Left wingers are getting a bit scared

Left wingers are getting a bit scared

Author
Discussion

mph1977

12,467 posts

167 months

Tuesday 23rd September 2014
quotequote all
Mrr T said:
turbobloke said:
Mrr T said:
XJ Flyer said:
You are missing the point that firstly in the USA decisions made at state level can be overruled at federal level.Just like in the case of the EU and just like in the case of the UK.
I presume you have never heard of the US constitution. The Tenth Amendment set out in detail what are Federal matters. The Federal government cannot over rule a state except on a federal matter.
Out of interest, who defined what is and what isn't a federal matter?

From the above (constitution) it appears to be on the government side!
The US constitution gives a range of powers to the federal government. Mainly, if I remember correct, Section 7 and 8.

The Tenth Amendment to the Constitution makes it clear that if the Constitution does not specifically make a matter a federal matter then its a state matter.

Mind you that does not stop constant battles between the states and the federal government as to the correct meaning of what is a state or federal matter.
nor does it stop the imposition of coercive clauses into unrelated federal bills

RYH64E

7,960 posts

243 months

Tuesday 23rd September 2014
quotequote all
crankedup said:
I am very concerned that the Labour Party could lose those Scottish voting Rights in Parliament. Not because its possibly a loss of Labour power but the partial loss of true political democracy. With just one dominant political party it will be a recipe for disaster.

What would be your view if Labour had no seats in Scotland? Whether it's right or wrong shouldn't depend on the outcome for either party. Personally, I can't see any rational defense for the current system.

XJ Flyer

5,526 posts

129 months

Tuesday 23rd September 2014
quotequote all
s2art said:
XJ Flyer said:
It will probably be that catastrophic mistake which will ( hopefully ) deny Cameron getting his ersatz independent 'English' parliament while sadly wrecking the hopes of those of us who thought that Farage was the real anti federalist thing.
I am pretty sure that UKIP's policy has been for more power to be devolved to the home countries for some time now. So to assume that Farage was anti-federalist is a bit strange. He is certainly against the UK in a federal Europe though.
Farage's policy is actually withdrawal from the EU not 'devolution' of powers on the grounds that there can be no real devolution under a federalist system,because if there was it wouldn't be a federal system it would then be Confederate one.

So you're saying he's actually a federalist,just not an EU federalist,calling a nationalist,just not a UK federalist,a federalist.In which case,assuming you're right,if that isn't gross hypocrisy nothing is.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=T72l2072nH8


Edited by XJ Flyer on Tuesday 23 September 19:21

crankedup

25,764 posts

242 months

Tuesday 23rd September 2014
quotequote all
Rovinghawk said:
crankedup said:
I am very concerned that the Labour Party could lose those Scottish voting Rights in Parliament.
Not losing all their rights- just losing the right to be involved in stuff that's none of their actual business.

We can't vote in theirs, they can't vote in ours. Seems fair to me.
I agree, its not the fairness that concerns me its the possibility of one political party in England having no serious opposition in Parliament. Its a balance of power required for democracy to work well for the Country.

s2art

18,937 posts

252 months

Tuesday 23rd September 2014
quotequote all
XJ Flyer said:
s2art said:
XJ Flyer said:
It will probably be that catastrophic mistake which will ( hopefully ) deny Cameron getting his ersatz independent 'English' parliament while sadly wrecking the hopes of those of us who thought that Farage was the real anti federalist thing.
I am pretty sure that UKIP's policy has been for more power to be devolved to the home countries for some time now. So to assume that Farage was anti-federalist is a bit strange. He is certainly against the UK in a federal Europe though.
Farage's policy is actually withdrawal from the EU not 'devolution' of powers on the grounds that there can be no real devolution under a federalist system,because if there was it wouldn't be a federal system it would then be Confederate one.

So you're saying he's actually a federalist,just not an EU federalist,calling a nationalist,just not a UK federalist,a federalist.In which case,assuming you're right,if that isn't gross hypocrisy nothing is.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=T72l2072nH8


Edited by XJ Flyer on Tuesday 23 September 19:21
This looks a bit mad. UKIP's policy has been more devolved power around the UK for ages. But it has always been for a sovereign UK parliament and out of the EU. There is nothing hypocritical there.

XJ Flyer

5,526 posts

129 months

Tuesday 23rd September 2014
quotequote all
crankedup said:
Rovinghawk said:
crankedup said:
I am very concerned that the Labour Party could lose those Scottish voting Rights in Parliament.
Not losing all their rights- just losing the right to be involved in stuff that's none of their actual business.

We can't vote in theirs, they can't vote in ours. Seems fair to me.
I agree, its not the fairness that concerns me its the possibility of one political party in England having no serious opposition in Parliament. Its a balance of power required for democracy to work well for the Country.
Not just a Party without opposition.It would be a unionist/federalist Party,taking advantage of justified English nationalist sentiment.To make the required cutbacks in the English budget,to pay off its Scottish /unionist/federalist allies for the bribes given to Scotland to save the Union.

s2art

18,937 posts

252 months

Tuesday 23rd September 2014
quotequote all
XJ Flyer said:
Not just a Party without opposition.It would be a unionist/federalist Party,taking advantage of justified English nationalist sentiment.To make the required cutbacks in the English budget,to pay off its Scottish /unionist/federalist allies for the bribes given to Scotland to save the Union.
What information do you have that more money will go to Scotland? Keeping the Barnett formula doesnt actually do that, and its only a matter of time before that gets junked.

crankedup

25,764 posts

242 months

Tuesday 23rd September 2014
quotequote all
RYH64E said:
crankedup said:
I am very concerned that the Labour Party could lose those Scottish voting Rights in Parliament. Not because its possibly a loss of Labour power but the partial loss of true political democracy. With just one dominant political party it will be a recipe for disaster.

