When will indyref2 happen?

[Antlion]

1 hour ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

This is  testing my memory but, as I recall, Cameron never expected to get an outright majority and he promised an in out EU referendum to keep his Brexiteer supporters on board.

When he got the majority he had no choice.

Anyway, old news. Time to move on.

So Gove believes referendums should happen when they’re in the manifesto of a party who forms the government and can put their pledges before parliament? That’s what you’re saying? Then he believes a Scottish referendum should go ahead. 

[SANTAN]

1 hour ago, welshbairn said:

I just think the combined vote of liberal English born expats and EU born expats eager to keep freedom of movement, alongside others nervous of Indy but thinking that EU membership was a net positive, would have taken us well over 50% if we'd been told what the plan was for 2016.

Of course that could be the case when it's all ifs and buts but in fairness nobody in 2014 knew what would happen in 2016 like that. Cameron was cocky after the Indy vote and thought brexit would be an easy win for his side imo and it could arguably be one of the biggest political missteps in the past 50 years or so. 

Edited August 1, 2021 by SANTAN

[Dawson Park Boy]

10 minutes ago, Antlion said:

So Gove believes referendums should happen when they’re in the manifesto of a party who forms the government and can put their pledges before parliament? That’s what you’re saying? Then he believes a Scottish referendum should go ahead. 

You had one - 2014.

You lost.

[Dawson Park Boy]

Just had some thoughts about Gove’s comments.

Yes, let’s have a referendum.

Bring it on. As soon as possible.

This could be a great time from the unionist perspective.

[Antlion]

23 hours ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

You had one - 2014.

You lost.

We’ve actually never had a referendum on whether we want to be part of an anti-EU state. Gove claims we should have one, though, given he supports them.

[The_Kincardine]

On 01/08/2021 at 22:49, Dawson Park Boy said:

Just had some thoughts about Gove’s comments.

Daft wee Gove is making the same mistake as Dim Dave did in 2012.

You do not partition our unitary nation-state on the say so of a coterie of glengarried-up grievance junkies from the worst schemes of Glasgow, Dundee and N Lanarkshire.

It was idiotic then and is idiotic now.

[Stellaboz]

Daft wee Gove is making the same mistake as Dim Dave did in 2012.
You do not partition our unitary nation-state on the say so of a coterie of glengarried-up grievance junkies from the worst schemes of Glasgow, Dundee and N Lanarkshire.
It was idiotic then and is idiotic now.

Nah I'm all for a UK wide vote on it. The UK wants to decide on the future of itself? Batter on. Let's see how much England wants to stay in the union and how it will still be our own fault when we're seperated.

[The_Kincardine]

13 minutes ago, Stellaboz said:

30 minutes ago, The_Kincardine said:

Daft wee Gove is making the same mistake as Dim Dave did in 2012.
You do not partition our unitary nation-state on the say so of a coterie of glengarried-up grievance junkies from the worst schemes of Glasgow, Dundee and N Lanarkshire.
It was idiotic then and is idiotic now.

Nah I'm all for a UK wide vote on it. 

Same. 

Of course there is no telling the outcome but if it ends up with a ScotchNat enclave around the central belt then it's a win win.

[Antlion]

On 03/08/2021 at 21:52, The_Kincardine said:

Same. 

Of course there is no telling the outcome but if it ends up with a ScotchNat enclave around the central belt then it's a win win.

Aren’t you worried the open contempt you face every day from your superiors are work would be exacerbated when their government starts telling them to lovebomb your unwanted jock arse?

[git-intae-thum]

On 01/08/2021 at 21:39, Dawson Park Boy said:

I disagree.

I think most English born residents in Scotland would have voted no despite Brexit. I think they still will.

Just my opinion.

 

Scotgov should maybe copy the UK governments approach to referendums and voter eligibility.

[The_Kincardine]

Another nail in the coffin of independence.

Last night's Newsnight treatment of the ferry fiasco was pretty generous I'd say but still damning:

What they failed to bring out was that, through all the shenanigans over contracts and party allegiances, BritGov is building some of the most advanced ships the world has ever seen only a few miles up the same river.

