This is interesting and I did hear what you said on the AP show.

I just wonder if the SNP are going to win enough seats in Scotland. If I heard you right, are Labour looking to be wiped put in Scotland as the tories were?

Are Labour are going to lose as badly as you suggest, then the Tories may not need any help from the SNP. And you would have to think that any coalition would start with the Loyalist MPs in Northern Ireland.

As long as it ends the Barnett Formula, I'm all for it.

Although I am pretty sure with end of that and a fair distribution of tax money around the UK, the SNP would be wiped out at the next election, seeing as the Scots rely on the extra £1500/capita spending to provide Free University, prescriptions and freezing council taxes (all of which isn't available in England).

Once the SNP have no money with which to bribe Scottish voters, they'll all turn back to Labour and the Tories. The SNP (and Scottish politics in general) rely on the Barnett Formula to allow them the spending levels they have.

Salmond's far too crafty to prop up a minority Conservative British Government, no way, Labour would brand him a Tartan Tory in the same way the SNP were damned by Labour at the tail end of the 1970's.

What he will do is promote division between Scotland & England as each and every opportunity arises. That means Scottish voting rights at Westminster on English legislation being removed altogether (quite right too) & the powers of the Scottish Parliament being hugely increased. That's the trade off. Others in the SNP will be looking for The Scotland Act 1998 to be repatriated so that no Westminster government can ever abolish the Scottish Parliament.

Longer term as Labour voters in England realise they'll never get the government they want they'll drift towards the Lib Dems or perhaps the politicos may cobble together a anti-conservative Lib Dem-Lab pact. But Scottish Labour voters will move over to the SNP in droves.

By encouraging constitutional change he'll finally achieve what he really wants ... the emasculation of the Labour Party as an electoral force and a Yes vote at a Scottish independence referendum.

Yikes. An SNP government in Edinburgh and a Conservative government in London. It's a recipe for chaos and the end of the United Kingdom forever.

Yippee I say !!

Oh Stumason's posted about Barnett. Yawn. That hoary old chestnut again. Barnett, over time is slowly being eroded. Scotland currently receives just over 10% of the English total and that reduces periodically as England gets a greater slice of the cake due to differences in the population of both nations (known up here as the "Barnett Squeeze"). Barnett also means the Scottish grant is being eroded faster by inflation than in England. Barnett is a crude measure of expenditure based on headcount. It doesn't take into account other "British" expenditure, the vast majority of which gets spent in England or overseas.

Can I ask, Stumason, why you think Salmond introduced cheaper/free prescriptions, a freeze on Council Tax rises etc etc ? To rile up folks down South. And to win a few votes up here. That's the way he works. That's why the UK is doomed.

They predict hung Parliaments quite a lot, don't they? 2005 was supposed to be a hung Parliament, yet Labour came back with a handsome majority of 66.

The SNP have got a long way to go to get to 20 seats at Westminster, too. They presently have just six out of the fifty nine Scottish seats, and the most they've ever had was 11. An increase of 14 seats for such a small party isn't common, and I don't get the impression that the SNP have been exceptional in Scotland either. Competent? Yes. But not the exhilarating change that people expected. They have their share of dodgy dealings and sleaze (see this golf course being proposed by Donald Trump... the SNP government overruled the decision of a local council to reject it because Salmond wants the golf course to be built - the locals aren't keen on the idea and there are environmental concerns, too). Besides, Holyrood elections don't translate well into Westminster elections.

If there is a hung Parliament (and I'm not convinced there will be) then my bet would be a Labour coalition government with the Liberal Democrats, or a Labour minority government with conditional backing from other parties. The latter, probably. Brown would 'retire' (or be forced out), and Cameron would still be the Tory leader. If the Tories kicked Cameron out then I think they're in opposition for another couple of terms. Of course, based on the present polls the Tories would win with a decent majority... but who's to say what'll happen between now and the next election? It could go either way.

I'm disappointed at the Conservative Party for selling out to the Scot Nats, too. Seems a bit hypocritical given the pro-Union speech that David Cameron gave just a couple of months ago.

Originally posted by infinite
The government has three solutions. 1) English Parliament 2) English votes for English laws or 3) Scottish Independence.

None of which are desirable. There are other alternatives.

