Jedi2
-
Posts
396 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Jedi2
-
-
2 minutes ago, Leith Green said:
I agree with this in theory, but unfortunately I don't believe for a minute that Labour give 2 fucks about Scotland now they have their 30+ MPs back.
It's been a long road back to today from Jim Murphy's Irn Bru crates and the banter years of Dugdale and Leonard.
No question that, as we saw in 2011, that folk can switch their votes from WM to Holyrood, but as said, to not take this chance to build on 30+ MPs would be criminal
0 -
For Holyrood Labour should also get in early to stress that they would keep free prescriptions, dental care, and no tuition fees for domestic students.
In addition they have to come up with an offer of Devolving full taxation powers (including NI), Broadcasting, and parts of Immigration law. With a big majority at WM they have the opportunity to do this. Basically strengthening Devolution. Barnett should also be increasing from the current £41 billion.
Have to answer the question of 'what can Labour do for Scotland', with WM Labour showing that they can make a genuine difference if both administrations are Labour. Can't and must not, just be rhetoric.
Presumably the SNP will go with a 'pro-Indy majority' is a Referendum. Again, Labour can and should say that, while not agreeing that a Ref is necessary that they would 'recognise' that result and grant one, while offering enhanced Devolution and protection of SNP measures which are popular.
They have a great opportunity from today to show that Scotland is important to them, and again of they fail to capitalise on that from this position, they would deserve the SNP to win again. They have to be 'serious' about resetting the relationship between WM and Holyrood now and be different from the Tories. Won't get a better chance.
1 -
Biggest and most important lesson Labour learned from 2017 and 19 was the need to ensure that our vote was spread around the country, rather than piling up the higher numbers in big cities and safe seats.
Factors already mentioned with Farage returning to lead Reform and eat away at the Tory vote, as well as disillusionment with the SNP record in Scotland, has obviously helped that vote spead across the UK
It is notable however that the only place where Labour's vote is actually down is Wales, where of course there is (understandably) disillusionment with Labour's own record in govt.
2 big battles to come at both Holyrood and the next GE, where it will be important to keep that vote spread going (on a relatively) small overall share of around 35% both in Scotland and the UK. (I accept that there is no great 'love' for Starmer yet, more of a 'not the Tories again narrative)
Clearly, if the SNP sort themselves out they are still likely to win the most seats at Holyrood (though not a majority), and Reform will still be a factor which could start to eat away at Labour votes as well as Tory.
It's relying on a poor SNP showing between now and 26, as well as disillusioned Tories continuing to switch to Reform...neither is guaranteed.
What will also be required, of course, is to be seen to be making tangible improvements to people's lives in Health, Education, Housing, Social Services, the Environment, and Immigration over the next 2 years (initially). Ideally it will be a 2 term task though.
If we can't do that, then a (potentially reinvigorated) SNP will deserve to win at Holyrood again in 26.
Independence hasn't 'gone away', far from it, (and nor it should) and the grassroots will be important outside the SNP to keep in going in the next 2 years as well.
Lots to play for all round...
2 -
1 hour ago, coprolite said:
Corbyn was box office compared to Starmer. But he mobilised and galvanised the opposition as much as his own side.
If Starmer had had half of Corbyn's manifesto, he would have had all the friction from the media, vested interests lined up against him and might have kept tories voting tory.
No way would turnout be as low. And he'd probably not enthuse the left as much as corbyn did.
He won by being a blank slate for people to project their own hopes onto while never thrratening the sratus quo. I doubt he could have won with anything controversial.
Would largely agree with this.
Another couple of factors: Ironically had Farage not 'returned' just a few weeks ago, don't think Reform would have done anything like as well as they did. For probably 90% of their voters he is the 'face' they need to back them, odious though he is. That would have meant the Tories traditional vote holding up better and a smaller Lab majority.
You are right that, had Starmer set out a more 'Corbyn like' offer, the right wing media would have been all over it. Given that we have only ever had 7 Labour PMs it is incredibly difficult to win with a more left leaning manifesto.
However, despite the point above about the Tory vote holding up better had Farage not intervened, after Truss they were never going to 'win' this election..once their economic credibility was shot...even their traditionalists will put up with Johnson's antics but when they crash the economy they are done.
So, Starmer could probably have been bolder...not Corbyn bolder,no, but still...and seem come out with a working majority.
3 -
Labour with 3.5 million fewer votes than 2017 (on probably the most left-wing programme since 1945) and 500,000 fewer than 2019.