ScotGov:  Painting windows on an unsailable hulk in Port Glasgow.
BritGov: Cutting steel for the 3rd Type 26 frigate in Govan.

As for costs:

ScotGov:  If you believe last night's piece the cost of Glen Sanox and Hull 802 PLUS the modifications needed to the ferry terminals will run out at about one third of a billion pounds.  This, to quote last night's piece, should have been enough to to replace the entire CalMac fleet.
BritGov:  About £250M a ship including its vast array of weaponry and electronic surveillance systems.  Likely cost per hull?  Much below that of The GS and Hull 802.

Yet the daft wee tartan gonks on here thought, as recently as May, that 5 more years of Nikla and Pete was in the best interests of Scotland.

 

[The_Kincardine]

Another nail in the coffin of independence.  14 years of DaftNatties has increased the life expectancy gap between Glasgow's richest and poorest:

Yet still the glengarried-up brigade vote for The Murrells against the best interests of Scotland.

[Baxter Parp]

5 minutes ago, The_Kincardine said:

Another nail in the coffin of independence.  14 years of DaftNatties has increased the life expectancy gap between Glasgow's richest and poorest:Yet still the glengarried-up brigade vote for The Murrells against the best interests of Scotland.

Yes, we should vote for the alternative:

[DeeTillEhDeh]

Another nail in the coffin of independence.  14 years of DaftNatties has increased the life expectancy gap between Glasgow's richest and poorest:
Yet still the glengarried-up brigade vote for The Murrells against the best interests of Scotland.

It's not just Scotland.

https://www.bmj.com/content/364/bmj.l1492

[The_Kincardine]

14 minutes ago, Baxter Parp said:

Yes, we should vote for the alternative:

You and your gang of Natterist duds are out-Torying the Tories in every respect and are ruining Scotland and all for a dream of NewCo Scotchland which is in tatters. 

I said, years ago, try governing your way to independence but you idiot Nats prefer a scorched earth policy.

[DeeTillEhDeh]

You and your gang of Natterist duds are out-Torying the Tories in every respect and are ruining Scotland and all for a dream of NewCo Scotchland which is in tatters. 
I said, years ago, try governing your way to independence but you idiot Nats prefer a scorched earth policy.

Jesus wept.

[Baxter Parp]

6 minutes ago, The_Kincardine said:

You and your gang of Natterist duds are out-Torying the Tories in every respect and are ruining Scotland and all for a dream of NewCo Scotchland which is in tatters. 

I said, years ago, try governing your way to independence but you idiot Nats prefer a scorched earth policy.

That's right, we should accept unionism instead:

When do we start rounding up the foreigners, Kincy?

[Benjamin_Nevis]

I hadn't realised the racist jake was contributing such unintentionally hilarious point-and-laugh material. Good god [emoji23]

[renton]

6 hours ago, The_Kincardine said:

Another nail in the coffin of independence.

Last night's Newsnight treatment of the ferry fiasco was pretty generous I'd say but still damning:

What they failed to bring out was that, through all the shenanigans over contracts and party allegiances, BritGov is building some of the most advanced ships the world has ever seen only a few miles up the same river.

ScotGov:  Painting windows on an unsailable hulk in Port Glasgow.
BritGov: Cutting steel for the 3rd Type 26 frigate in Govan.

As for costs:

ScotGov:  If you believe last night's piece the cost of Glen Sanox and Hull 802 PLUS the modifications needed to the ferry terminals will run out at about one third of a billion pounds.  This, to quote last night's piece, should have been enough to to replace the entire CalMac fleet.
BritGov:  About £250M a ship including its vast array of weaponry and electronic surveillance systems.  Likely cost per hull?  Much below that of The GS and Hull 802.

Yet the daft wee tartan gonks on here thought, as recently as May, that 5 more years of Nikla and Pete was in the best interests of Scotland.

 

1. The UK government isn't building the T26, BAE Systems, a private company (which spent some time nationalised in the past) is.

2. The type 26 cost per ship isn't 250 million. The cost of one T26 is about 1 billion pounds.  Part of the reason for that being the various delays on the project imposed by the UK government. 

