Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Todders

Consultitive eferendum on FFA

Full Fiscal Autonomy  

52 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

Now that is has become obvious that the Smith Commission recommendations are being watered down even further and the Lab/Tory alliance in Westminster is determined to vote down every single amendment tabled by the SNP I can only see one option left open.

David Cameron stated prior to the independence referendum that "If Scotland says it does want to stay inside the United Kingdom then all the options of devolution are there and are possible". While we have English MP's voting on the form of devolution Scotland gets we will never truly have a real say in how our country is governed.

Time for another referendum. Not for Independence but for Full Fiscal Autonomy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I voted Yes to both, but the way the Tories are going, there WILL be another referendum on Independence sooner rather than later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's almost like Mundell is forcing the SNP into another referendum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's almost like Mundell is forcing the SNP into another referendum.

This is my suspicion too.

Ruth Davidson was rambling on about how Better Together would lose a second indy ref if it happened sooner and i was suspicious why she even said it. I suspect the Tories are playing a high risk game of trying to force the SNP into calling a second indyref after the Holyrood elections next year. A second no vote by 2020 really would kill the question for at least a decade, possibly more.

Looking at the demographics of the indy vote, they are probably right that they need it to happen sooner and they also need it to appear to be the SNP's doing so they can use the "neverendum" phrase and blame them for "dividing the country" again.

Hopefully enough of the 55% can see the utter disaster heading our way from Westminster over the next few years over which, despite a near unanimous voice, Scotland has absolutely no control over.

Time will tell but the way things are going I am almost certain a second indy ref will happen before 2020.

Edited by Double Jack D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Voted No - Yes

We just voted for a party that won 56 out of 59 seats in Scotland and are in favour of FFA. There should be no need for a referendum.

This is what was being said before the independence vote last year -

dc_zpsfy1aacwo.jpg

The SNP amendment to the Scotland Bill for FFA was defeated by 508 votes to 56 in the House of Commons. So it seems Dave's definition of 'possible' is the same as that of Scotland winning the World Cup!

I would wait 5 years for another inevitable Tory win at the General Election and then set a date for indy ref 2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yay. It's all happening.

SNP: rushing through English votes for English laws is democratic outrage

Party’s Westminster leader, Angus Robertson, hits out at David Cameron’s plans to bring in new powers before the summer break

Angus Robertson, the SNP’s Westminster leader, has called for greater scrutiny and debate over the plans for English votes for English laws

Rowena Mason Political correspondent

Tuesday 30 June 2015

David Cameron has been accused by the Scottish National party of plotting a “democratic outrage” by trying to rush through new powers for English MPs to have a veto on English laws before parliament’s summer break.

Angus Robertson, the SNP’s Westminster leader, said the proposals would give Scottish MPs second-class status in the House of Commons without proper democratic scrutiny.

It is understood the plans for English votes for English laws (known as Evel) will be finally brought forward on Thursday, although John Bercow, the Speaker of the Commons, said he had not yet been notified of any proposals to restrict Scottish voting rights.

The SNP was already angered by the government’s intention to introduce English-only votes by amending the standing orders of the Commons, without the necessity for legislation or lengthy debate. It could require just a single vote by MPs to be enacted, rather than the months of scrutiny a new law would entail.

However, the party is now seething that the plans could be pushed through swiftly before the summer recess, just weeks after the general election brought 56 SNP MPs to parliament.

Robertson said: “I have written to the prime minister to raise these very serious concerns and have called for an urgent clarification of the UK government’s plans. The ramifications of Evel would be far-reaching – an issue with such magnitude must be properly considered, scrutinised and debated. We face the prospect of MPs being barred from specific votes, hindering our rights to represent our constituents properly.

Alex Salmond challenges Tories' plan for English votes for English laws

“Restricting the voting rights of some MPs could be the single biggest change to the rights of MPs in decades – and doing so without following the appropriate parliamentary procedure is totally unacceptable.

“SNP MPs already don’t vote on English-only legislation which has no financial impact on Scotland. We don’t need a change of the rules to determine what we can and can’t vote for. We certainly cannot have this rushed through without proper consideration of all the consequences.”

