Archive for Our Scotland - www.our-scotland.org Scottish Politics Discussion Forum / Messageboard - Dedicated to online discussion about Scottish Politics and an Independent Scotland, as well as Scottish Society today. We also have a section dedicated to Banter, Sport and Recommended Sites.
 

See your forums statistics


       Our Scotland - www.our-scotland.org Forum Index -> Scottish Politics and Independence
mac

Brown & Darling have forgotten that they used to be Scot

The worst kind of "Scotsmen" - get into a position of influence, then rubbish/ignore your country while sitting at the masters table.

I'm sure that any family members they have left in Scotland must be proud of them.
mac

The header did say "Brown & Darling have forgotten that they used to be Scottish", but it looks like that was too many characters.
Corby Boy

Lot of anti-Scottish rhetoric in the base media in England yesterday i.e. The Sun - Kelvin MacKenzie and on Newsnight again, Kelvin MacKenzie.

Basically slagging off the fact that the English SE subsidises the rest of the country and Scotland was very much being singled out due to Brown adn Darling's credentials.

The argument is Scots get more money than they contribute, their public services are better and they get in the South £1,000 less in public spending per head despite contributing higher tax per head.

Not so United Kingdom
Reluctant Hero

Quote:
Lot of anti-Scottish rhetoric in the base media in England yesterday i.e. The Sun - Kelvin MacKenzie and on Newsnight again, Kelvin MacKenzie.


Here is the link to the story

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/7041128.stm
will live from Glasgow

in what ways have the "rubbished" scotland. in this context i guess you could say they've ignored Scotland only in so much as they have had to primarily concentrate on other parts of the UK but i dont think ive ever heard either of them run down Scotland.
Aventinian

Load of f***ing nonsense.

Shocking most of us Scottish people do not eat, sleep and defecate Scotland in the course of our ordinary lives. The fact that I am Scottish is, to me, less important than my choice of shirt in the morning.

I'm sure their family members are very proud of them. More importantly what is this 'master's table' nonsense. To be frank, it sounds simply like complete and utter bigotry with absolutely no basis. What the hell do you actually want them to do? Play the bagpipes at cabinet meetings?
SLG

Aventinian wrote:
What the hell do you actually want them to do? Play the bagpipes at cabinet meetings?

I think it's you party - the Tories - that were paying for bagpipes to be played as Brown toured some southern English constituencies to remind the public that Brown was Scottish and that that was a bad thing. Not very 'British' of them eh.
Aventinian

SLG wrote:
Aventinian wrote:
What the hell do you actually want them to do? Play the bagpipes at cabinet meetings?

I think it's you party - the Tories - that were paying for bagpipes to be played as Brown toured some southern English constituencies to remind the public that Brown was Scottish and that that was a bad thing. Not very 'British' of them eh.


I hardly mind, it was a light-hearted jibe meant to highlight a serious issue.

That said, I'm not denying there is some animosity towards the Scots within the Tory Party down south.
Babygael

What rogue said this?
Quote:
The fact that I am scottish is, to me, less important than my choice of shirt in the morning


Oh me oh my!! I rest my case!!
will live from Glasgow

woah,give him a chance man he may just mean that being scottish isnt the dominating factor in his life,which is allright i guess.
Neil

Is it seriously being suggested that it is the duty of Scots in the Westminster government to ensure that Scotland's share of government money, already weel above the UK average, must forever increase faster? Presumably it is also the duty of a First Minister from the West of Scotland, or from the North East to ensure nothing gets spent outside their parish.

The logic of this is, of course, that under no circumstances should any Scot be involved in the government of the UK since they cannot keep their oath to govern in the national interest.
Aventinian

Babygael wrote:
Oh me oh my!! I rest my case!!


Blimey, not much of a case is it? I doubt we'll ever be seeing you rise to the lofty heights of Lord Advocate, even with the Nats in government!

Really, I simply can't understand why you could possibly care about something quite so arbitrary. It's a simple accident, nothing more.
Aventinian

Neil wrote:
Is it seriously being suggested that it is the duty of Scots in the Westminster government to ensure that Scotland's share of government money, already weel above the UK average, must forever increase faster? Presumably it is also the duty of a First Minister from the West of Scotland, or from the North East to ensure nothing gets spent outside their parish.


Precisely, it's not a sustainable method of funding, nor is it a sensible or sustainable constitutional theory. What next? Will politicians be expected to demand more and more funding for people of their race, gender, sexual orientation? It's patently ridiculous.

What I think is that it was a rather poor political decision. Inevitably the SNP will not be able to keep their spending promises - this just gives them someone else to blame, as is their rather constant excuse.

Quote:
The logic of this is, of course, that under no circumstances should any Scot be involved in the government of the UK since they cannot keep their oath to govern in the national interest.


The majority do, thankfully. Luckily the SNP only have six of Scotland's sixty-odd seats.
SLG

Aventinian wrote:
Neil wrote:
Is it seriously being suggested that it is the duty of Scots in the Westminster government to ensure that Scotland's share of government money, already weel above the UK average, must forever increase faster? Presumably it is also the duty of a First Minister from the West of Scotland, or from the North East to ensure nothing gets spent outside their parish.

Precisely, it's not a sustainable method of funding, nor is it a sensible or sustainable constitutional theory. What next? Will politicians be expected to demand more and more funding for people of their race, gender, sexual orientation? It's patently ridiculous.