Shows that it was Reform wot won it, by pulling down the Tory vote.
Certainly something for Starmer to reflect upon..both that Corbyn actually won more votes (twice) and that an openly 'left' manifesto went down better across the country.
Also, in terms of winning a 2nd term, that ironically Reform would probably have to continue eating away at the Tories.
1 -
If Proportional Representation had been in place it would have been roughly..(based just on vote share) and these obviously are 'roughly'
Scotland:
Labour 22 (36%)
SNP 17 (30%)
Tory 7 (13%)
Reform 5 (8%)
Libs 5 (9%)
Greens 1 (5%)
If at UK level...
Lab 241
Tory 156
Reform 91
Libs 78
So PR maybe not 'so good' in allowing Reform to be a force.
Though obviously PR if at a GE would be regionally based, so % in S.East England, NE England etc rather than 'nationally' but still, interesting to see national vote share v seats.
0 -
Particularly good to see all of Truss, Rees-Mogg and Mordaunt gone
0 -
1 hour ago, DrewDon said:
Honestly, the worst thing about casting your vote is that hour or so of doubt afterwards where you convince yourself that you didn't actually vote for the candidate/party you intended to. I checked my ballot three times before folding it and taking it to the box, and once after folding it, but there is still part of me convinced that I voted Reform by accident.
I'd imagine that normal, well-adjusted human beings do not experience this, but hopefully some on here can relate.
Totally get this.
0 -
3 hours ago, strichener said:
I propose that the Scottish government introduce a 75% teachers tax rate since they all want to pay higher taxes.
Sounds fair
0 -
1 hour ago, sparky88 said:
Boris Johnson being wheeled out 2 days before election day in 2024 is like if they brought out David Mellor's mistress during the 1997 campaign.
They did used to wheel Thatcher back out at every election after they punted her as well
0 -
6 hours ago, Salvo Montalbano said:
As a teacher in a state school "hit" with the higher tax, I'm happy to and would happily pay more tax if it meant more money was spent in education, particularly in the return of dedicated behaviour support units and around addional support needs/more pupil support assistants. You'd be surprised how many people don't mind paying a bit of extra tax if they see something from it. The issue with the tax rises the Tories have overseen is that we don't have anything to show for it as it has been wasted on things like dodgy PPE contracts and tax cuts higher up the food chain. Labour seem to have been spooked by the old Lib Dem "1p more to pay for the NHS" policy and have been backed into a corner where they've committed to not increasing any of the big four taxes, not changing council tax and not borrowing. With such a big lead in the polls they could have probably got away with a 1p extra for medium earners and 2p more for the uber wealthy if they said it was ringfenced for the NHS, education and the likes. But we'll never know.
I have been a teacher in a state school for 28 years now as well, and don't disagree about extra tax, if you can see it reinvested into education and health particularly the areas you suggest.
Also agree that Labour could (and should) have got away with an 'extra 1p for Education and Health' approach.
However being a teacher and due to various 'issues' to say the least with the SNP and Education over the past few years is one of the main reasons I couldn't vote for them.
0 -
Just now, Pocketman said:
I get the impression and therefore am hopeful that when the election is over, you will still find a way to make a daily reference to John Swinney on here.....
Unlikely, as if the result doesn't go well, he will be replaced soon..probably by Nicola
0 -
1 hour ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:
Scottish polls have been showing a fair number of undecided voters - you think would be disillusioned Tories or independence voters who are not happy with the SNP.
The fact that Labour look comfortable will make many independence voters think about lending Labour their vote, not to mention putting independence at the centre of the manifesto - clearly to encourage those non-SNP independence supporters.
There are indeed a good number of Undecided.. and you are right, probably disillusioned Tory and SNP voters.
However, on the day that still makes them likely to not bother or just 'go with what they usually do'
24-22 SNP probably feels 'about right'. If that is the result, it renders a Labour win in England and Wales pretty meaningless in Scotland, as the 'narrative' is still with the SNP, and they still hold control of 'most' powers at Holyrood in any case
0 -
And there you are..Scotsman and Independent reporting the Savanta poll which gives the SNP a comfortable lead over Labour and should see
SNP 24
Labour 22
Libs 5
Tories 6
SNP lead for Holyrood also stretching away now.
0 -
15 hours ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:
It's in waste water management.
Left school without being able to read or write, and haven't gained either skill since.
On the Survation Poll, still can't see the Tories as low as that, or the SNP.
There will still be that 'can't admit to voting Tory in polls' element. Chance of them still being over 100.
