Jump to content

Independence - how would you vote?


Wee Bully

Independence - how would you vote  

1,135 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24613217

Perhaps DeeGas would like to give us his take on the above story. I thought everyone in the British family stuck together through the rough and the smooth, and that we didn't 'do the dirty' on each other? Surely then, our Westminster MPs should be leading by example?

And I'm sure my fellow Glasgow Uni Law Squad members will confirm that solicitors generally do not get compensated for working unsociable hours, in Scotland at least, nor are 'salaries supplemented to compensate'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 32k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Ad Lib, reach for your fainting couch. Vote No, get nothing:

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/wales-office-hits-back-first-6213091#.UmYH9R4OjoU.twitter

Without the threat of independence, we will get nothing. And that isn't speculation. That is reality based on what is actually happening.

The UK Government said it was “regrettable” that the First Minister was looking to “stir up conflict” and defended David Jones’ record in office, saying he was “instrumental” in bringing a prison to North Wales and securing the future of the nuclear site at Wylfa.

A prison and a nuclear site. He's really creating a utopia there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still can't believe there are actually people who believe we'll get more powers if we vote No. I've said it time and again, with the threat of independence gone, there would be no need for them to. Devolution has been a way of keeping us on side. Remember Lord Robertson in that 1995 debate with Salmond?

"I wouldn't be arguing for devolution if I thought it would lead to independence".

And remember, it was his party who established the Scottish Parliament. Add to this my point earlier back in the thread about the unionist parties not falling over themselves to have Devo-Max included on the ballot paper, and really this should tell you all you need to know about their true intentions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll bite. Why?

Why am I reading it or why would I recommend it?

I'm reading it for research purposes. I'd recommend it as it's interesting. Much more substantial devolution argued for by the Liberal MPs of Scotland (including of welfare) than was even discussed in either 1979 or 1997, or in Calman, or in the Steel Review, or in Campbell's Home Rule document, or in just about any other proposed alternative we've seen in the last 80 years.

As far as I can see the Bill in question fell (much like many other attempts from non-governmental bills on this matter before and since) because of opposition from Conservative UK Governments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've changed my views on open borders. Post independence, we are going to need border guards.

http://www.express.co.uk/scotland/435607/Venomous-spider-creeps-north-of-the-Border

A POISONOUS cousin of the deadly black widow spider has appeared in Scotland for the first time. The spiders may have arrived inside ventilation ducts imported from England.

Time to close the fucking border. Better Together.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why am I reading it or why would I recommend it?

I'm reading it for research purposes. I'd recommend it as it's interesting. Much more substantial devolution argued for by the Liberal MPs of Scotland (including of welfare) than was even discussed in either 1979 or 1997, or in Calman, or in the Steel Review, or in Campbell's Home Rule document, or in just about any other proposed alternative we've seen in the last 80 years.

As far as I can see the Bill in question fell (much like many other attempts from non-governmental bills on this matter before and since) because of opposition from Conservative UK Governments.

Did it include putting down protest using troops & tanks? Because that's exactly what the Liberal led Govt did in George Sq, Glasgow in 1919!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24613217

Perhaps DeeGas would like to give us his take on the above story. I thought everyone in the British family stuck together through the rough and the smooth, and that we didn't 'do the dirty' on each other? Surely then, our Westminster MPs should be leading by example?

And I'm sure my fellow Glasgow Uni Law Squad members will confirm that solicitors generally do not get compensated for working unsociable hours, in Scotland at least, nor are 'salaries supplemented to compensate'.

Loads of politicians are horrible and as for solicitors/lawyers,well they must be the greediest crooks on the planet.I wouldn't trust any of em as far as I could spit.

That's it for now,settling down with a couple of butter and jam cones,a bar of nut crackle stuff and a cup of cha for tonights big game on the radio,Accrington Stanley v Bristol Rovers.I'll also have one eye occasionally seeing how Brentford are fairing at Bristol City.

Better Together.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh and lets not forget this little gem from the article

"The UK Government is making the move without the consent of the Welsh Government or the National Assembly for Wales"

Yip, they are just going right ahead and doing it without even asking

Where are the Lib Dems (?) to bitch and whine about the evils of centralist control, while proposing more effective local and federal solutions?