Chris Grayling, the leader of the House of Commons, defended the proposals for Evel in a speech at Central Hall in Westminster. He said: “Why should Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish MPs vote on English measures that affect English constituencies in matters that are wholly devolved to the administrations in their own countries, and where English MPs have no reciprocal say?”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chris Grayling, the leader of the House of Commons, defended the proposals for Evel in a speech at Central Hall in Westminster. He said: “Why should Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish MPs vote on English measures that affect English constituencies in matters that are wholly devolved to the administrations in their own countries, and where English MPs have no reciprocal say?”

Thats the best bit,and yet 500 odd mps voted against ffa for Scotland yesterday,double standards all round

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The seethe towards the Greens for voting against FFA is pretty funny at the moment

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pamplona and Bilbao would be the sensible analogy. Would have thought the sensible thing for him to do would be to point out that the Scottish Greens have no MPs and are separate from the England & Wales party that is represented at Westminster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that is has become obvious that the Smith Commission recommendations are being watered down even further and the Lab/Tory alliance in Westminster is determined to vote down every single amendment tabled by the SNP I can only see one option left open.

David Cameron stated prior to the independence referendum that "If Scotland says it does want to stay inside the United Kingdom then all the options of devolution are there and are possible". While we have English MP's voting on the form of devolution Scotland gets we will never truly have a real say in how our country is governed.

Time for another referendum. Not for Independence but for Full Fiscal Autonomy.

Maybe we could have a referendum on every issue the snp disagree with,as for ffa the snp did not even include it as a amendment in the 2nd reading of the scotland bill,i wonder why.

post-53474-14360864273364_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I propose a referendum on Kevthedee's p&b membership

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The seethe towards the Greens for voting against FFA is pretty funny at the moment

Had a read through the comments of his post on Facebook, and clocked this absolute belter.

post-14061-14360897110989_thumb.jpg

"#NoToGreenTories" :lol:

FWIW, I agree with Harvie's view on FFA. Just laughable that any contradictory view to that of the SNP automatically makes you a Tory in some eejits' eyes.

Edited by Afro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pamplona and Bilbao would be the sensible analogy. Would have thought the sensible thing for him to do would be to point out that the Scottish Greens have no MPs and are separate from the England & Wales party that is represented at Westminster.

he probably didn't do that because he actually doesn't think FFA would be a good idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

he probably didn't do that because he actually doesn't think FFA would be a good idea.

Who does think its a good idea?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone who doesn't fall for the propaganda about North Sea oil being something that shouldn't be under Holyrood's control post-devolution in the same way it is in Alberta and Newfoundland in Canada. If FFA was genuinely bad for Scotland in economic terms the Tories would be all too happy to oblige so they can take EVEL far enough to really make things awkward for Labour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FFA would be bad for Scotland when it under performs against the UK and good when it performs better. At the moment it would be very bad, though in corresponding years the picture may improve or even reverse entirely. Unsurprisingly, Scotland does a lot better when the oil industry has a good time (and these would almost certainly be devolved under FFA).

The Tories are probably aware of that, and will also know that FFA wipes out Barnett and the pooling and sharing aspect that the Union offers. Remember that we'd be sharing a currency: how would FFA Scotland be able to make up the gap when it underperforms against the UK? There is absolutely no way we'd be allowed to borrow whatever was required to plug the gap. Being part of the UK, we don't have to worry about that. The Tories want to keep the UK and whilst it must be tempting to let the SNP walk into the trap and give them FFA at this moment in time, it would be a bad move for the Union.

The SNP also know that FFA would break a big link with the Union, which is presumably why they now appear to favour it despite not including it in their manifesto and the current figures painting a bleak outlook.

I wasn't in favour of independence and that hasn't changed, but it's a better option than FFA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would leave Scotland, or at the very least change my domicile, if FFA is ever visited on Scotland. FFA would be an absolute disaster. A very definite road to ruination and one that would not be easy to unwind after the proletariat (aka that sophisticated progressive social democratic electorate) work it out. The tax base is going to shrink as people leave and change domicile, there's your bottom line.

Edited by Pete's Frontier

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...