1) English Parliament - Do we really want another layer of politicians and bureaucrats running our lives? And, speaking as a Northerner, I'm not keen on the idea of a single English parliament that would inevitably be dominated by London and the South East. This is why I find the notion of Englishness deceptive; the divisions between North and South are deeper than one might expect. The English identity is dominated by the South. I am a Yorkshireman and I'm British, but I'm not English. It means very little to me at all.

2) English votes for English laws - Just what is an 'English law'? Many votes take Wales into account, and other votes that may superficially appear to be English may affect other areas of the United Kingdom. And again, like an English Parliament, it would be dominated by MPs from London and the South East.

3) Scottish Independence - I've covered this numerous times before. Go look up some old posts.

You miss two other key solutions, infinite. Namely:

- Federalism: The Scottish Parliament and the Welsh Assembly are dismantled and replaced by regional assemblies across Scotland, England and Wales. These represent about 3-5million people with Westminster being the central Parliament - governing macroeconomics, foreign affairs, defence, policing and so forth. It would also take into account regional differences (e.g. Highlands/Lowlands, North/South England, North/South Wales etc) The Australian model could be adopted for this purpose. People can then choose whether they want to spend their taxes on free prescriptions and so forth, or whether they want cuts in public services and taxes. It could vary from region-to-region, and each could be virtually self-financing.

- Local democracy: Implement wholesale reform of local government and empower it, having two layers of government: Local councils and Westminster. This would take matters directly to the voters - the people who would be affected by them. Their leaders would be genuinely accountable to the people.

Devolution in its present form is unworkable; we're agreed on that. But there are so many other solutions than simply trotting out an English Parliament in an attempt to appease Little England.

[edit on 20/4/08 by Ste2652]

Hmmph good old fishy's making promises again is he?

Be nice if he could help sort out this buisness in my home town, afterall it is THE oil hub for the entire of scotland....but then again...he might have more important things on his mind....

Like thinking up a new way to gain independance from this "oppressive" regime that we're currently under.

As for independance....All I can ask is...why?

Seems to me that all moral, political and economic arguments may be settled by a referendum on independence put to the Scottish people.


If they vote for independence, let them have it and pay for their own way in life. The Barnett formula is a clear and present unfairness, as is the West Lothian question.

If they choose to stay a part of the union, the Scottish parliament ought to be dismantled.

It strikes me that this current situation is shafting the English because we are afflicted by the pox of 122 Labour MPs from Scotland, who should not even be able to vote on English issues because it has no impact on their constituencies.

Furthermore, the injustice of the Barnett formula is clearly evident. Demographics are not an issue : all regions should recieve funding which equates to the same amount per subject in that region.

The union is disintegrating. It serves no purpose. It's time for Scotland to fly free and for England's load to be lessened.

Thanks for the update Charity (was your previous sn Niall?).

It all depends upon timing in my opinion.

If Scotland were to go independent, Labour would immediately lose 122 MPs and I would bet my life on the fact that they would lose the general election without those 122 MPs.

That said, Wales and NI would also have to be declared sovereign. I see no problem in this. My allegiance is English first and foremost- I suspect a Scot, Welshman or Irishman would say the same thing.

It would cause a ridiculous scene in NI though! After fighting for decades to remain a part of the UK, the loyalist paramilitaries would have no leg to stand on and Ireland could concievably become united.

Originally posted by 44soulslayer
If Scotland were to go independent, Labour would immediately lose 122 MPs and I would bet my life on the fact that they would lose the general election without those 122 MPs.

How so? Scotland returns 59 MPs to Westminster, 39 of which are Labour. That'd still give Labour a 27 seat majority (not huge, but workable... Labour had a majority of just 3 in the October 1974 election and managed to hang on until '79).

Will the majority vote yes? It's hard to say, but I think it's unlikely. There are a number of reasons:

1) Not everyone who voted SNP wanted independence. Some voters just wanted to give Blair a final kicking before he left office, and the Scottish Parliament election was the only way to do it.

2) The polls are all over the place, but there has never really been a consistent majority in favour of independence.

3) In two years' time, the SNP will be looking decidedly less fresh and radical. And there are a number of issues simmering away that could cause Alex Salmond some trouble (the Trump golf course, allegations of a donation scandal [cash for planning permission, in this case] and so forth).

I think it's going to depend very much on the question that's asked and which voting system is used. If it's a simple 'yes' or 'no' then more people will be in favour. But if there are a number of option (independence, greater devolution, maintain the status quo, less devolution, abolish the Scottish Parliament) - which is probably the fairest, since it gives people a wider choice - then I think it's almost impossible for independence to win out.