner. A being very likeable by all accounts.

    But no, you have rumours. That you believe. Ok.

  5. 9 minutes ago, Scott Steiner said:

    I think she has cultivated an image and persona over the years that makes her appealing to so many groups.  She also has an incredible PR machine and is amazing in debates etc.  As well as this, she has rode the energy of the independence movement post-2014.  Give her telly time and she more often than not comes across extremely well, is to the point and speaks in a language everyone can understand.  She knows exactly what to say every single time.

    Fair play to her.  Sometimes I see her batting away questions at FMQs and I just think 'f***, she's good'

    She won't last forever though, and whoever takes over the party from her will be nowhere near as electable.

    An image and persona that did not come about through some artful manipulation or a compliant press, but political graft that involved representing her constituents and wider electorate over many decades which is absent of any trail of scandal.  Coupled with a concise communicator with a propensity for telling nazi's to do one is very appealing. Competent governance.

    No. Nicola is not forever. Or for everyone even. Far from done though. 2023 is a deadline.

  6. 11 hours ago, Scott Steiner said:

    Very true, Spongemeister.

    You can always tell when she's lying.

    Her lips move.

    Very popular though. Not just popular in Scotland mind you; it's a UK wide thing. Nicola Sturgeon rates higher approval than Boris, Kier or whoever is leading the lib dems atm.

    How do you explain that popularity?

  7. 7 hours ago, DublinMagyar said:
    7 hours ago, Scott Steiner said:
    The manifesto promise is a lie though, as the devolved assembly simply does not have the power to deliver referendums.  Only parliament does.
    The Tories got in on a majority, with a manifesto promise of not holding another referendum on an issue which is, quite frankly, settled.

    Lies, councils can hold referendums

    And our a parliament, as of 2020. I'm looking forward to the next one.

  8. 1 hour ago, Kenneth840 said:

    If the major changes were made while she was depute, who was chief then. Alex Salmond. 

    Referendum act is pointless. The Keatings case could have made things easier but the Scottish Government decided to oppose it.  The Scottish government decided to oppose a case which would decide if holyrood could call a referendum without a section 30. Why would they, it is not needed. Whether the referendum act is passed by holyroood or not westminster will overule it and change the scotland act.  That is what happened with the eu continuity bill and we all remember not being taking out of the eu against our will, where are we now.  

    This is where we are. We have a parliamentary group that asked westminster for permission to ban protest at our own Scottish parliament.  

    There we are. 

     

    You appear slightly confused on whether this has been passed, it has. It wasn't challenged.

    It deals with the integral part of the devolution, voting rights which are wholly devolved to Scotland.

    The expected challenge will be once the vote is passed for an independence referendum.

    To be held under the terms of that exact legislation. Which passed and was not challenged.

    Hard to see what legal argument can be levied against it. 

  9. 11 minutes ago, Thorongil said:

    What referendum act? The GRA, is it even enacted and is it even significant? 
     

    The NHS and schools are weaker than when she took office. Shame really as she was a damn good Health Minister. 

    Walking away from Names Persons was an act of real cowardice IMO. 

    I can’t think of any policy or social advancement that she can claim as her own.

    https://www.parliament.scot/bills-and-laws/bills/referendums-scotland-bill

    Sets the framework up for advisory referendums. Became an Act in 2020.

  10. 14 hours ago, Thorongil said:

    It’s entirely possible to be a lifelong supporter of independence and not rate the job Nicola Sturgeon has done since becoming First Minister. 

    She has achieved nothing of any note in the role. What policies and examples of improvements can she point to as her legacy?

    The referendum act? Gender recognition act? COP26 was handled well. Managing the COVID crisis?

    How about lowering the voting age to 16, investing in the NHS, Schools, infrastructure and generally being very very competent at her job.

    Trouble is, i have no idea what you would consider a fitting legacy for governance? The major changes were enacted whilst Nicola was Depute, and her influence on the SNP, and UK political landscape, has been major.

    Legacies, when written, tend to be once the politician has stopped politicking, and Nicola hasn't finished quite yet.

    At least when she does finish, she will actually be done with politics, there is no House of Lords for this lady.

    No lording it over the pheasants.

  11. 18 minutes ago, btb said:

    No their hourly rate is so great that 10/15/20 hours a week (officially) doesn't come into the equation.

    Take Owen Patterson whose extracurricular activities started the present kerfuffle he was paid

    I make that 18 hours a month or just under 5 hours a week @ appoximately £500/hour - nice work if you can get it.

    *********************

    As I said BJs proposals to clean up parliament are designed not to affect his backbenchers - it'll be interesting to see if the opposition can keep up the pressure and force the government into making significant reforms.

    So really just cosmetic legislation designed to keep everything as it is? Bugger that.

    This shit is actually sticking for once, just witness the sudden rush of declared interests by forgetful MPs who "forgot" that luxury holiday, fully paid junkets and whatnot.

    It looking less and less like a trough, and more like a swimming-pool for the wee piggys.

  12. 3 hours ago, strichener said:

    There are many types of corruption, some financial some far more sinister.  Whilst not "raging", I am remembering that the highest politician in the land was found by a committee to have given an "inaccurate account". That  minutes of meetings were not taken is beyond doubt.  However you can continue cheerleading a government led by someone that simply forgets when it is inconvenient to remember.

    First minister > Prime Minister

  13. 5 hours ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

    Not necessarily corruption.

    At the time everyone was complaining about how slow the processes were to get PPE and testing underway.

    In desperate situations a lot of civil service procedures need to be abandoned for expediency.

    Just remember that it was Boris asking his friend Kate Bingham to mobilise the pharmaceutical industry to get a vaccine ASAP.

    It worked and we got the Astra Zeneca vaccine.

    I would have thought the NAO would have looked at this.

    Sometimes, networking is a good thing.

    You left out the part where your friendly networker just happens to get your attention with briefcase full of £20 notes.

    It's corruption.

×
×
  • Create New...