3. The 250 million per ship you are quoting is not for the super advanced high end Type 26, but for the low end general purpose Type 31 frigate being built at Rosyth by Babcock. Because the various delays with getting the T26 project going, and the billion per ship cost, the Navy and government were unable to afford to replace the T23 one for one with the T26. Instead the thirteen T23 ASW ships will be replaced by 8 T26 ASW ships and 5 low end T31s.

4. Even at that, the 250 million per T31 (which Babcock got on a fixed price contract to avoid the usual inflation of costs (although it already stretched up from 200 million) doesn't get you a huge amount of capability and is routinely criticised for it's minimal weapons fit and lack of sonar which compares badly in terms of what most countries would get out of that price ticket.

5. Trying to use any military facing project as an example of value for money is fairly laughable. None of the Royal Navy's projects have been problem free since maybe the T23s in the late 80s. The Carrier programme over ran by about a decade and several billion pounds. The T45 destroyer programme got capped at 6 units instead of 12. Most relevant to this discussion was the massive delays and cost over runs in the Astute submarine programme.

Because of the gap between the last Vangaurd class Trident missile boat and the first Astute attack boat, the yard had lost a lot of the institutional knowledge and work force required to build an advanced  machine like that.  Consequently another contractor - the US firm Lockheed Martin - was brought in to provide project management support as well as access to their CAD tools to get the job done. The subsequent boat is extremely capable but the project ended up years late and well over budget so that the 13 Swiftsure and Trafalgar class boats ended up replaced by only 7 Astute class boats.

8. If you want other great examples of UK Government procurement, Google  the General Dynamics Ajax.

ScotGov could have contracted out to a foreign firm who bash out ferries on a fairly steady drum beat. Instead they chose to try and regenerate a local capability. It was always going to cost shit loads more and mistakes were always going to be made with a combination of poor project management and inexperienced work force. The point is to absorb the costs so that both sides get better at controlling costs of these types of projects.

[DeeTillEhDeh]

1. The UK government isn't building the T26, BAE Systems, a private company (which spent some time nationalised in the past) is.
2. The type 26 cost per ship isn't 250 million. The cost of one T26 is about 1 billion pounds.  Part of the reason for that being the various delays on the project imposed by the UK government. 
3. The 250 million per ship you are quoting is not for the super advanced high end Type 26, but for the low end general purpose Type 31 frigate being built at Rosyth by Babcock. Because the various delays with getting the T26 project going, and the billion per ship cost, the Navy and government were unable to afford to replace the T23 one for one with the T26. Instead the thirteen T23 ASW ships will be replaced by 8 T26 ASW ships and 5 low end T31s.
4. Even at that, the 250 million per T31 (which Babcock got on a fixed price contract to avoid the usual inflation of costs (although it already stretched up from 200 million) doesn't get you a huge amount of capability and is routinely criticised for it's minimal weapons fit and lack of sonar which compares badly in terms of what most countries would get out of that price ticket.
5. Trying to use any military facing project as an example of value for money is fairly laughable. None of the Royal Navy's projects have been problem free since maybe the T23s in the late 80s. The Carrier programme over ran by about a decade and several billion pounds. The T45 destroyer programme got capped at 6 units instead of 12. Most relevant to this discussion was the massive delays and cost over runs in the Astute submarine programme.
Because of the gap between the last Vangaurd class Trident missile boat and the first Astute attack boat, the yard had lost a lot of the institutional knowledge and work force required to build an advanced  machine like that.  Consequently another contractor - the US firm Lockheed Martin - was brought in to provide project management support as well as access to their CAD tools to get the job done. The subsequent boat is extremely capable but the project ended up years late and well over budget so that the 13 Swiftsure and Trafalgar class boats ended up replaced by only 7 Astute class boats.
8. If you want other great examples of UK Government procurement, Google  the General Dynamics Ajax.
ScotGov could have contracted out to a foreign firm who bash out ferries on a fairly steady drum beat. Instead they chose to try and regenerate a local capability. It was always going to cost shit loads more and mistakes were always going to be made with a combination of poor project management and inexperienced work force. The point is to absorb the costs so that both sides get better at controlling costs of these types of projects.

That's a telt.