Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
xbl

May 2011 Election

  

498 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

Can you link to that previous post? I'm struggling to think of a good reason beyond "Scottish NuLab comprises idiotic children."

The SNP have the majority in the chamber, the First Minister, will head the majority of committees, will have a majority on all committees, and there is no second chamber to scrutinise legislation, so I can see why there is an argument for letting the opposition have some means of securing balances, even if its just in a very minor way. The Parliament was supposed to work with the committees providing those checks and balances, but the SNP broke democracy. 8)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you link to that previous post? I'm struggling to think of a good reason beyond "Scottish NuLab comprises idiotic children."

Sure:

Personally I think it would be in the interest of the parliament to go for a non SNP presiding officer, the sheer dominance of the SNP at all levels is pretty much guarenteed, and bare in mind ours was a system built on the probability of no majority governments. With SNP majorities at committee level, I wonder if there is a danger of the SNP becoming sloppy in execution. Their last term was predicated on sound execution of policies in a principled way, and taking opposition views into account. They will need to demonstrate more of this in order to win over the Scottish people for independence. Majorities at commitee level could cause the SNP to ride roughshod over any and all objections. Which oculd lead to slip ups in policy execution.

By giving the opposition the presiding officer role, you at least give someone else the job of arranging schedules and managing the delivery of various policy objectives through the various levels of government. It would be good to see the SNP not be too bullish over this point

It may, or may not be all that relevant - but those were my initial thoughts on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the presiding officer role will be the difference between sloppy and effective policy execution. In fact I think that's a laughable suggestion. It's concern trolling. Even if it was true, the opposition would love to see the SNP overplay their hand and fail.

The SNP ran a free vote on it, how is that being "bullish"?

As I suspected, the main argument seems to be that the opposition are such brittle children that they need to be given a gold star despite being utterly rejected by the electorate. It's nonsense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the presiding officer role will be the difference between sloppy and effective policy execution. In fact I think that's a laughable suggestion. It's concern trolling. Even if it was true, the opposition would love to see the SNP overplay their hand and fail.

The SNP ran a free vote on it, how is that being "bullish"?

As I suspected, the main argument seems to be that the opposition are such brittle children that they need to be given a gold star despite being utterly rejected by the electorate. It's nonsense.

It's not actually 'concern trolling', I do want the independence referendum and more importantly I want a 'yes' vote in it.

As for the bullish comment, that was written before the vote, and before I knew it was going to be a free vote rather than whipped one way or the other, although I still suspect that the party body could ahve been persuaded by the SNP leadership one way or the other

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see the point in voting in a non-SNPer, form the SNPs point of view. Only if this 'bulldozer' and bullying talk actually resonates with a number of voters (which I doubt it will).

As Swampy says though, the presiding officer is a non-political position. There's never been a complaint about any previous ones, as far as I know, and I see no reason why Tricia Marwick will be any different.

John McTernan and the other Labour twats probably shot their chances of getting PO by encouraging them to stop the referendum at that stag, on legal grounds. A preposterous suggestion but the SNP don't have to give concessions and don't have to take that risk, with their numbers, so why bother.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not actually 'concern trolling', I do want the independence referendum and more importantly I want a 'yes' vote in it.

As for the bullish comment, that was written before the vote, and before I knew it was going to be a free vote rather than whipped one way or the other, although I still suspect that the party body could ahve been persuaded by the SNP leadership one way or the other

Can I ask you two yes or no questions:

1) Do you really, honestly think the Presiding Officer position will be the tipping point for the SNP legislating in a slipshod and lazy fashion?

2) Do you think the SNP leadership should have backed a *specific* non-SNP candidate for the position?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can I ask you two yes or no questions:

1) Do you really, honestly think the Presiding Officer position will be the tipping point for the SNP legislating in a slipshod and lazy fashion?

2) Do you think the SNP leadership should have backed a *specific* non-SNP candidate for the position?

1) The control of scheduling in parliament would at least offer some small block to legislation passing through parliament quickly, and might at least open up more debate. In terms of SNP legislation, well the checks and balance system is pretty well shot through at the moment. I don't think the presiding officer will make the biggest contribution one way or another, no. There are some rpesentaitonal issues as well, as Gordon EF pointed out.

2) To be quite honest, having seen who put their names into the hat for it, no. Had the opposition candidates put up a better candidate, then I might have done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) The control of scheduling in parliament would at least offer some small block to legislation passing through parliament quickly, and might at least open up more debate. In terms of SNP legislation, well the checks and balance system is pretty well shot through at the moment. I don't think the presiding officer will make the biggest contribution one way or another, no. There are some rpesentaitonal issues as well, as Gordon EF pointed out.

2) To be quite honest, having seen who put their names into the hat for it, no. Had the opposition candidates put up a better candidate, then I might have done.

But there aren't representational issues. It was a free vote, and the peoples' representatives have voted in accordance with their consciences. Honestly, the institutional defects of the Scottish Parliament - which are few and I don't think are really worth worrying about - do not begin and end with the Presiding Officer position in any case, and I maintain that wringing one's hands over this is concern trolling. It's a massive non-issue that an SNP member got the position.

In fact the converse *would* be an issue. As someone else brought up, give the scheduling powers to a CDUist and it'll f**k with the independence referendum. The CDU bloc showed during campaigning that they can't deal with the independence question in a mature and rational fashion, and thus there's no compelling reason to give them access to the levers of power and plenty of reasons not to do so. The SNP would never say so publicly but I imagine that the leadership feels much the same way. We're in for five years of attempted sabotage as it is - why bother helping with it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bump. What's happened to Reynard?

Think he finally disappeared up his own arsehole

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bump. What's happened to Reynard?

And can this be moved to the politics forum?

He is over on twitter having a complete meltdown

CAt4-fQWsAAJvYi.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whoever said was right, it was quite a thread. Wasn't on P & B at the time, but wondrous scenes.

Above everything else I have now found this wondrous piece of footage

Please let some of the Labour gadgies have breakdowns like this in 6 weeks time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whoever said was right, it was quite a thread. Wasn't on P & B at the time, but wondrous scenes.

Above everything else I have now found this wondrous piece of footage

Please let some of the Labour gadgies have breakdowns like this in 6 weeks time

What a fucking zoomer.

The snp guy has a right greggy Wallace coupon there at the end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I couldn't really understand what she was saying. Can anyone give a summary?

It's the verbal equivalent of pram emptied, toys everywhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...