SNP could be anywhere from 15 to 40...polls in Scotland have been all over the place Reform...probably 2 or 3.
0 -
1. Celtic
2. Rangers
3. Aberdeen
4. Hearts
5. Motherwell
6. Hibs
7. KIllie
8. United
9. St.Mirren
10. Dundee
11. St.Johnstone
12. County
0 -
Unlike France, Italy, Spain, Austria, Hungary the UK has never had actual Communists or Fascists (or at least far-left/far-right) elected to parliament in any numbers, and indeed has always avoided 'extremes'. Yes, Brexit was largely built on smears about Immigration, but it's a whole different matter actually electing far...(either side) to Parliament let alone govt.
Hence why Reform might win 2 or 3 seats this time (with maybe 14-15% of the vote or maybe less). Can't see how they go from there to potentially forming the next govt.
Howling at the moon about Immigration can only carry so far.
I genuinely think the majority of Tory voters (in England) care more about low taxes, not spending too much on public services, being able to keep 'most' of their money and Pensions, than they do about Immigration overall.
0 -
Reckon Reform might win 2 or 3 seats (on a good day) for them on Thursday..even Farage will struggle to win his seat.
In 5 years time they will probably be called something else (again)..Brexit Party to Reform to..?
They will influence the Tories to move further to the right, but electorally will disappear as 'traditional' Tory voters return to them rather than whatever Farage's latest vanity project is
0 -
Swinney has already got his in..'this election doesn't really matter as we have a mandate from 2021 so let's get on with that Referendum'
Other than that...
The weather
Folk being put off politics by the result in the French election
The Euros
The fact that too many folk couldn't find ID
The Glasgow Fair is coming up
0 -
10 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:
Is that the mean or median average?
Mean £35K
Median £28K
0 -
12 minutes ago, HibeeJibee said:
Will Labour's VAT policy trigger an influx of pupils to Scotland's under-pressure state schools? (scotsman.com)
A key concern raised about Labour’s plans to end the VAT exemption on private school fees has been that it will add to pressure on state schools. This is mainly because it is claimed many parents will decide to enrol their children in local authority-run primaries and secondaries due to rising costs. Private schools estimate this could be the case for 6,000 pupils north of the border - a 20 per cent fall. However, the Institute of Fiscal Studies believes the decline is likely to be of between only 3 per cent and 7 per cent, or 900 to 2,100 pupils in Scotland.
In theory, a significant increase in the pupil roll would only add to the existing strain in state schools, where staff are already struggling to cope with a staggering rise in the number of pupils with additional support needs, as well deteriorating behaviour. However, roll projections show primary pupil numbers in state schools peaked in 2017 at over 400,300 and are now falling by 1.7 per cent a year, while in secondary schools they will peak next year at 316,600 and then decline by 1.2 per cent annually.
There should, therefore, be capacity in the state system, although existing pressures would not be eased by an influx. Any impact would also vary by area. It is often claimed a quarter of school pupils in Edinburgh attend private schools and, while this is not accurate, the capital does have a significant proportion. Close to 54,000 pupils attended state schools in Edinburgh last year, while 9,310 pupils living in Edinburgh are estimated to attend private schools. However the next highest was Glasgow, where only 3,170 private school pupils are thought to live, followed by Aberdeen with 2,530 and Perth & Kinross with 2,240. Edinburgh, Glasgow and Perth & Kinross councils all confirmed to The Scotsman they have not yet seen any evidence of a rise in enrolments.So the conclusions leads to:
Taxing Private School parents more
Taxing Oil and Gas Giants more
Taxing Property Developers more
Trying to claw back non-dom.tax avoidance.....
All 'unfair' and 'unmanageable'
But....Taxing people earning £8000 less than an average wage and going after teachers, nurses, police and Social Workers with tax hikes is 'progressive' and where we should be clawing the money in from?
Certainly removes any doubt about the clear right-left wing gap in economic approach between Labour and the SNP.
If you want to protect private schools, large multinationals, large landowners, and bankers, the SNP is clearly on your side.
0 -
The average wage in Scotland is around £35,000.
Under the SNP's 6 bands these 'high earners' start at £26,562 (or around £8000 below an 'average' wage. Of course there is then the fiscal drag between £43662 and £43,663 which takes a lot of public sector workers (nurses, teachers, police, Social Workers etc) into the 'Higher' band...these are the people the Scottish govt are going after to up their tax revenue (worth around £1 billion more in the next year with the rates higher than rUK
So for all the 'we settled teachers/nurses/police etc pay disputes (eventually)..award these workers a rise then hit them with Higher tax, which kind of defeats the purpose of the pay rise and makes it smoke and mirrors.