Totally agree. The problem is, those in power at Westminster are still not looking for a solution, they are twisting the situation for their own ends. What we need is transparency and I can't see that coming through any route other than fiscal autonomy.
For Neil, no, we should not be getting an unfair deal just because the PM comes from out country or constituancy. What we should be getting is a fair deal. You could argue that, despite the extra spend per head based on certain spending, we are not getting a fair deal.

Aventinian wrote:
What I think is that it was a rather poor political decision. Inevitably the SNP will not be able to keep their spending promises - this just gives them someone else to blame, as is their rather constant excuse.

Nothing is inevitable Av, we'll have to wait and see what happens over the four years. The issue over funding is being used for party political gain by Labour and of course it will be used as such by the SNP as well. We'll also have to wait and see who can make the most political capital out of the situation. The only ways to take the party politics out of the situation, is, as above, fiscal autonomy, or for there to be a return to the same party in power north and south of the border. The second solution is not really a long term solution.

Aventinian wrote:
Quote:
The logic of this is, of course, that under no circumstances should any Scot be involved in the government of the UK since they cannot keep their oath to govern in the national interest.

The majority do, thankfully. Luckily the SNP only have six of Scotland's sixty-odd seats.

Well I think you'll find that there are a lot of English people who thing that the Labour MPs also favour Scotland over England. Just not openly like the SNP members.
Aventinian

Quote:
The only ways to take the party politics out of the situation, is, as above, fiscal autonomy, or for there to be a return to the same party in power north and south of the border. The second solution is not really a long term solution.


If I was a Scots nationalist, I'd be very slow indeed to suggest fiscal autonomy within the UK. Firstly it seems, the status quo provides a wide-ranging ability for the Scottish Government to blame external forces and further its nationalist aims. More significantly, however, is the post-fiscal-autonomy situation - if other somewhat federalised countries are anything to go by (I'm thinking of the US and Canada here), the central government can often use central funds and grants as a way of attaining compliance from the local administrations. An example I recall from Quebec was the Dominion funds would not be given to some local project or other if the Quebec flag flew without the Maple Leaf alongside. In the United States, the common drinking age was brought about by the suggestion that non-implementation within the states would lead to federal road-improvement grants being removed.

Be careful what you wish for etc.
Neil

Quote:
You could argue that, despite the extra spend per head based on certain spending, we are not getting a fair deal.
I would be very interested to see how that that argument could be put without obfuscation.

Normally those claiming we should get more money pretend that we are not already getting more per head.
agentmancuso

Aventinian wrote:
If I was a Scots nationalist, I'd be very slow indeed to suggest fiscal autonomy within the UK. Firstly it seems, the status quo provides a wide-ranging ability for the Scottish Government to blame external forces and further its nationalist aims.


True. Nationalism cannot thrive without external forces to blame.
voiceofourown

Quote:

"Brown and Darling have forgotten that they used to be Scottish".


Au contraire. They are acutely aware of the fact.
sgmillerton

mr. darling is married to my cousin, met him a few times. we and particularly his close family in scotland are very proud of him and also that nice bottle of house of commons whisky he gave to my uncle. a thoroughly decent chap.
SLG

Aventinian wrote:
Quote:
The only ways to take the party politics out of the situation, is, as above, fiscal autonomy, or for there to be a return to the same party in power north and south of the border. The second solution is not really a long term solution.

If I was a Scots nationalist, I'd be very slow indeed to suggest fiscal autonomy within the UK. Firstly it seems, the status quo provides a wide-ranging ability for the Scottish Government to blame external forces and further its nationalist aims. More significantly, however, is the post-fiscal-autonomy situation - if other somewhat federalised countries are anything to go by (I'm thinking of the US and Canada here), the central government can often use central funds and grants as a way of attaining compliance from the local administrations. An example I recall from Quebec was the Dominion funds would not be given to some local project or other if the Quebec flag flew without the Maple Leaf alongside. In the United States, the common drinking age was brought about by the suggestion that non-implementation within the states would lead to federal road-improvement grants being removed.

Be careful what you wish for etc.

I wouldn't fear fiscal autonomy any more than I feared devolution. At the end of the day it will provide the transparency that I want to see. If people are happy to see money go into central government only for part of it to come back wrapped in the Union Flag, then so be it.
SLG

Neil wrote:
Quote:
You could argue that, despite the extra spend per head based on certain spending, we are not getting a fair deal.
I would be very interested to see how that that argument could be put without obfuscation.

Normally those claiming we should get more money pretend that we are not already getting more per head.

The arguement is based on the estimation of complete tax intake from Scotland compared with complete spend for which Scotland can be said to benefit. The "we put more in than we get out" argument.
SLG

agentmancuso wrote:
Nationalism cannot thrive without external forces to blame.

The forces I blame are mostly internal. I also imagine that post independence, you would not describe me as a nationalist.

       Our Scotland - www.our-scotland.org Forum Index -> Scottish Politics and Independence
Page 1 of 1
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum
Our Scotland Hit Counter 'Top Scottish Websites' - www.our-scotland.org Scottish Top Site - Topsites Top 100 Scottish Websites Our Scotland Forums Critical Acclaim ~ Politically Progressive Top Sites Tartan Army Topsites View Site Stats Our Scotland Blog Scottish Politics Scottish Lads