Scotland Vote No In Referendum – Selfish, Scared People, Well Done!

a reply to: LeBombDiggity

How exactly have they failed it?

I'd love you to explain how they could table a motion in Parliament while it is in recess! The text of the motion has been agreed and a timetable has been sorted. You seem to be grasping a bit here.

a reply to: stumason

We always seem to be at odds and yet I don't wish to be. I think you were talking about my backside comment but it is no big deal. I have my faults, can get carried away but I do appreciate posters pointing out whenever I am wrong. I have put my hands up many times on ATS. There are English members in my family who have the vote and voted no. I respect that and understand their reasons. However family or not, the English people are in the same boat as us.

Regards Midicon.

a reply to: stumason

The pledge expressly said within 24 hours of a No vote. I guess the people who wrote that pledge knew that Friday followed thursday yet no motion was lodged. I guess the people to whom the pledge was made knew all the intricacies of the parliamentary clerks office when they cast their No votes, huh ?

And why's your new hero Brown suddenly in charge of the legislative process ? Who chose him ? Scotland's new legislation is going to be led through a hostile House of Commons by a man arguably the most incapable Prime Minister in recent history, a man rejected by the electorate and a man you held no candle for when he was in office.

Scotland deserves better.

Btw, since you didn't ask, I am of the 45%. What were you ?

a reply to: LeBombDiggity

I have no trust, faith nor liking for Gordon Brown, I too wonder why he is suddenly somehow calling the shots. It should be Sturgeon now that Alex Salmond has resigned. Holyrood has been hijacked by the Labour party. Brown will never be first minister of Scotland, the SNP will win the next election by a landslide. On top of that he took over from Darling during the referendum, we won't forget him when the next election comes round. He surrounds himself with yes men and supporters, he has no idea how much we dislike him.

a reply to: shauny

What truly amazes me is how much negativity and accusations of moochery there were, with so many people saying Scotland gets more money from Westminster per head than anywhere else in the Uk and Scotland contributes less per head, and blah blah blah. And yet, they BEGGED Scotland to stay. Cameron and Darling were practically GROVELLING in the street for Scotland to not go.

How many of you voters actually fell for the lies????

It's like if you threatened to quit your job and your boss said to you "you know paying you £20/hour actually costs me more money than it makes the company" and then he BEGGED you to not go!!!!

Any company who has employees makes MORE money from those employees than they pay them... Or else it would make ZERO SENSE to keep employing them!!!!!

In other words, you NO, voters bought the bullshiztz, HOOK, LINE and SINKER!! Per head, Scotland is worth more to the UK than any other geographical region. If it wasn't.... they would have been HAPPY FOR YOU TO LEAVE!!

Yes well unfortunetly, sometimes democracy sucks for the loosers. They may be scared or cowards, but the people of Scottland has voted no. All the yes peeps should respect that and move on while trying to take something good out of it - make England live up to their promises.

a reply to: LeBombDiggity

And the motion has been written and publicly released, but seeing as everyone knows Parliament is on recess between 12th Sept and 13th October, as it is Party Conference season, I don't see how you reasonably expect the motion to actually be presented to Parliament.

I have provided you with the text of said Motion, as released. It will be presented to Parliament as soon as it reconvenes.

You seem to be splitting hairs.

As for Brown - my new hero? Hardly. Can't stand the bloke, but he is still popular in Scotland, apparently, so I presume that's why he was asked.

I thought you would be of the 45%, LeBomb, hence why I didn't ask. It was obvious. Got to love the irony of a Frenchman having a say on Scotland's future while Scots who live South of the border had no say at all...

As for me? I didn't vote and I think you know that

a reply to: LeBombDiggity

Actually, LeBomb, you really are grasping.

Having read the "Pledge" for the first time - rather than just hearing about it - it says nothing about presenting a motion to parliament within 24hrs. I believe you know this and are just pulling a fast one...

It actually says (the bit relevant):

We are agreed that:

the Scottish Parliament is permanent and extensive new powers for the Parliament will be delivered by the process and to the timetable agreed and announced by our three parties, starting on the 19th September.

It says bugger all about any motion.

Link to the Pledge

And here are the promises in easy to read form:

Promises
Guarantee One

❱❱ New powers for the Scottish Parliament.

❱❱ Holyrood will be strengthened with extensive new powers, on a timetable beginning on September 19, with legislation in 2015.

❱❱ The Scottish Parliament will be a permanent and irreversible part of the British constitution.

Guarantee Two

❱❱ The guarantee of fairness to Scotland.

❱❱ The guarantee that the modern purpose of the Union is to ensure opportunity and security by pooling and sharing our resources equitably for our defence, prosperity and the social and economic welfare of every citizen, including through UK pensions and UK funding of healthcare.