On the Windfall Tax, the proposal is to increase it by around 3% at present (less of an increase than the Tories made in the last 2 years).
Ultimately I would still rather see oil and gas giants, Private School parents and property developers paying a bit more in tax, than an average public sector worker, as, in most considerations they are most able to afford it.
20%
Intermediate
£26,562 - £43,662
21%
Higher
£43,663 - £75,000
42%
Advanced
£75,001 - £125,140*
45%
Top
Above £125,141
1 -
2 minutes ago, lichtgilphead said:
For f*cks sake Jedi, you can't say that the IFS spokesman said "that these figures are based on a one year projection not the 5 year term". in a radio interview (which he didn't) then link to something that the IFS said 6 days later in a newspaper as proof of what was said in that interview.
That's fundimentally dishonest.
How about the next time you try to make a point, you link to the place that the person quoted actually said these words?
No?
Look at my quote in the Latest Polls thread at 22:46 on 22/06/2024
Your original post talked about a decade of austerity. I've set out some cuts I would make, pointed out that the finances of iScotland will depend on the settlement & said that I'm happy to look at the long -term advantage of never electing a tory government again as sufficient justification for any potential additional costs. What more do you expect me to say?
I consider that to be a pretty comprehensive reply. You're not getting anything more. I'll look forward to your apology.
Apology? For your condescending arrogance and constant 'intellectual superiority',continual inference of my uneducated numbskullness and your colossal intellectual capacity by comparison.
0 -
21 minutes ago, SandyCromarty said:
Increasing Windfall taxes will just see the majors move away to more profitable climes,Guyana for example.
The North Sea drilling and production costs are very high compared to other areas but successive British Governments have given good tax breaks on exploration if a company has a oil production platform, an increase on the Windfall tax would wipe out the tax break and then it's adios.
No Government anywhere in the world tells one of the majors how to run their business. FACT.
VAT on school fees would see a massive pupil exodus from private to state schools and the increased cost to us the taxpayer.
They will not achieve taxing the non doms, the rich or companies such as Amazon as they all move their residential status overseas, Labour knows that but they will peddle their manifesto bollocks to please the believers.
Labour runs on pie in the sky ideas, we've seen it all before.
Things is they will win this election by a landslide and then run the country into the ground for five years then disappear for the next ten years or so.
It's the same shite over and over and it's time Scotland broke away from this Westminster pantomime.
You mean like when Shell (profit £22 billion) BP (profit £14 billion) and others, fled the UK when Jeremy Hunt slapped a 35% Windfall Tax (an increase of 10% from the previous year),on their profits in January 2023..think they are still here.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-60295177.amp
Or the whole 5% of kids who go to Private Schools will mostly be leaving? Don't think so. Rather think that they will be more than able to afford an 'increase'. After all, fees of between £20-30K a year already aren't an issue.
Meanwhile it's fine and dandy to slap tax hikes on 'high' earners (by the SNP's definition) on £28,000 a year, but not oil and gas companies, private schools, or property developers.
It's interesting that you mention 'disappearing' for 'ten years or so', a decade in other words, that the SNP plan to use to 'disappear' even moderate functioning of public services in Scotland for.....but its all worth it in the 'long term'. How long it would take to rebuild those public services is anyone's guess.
0
Hope for Independence
in The Politics Forum
Posted
I genuinely don't take any pleasure in seeing the SNP where they found themselves this morning Obviously I am pleased (to say the least) about the return of a Labour govt, the back of the Tories at last, and a good Labour performance in Scotland after a long 10 years.
However the SNP were a formidable election winning machine, based largely on being 'different' from the others with their discipline. While I obviously didn't agree with their political choices I could still admire and hand it to them on their activism.
It is therefore sad to watch the Murrel situation, Mattheson etc as it is such a departure from what they had before.
As said previously the great energy produced in 2014, came not from the SNP themselves but the grassroots movements which sprung up around it . These folk are scunnered but they (rightly) haven't gone away. Neither have folk who vote Labour and Lib Dem but who would vote Yes in a Referendum.
There is still a chance to build that support in opinion polls over the next few years, decoupled from SNP 'success' or not, at the ballot box.
The day will come when it reaches around 60% and will hold there..it might take a few years, but it will happen. Hopefully by that time Devolution will have been enhanced to the point that a next step seems only natural.