You'd be forgiven to think their craven submission at Westminster and their obliteration by the SNP at Holyrood are connected to their conflicting actions.

I'm reading the Hansard extracts of the Government of Scotland Bill from 1913. Radical stuff. Would recommend.

The last time your party was relevant: I can see the appeal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wellity, wellity wellity, what do we have here?

https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/event/8929086137/?ref=enivtefor001&invite=NDQ1NTkxNy9qZW5uaWZlci5jcmF3Zm9yZEBnbGFzZ293LmFjLnVrLzA%3D&utm_source=eb_email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=inviteformal001&utm_term=eventpage

Hanging Together:The Case For Union School of Law, University of Glasgow Monday, 28 October 2013 from 17:00 to 18:00 (GMT)
Glasgow, United Kingdom

The School of Law presents Professor Jim Gallagher on the topic of Hanging Together: the case for Union.

Jim Gallagher is a Visiting Professor at the School of Law, University of Glasgow he holds a Fellowship at Nuffield College Oxford and is a fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh.. His main interest is the UK's territorial constitution, and is the author (with Iain Maclean and Guy Lodge) of “Scotland's Choices" on the independence referendum, “England and the Union: why and how to answer the West Lothian Question” as well as numerous articles in the Scotsman and other newspapers.

He was formerly Director General, Devolution for the UK Government, and an adviser at different times to both Gordon Brown and Tony Blair as Prime Ministers. In St Andrews House he was Head of the Justice Department from 2001.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wellity, wellity wellity, what do we have here?

https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/event/8929086137/?ref=enivtefor001&invite=NDQ1NTkxNy9qZW5uaWZlci5jcmF3Zm9yZEBnbGFzZ293LmFjLnVrLzA%3D&utm_source=eb_email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=inviteformal001&utm_term=eventpage

Hanging Together:The Case For Union School of Law, University of Glasgow Monday, 28 October 2013 from 17:00 to 18:00 (GMT)
Glasgow, United Kingdom

The School of Law presents Professor Jim Gallagher on the topic of Hanging Together: the case for Union.

Jim Gallagher is a Visiting Professor at the School of Law, University of Glasgow he holds a Fellowship at Nuffield College Oxford and is a fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh.. His main interest is the UK's territorial constitution, and is the author (with Iain Maclean and Guy Lodge) of “Scotland's Choices" on the independence referendum, “England and the Union: why and how to answer the West Lothian Question” as well as numerous articles in the Scotsman and other newspapers.

He was formerly Director General, Devolution for the UK Government, and an adviser at different times to both Gordon Brown and Tony Blair as Prime Ministers. In St Andrews House he was Head of the Justice Department from 2001.

One hour? Surprised they'll be able to fill the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wellity, wellity wellity, what do we have here?

https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/event/8929086137/?ref=enivtefor001&invite=NDQ1NTkxNy9qZW5uaWZlci5jcmF3Zm9yZEBnbGFzZ293LmFjLnVrLzA%3D&utm_source=eb_email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=inviteformal001&utm_term=eventpage

Hanging Together:The Case For Union School of Law, University of Glasgow Monday, 28 October 2013 from 17:00 to 18:00 (GMT)
Glasgow, United Kingdom

The School of Law presents Professor Jim Gallagher on the topic of Hanging Together: the case for Union.

Jim Gallagher is a Visiting Professor at the School of Law, University of Glasgow he holds a Fellowship at Nuffield College Oxford and is a fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh.. His main interest is the UK's territorial constitution, and is the author (with Iain Maclean and Guy Lodge) of “Scotland's Choices" on the independence referendum, “England and the Union: why and how to answer the West Lothian Question” as well as numerous articles in the Scotsman and other newspapers.

He was formerly Director General, Devolution for the UK Government, and an adviser at different times to both Gordon Brown and Tony Blair as Prime Ministers. In St Andrews House he was Head of the Justice Department from 2001.

Its the very definition of preaching to the converted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...