Guarantee Three

❱❱ The power to spend more on the NHS if that is Scottish people’s will.

❱❱ The guarantee that with the continued Barnett allocation, based on need and with the power to raise its own funds, the final decisions on spending on public services in Scotland, including on the NHS, will be made by the Scottish Parliament.

❱❱ The Scottish Parliament will have the last word on how much is spent on health. It will have the power to keep the NHS in public hands and the capacity to protect it.

originally posted by: foxhound2459
a reply to: shauny
Surly this is a win win campaign for a fairer more democratic United Kingdom.
The fact that you the Scots gained more local power and have a greater say in your part off the UK is the most important part off this referendum.
Talking off referendums nows Englands and Wales turn to gather momentum for a referendom about pulling out off the EU.

The Scots have pulled a canny blinder on this, Welldone cousins.

In what way is it fairer? To the English, the 100,000 pounds extra promised to each greedy Scot in government spending sounds a bit unfair!

Do you mean that the Scots may lose their double voting rights which would make it more democratic?

a reply to: stumason

Undiscovered tribes up the Amazon delta knew you would raise my nationality,
Such are you, the one trick donkey.

I have every right to vote in UK elections, as do Brits living in France.
Don't hold me accountable for rules your own government makes.

What. "Within 24 hours" actually means "within one month" ? You expect Scotland to wait while politicos eat chips and fish at the annual seaside conference ? Pah. I do not think so.

a reply to: stumason

According to Salmond they have already moved the goalposts. I have just watched him on STV saying this.

You should also realise that if the yes campaign had won we would have had to deal with the Orange Order and their threat of paramilitary violence. This was something I had never considered before the referendum...and I want to get rid of the monarchy! Not in a nasty way but in the political sense.

a reply to: stumason

Here is the leaflet put through many doors from the No campaign, ours included.

You're being misled.

a reply to: LeBombDiggity

Er, no - it is you who has misunderstood.

It says:

The day after a No vote the timetable for further powers will be published as a motion before the UK Parliament.

Key word: Published.

It has been published - I provided you with the link earlier.

The motion will be tabled when Parliament reconvenes - you cannot table a motion while Parliament is in recess.

a reply to: stumason

Published before the UK Parliament
And it hasn't been. It simply hasn't been. There is no motion prepared for debate. And don't sauce the goose by claiming the Civil Service has all gone home for another 2 months so UK Parliament grinds to a halt.
The No campaign are blatant liars and you're being misled.

a reply to: stumason

In fact show us the motion.
Just show us the parliamentary motion, tabled or otherwise.

a reply to: LeBombDiggity

Just making the observation I wonder how you'd feel if the situation was reversed and Englishmen got to vote on a department of France succeeding? How hum, a moot point anyway, I just know the Scots I work with felt hard done by.

a reply to: LeBombDiggity

I already have - go back to page 7

In case that is too strenuous for you -

“That this House welcomes the result of the Scottish independence referendum and the decision of the people of Scotland to remain part of the United Kingdom; recognises that people across Scotland voted‎ for a Union based on the pooling and sharing of resources and for the‎ continuation of devolution inside the United Kingdom; notes the statement by the Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister and Leader of the Opposition regarding the guarantee of and timetable for further devolution to Scotland; calls on the Government to lay before Parliament a Command Paper including the proposals of all three UK political parties by 30th October and to consult widely with the Scottish people, civic Scotland and the Scottish Parliament on these proposals; further calls on the Government to publish heads of agreement by the end of November and draft clauses for the new Scotland Bill by the end of January 2015."


news.stv.tv...

a reply to: LeBombDiggity

Er no, at risk of incurring the wrath of the mods, it is you who is "lying".

The motion has been prepared and will be tabled as soon as Parliament reconvenes - as posted above, it even includes the timetable.

a reply to: stumason

You know EXACTLY what i am trying to say, don't re-direct things with semantics.

Scotland was willfully leading in these crimes? Well then, i guess you might as well say Scottish Empire, then.

Stupid yank? I go 0 f's about being an American. It really means nothing to me, and in actuality means nothing to noone else born on this piece of land. This "country" is corporate property of your crown, anyway. Feel proud.

originally posted by: stumason
a reply to: LeBombDiggity

Just making the observation

I wonder how you'd feel if the situation was reversed and Englishmen got to vote on a department of France succeeding? How hum, a moot point anyway, I just know the Scots I work with felt hard done by.

You're trying to confound me with succeeding/seceding lol.
If say Corsica wished to leave France (and some of them do) then I guess the voters there, English included, could cast their votes whichever way they wanted.
I wish you'd get the big picture about the EU. Sovereignty is to be pooled and shared in this great EU experiment. Unfortunately some see just losses of sovereignty and no gain, either for individuals or nations.