What would be your view if Labour had no seats in Scotland? Whether it's right or wrong shouldn't depend on the outcome for either party. Personally, I can't see any rational defense for the current system.
I do not want to see a massive power shift to just one political party as a direct result of the Scottish independence vote being bought off by Cameron. I would say exactly the same if it were Labour that were responsible for major political gerrymandering. I want to see a rational debate amongst the parties that sees no seismic changes to the political balance.

I'm not in favour of the Scottish M.P. voting on policies when those policies will only have affect on England. But I am not in favour of gerrymandering either.

XJ Flyer

5,526 posts

129 months

Tuesday 23rd September 2014
quotequote all
s2art said:
XJ Flyer said:
s2art said:
XJ Flyer said:
It will probably be that catastrophic mistake which will ( hopefully ) deny Cameron getting his ersatz independent 'English' parliament while sadly wrecking the hopes of those of us who thought that Farage was the real anti federalist thing.
I am pretty sure that UKIP's policy has been for more power to be devolved to the home countries for some time now. So to assume that Farage was anti-federalist is a bit strange. He is certainly against the UK in a federal Europe though.
Farage's policy is actually withdrawal from the EU not 'devolution' of powers on the grounds that there can be no real devolution under a federalist system,because if there was it wouldn't be a federal system it would then be Confederate one.

So you're saying he's actually a federalist,just not an EU federalist,calling a nationalist,just not a UK federalist,a federalist.In which case,assuming you're right,if that isn't gross hypocrisy nothing is.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=T72l2072nH8


Edited by XJ Flyer on Tuesday 23 September 19:21
This looks a bit mad. UKIP's policy has been more devolved power around the UK for ages. But it has always been for a sovereign UK parliament and out of the EU. There is nothing hypocritical there.
How can it be a 'UK' parliament if it has been devolved to the point where it no longer functions as a UK parliament but it also doesn't function as a Confederate one either.Because as I said we don't have the right of Veto or opt out when setting the respective Scottish share of the UK budget which is rigged so that the Scottish get more per head from it than we do as a net contributor.Which is one of the same reasons given by UKIP for withdrawal from the EU federation.

XJ Flyer

5,526 posts

129 months

Tuesday 23rd September 2014
quotequote all
s2art said:
XJ Flyer said:
Not just a Party without opposition.It would be a unionist/federalist Party,taking advantage of justified English nationalist sentiment.To make the required cutbacks in the English budget,to pay off its Scottish /unionist/federalist allies for the bribes given to Scotland to save the Union.
What information do you have that more money will go to Scotland? Keeping the Barnett formula doesnt actually do that, and its only a matter of time before that gets junked.
There's no argument that the Scottish get more per head out of the UK budget than the English do.

The Barnett formula is actually set in stone as part of the settlement that Cameron has signed up to to 'save the Union'.

s2art

18,937 posts

252 months

Tuesday 23rd September 2014
quotequote all
XJ Flyer said:
How can it be a 'UK' parliament if it has been devolved to the point where it no longer functions as a UK parliament but it also doesn't function as a Confederate one either.Because as I said we don't have the right of Veto or opt out when setting the respective Scottish share of the UK budget which is rigged so that the Scottish get more per head from it than we do as a net contributor.Which is one of the same reasons given by UKIP for withdrawal from the EU federation.
I think you will find its not going to work like that. The Scots will be told 'this is your share of the budget' based upon a much much smaller budget as the scots will be given more tax raising power and Scots income tax will go direct to Holyrood, if they want to spend more then they can tax their electorate more. When this is finally recognised by the Scots, even the YES voters will be pining for the old days.

crankedup

25,764 posts

242 months

Tuesday 23rd September 2014
quotequote all
turbobloke said:
crankedup said:
I am very concerned that the Labour Party could lose those Scottish voting Rights in Parliament. Not because its possibly a loss of Labour power but the partial loss of true political democracy. With just one dominant political party it will be a recipe for disaster.
Or more success in terms of the majority of the people seeing their vote leading to the Party they voted for getting in at election time. That's true democracy. The idea behind having any form of HM Opposition is to do what you claim will be missing. There will be the odd LibDem yellow spot here and there, a red blob or two particularly up north. What you're possibly mourning in advance, should England get what's on offer in other parts of the UK, is the loss of influence from outdated unaffordable left-ish dogma on the engine room of the former UK's economy and the more libertarian approach to responsible lifestyle self-determination with nanny state in retirement. Otherwise known as an excellent prospect to the large majority of English as opposed to UK voters.
Given the fact that the last General Election attracted just about the lowest ever turnout of voters. I fail to recognise what it is that you do not understand by offering political choice. Without a political platform people that are not Tory or UKIP will simply become further politically disengaged.

s2art

18,937 posts

252 months

Tuesday 23rd September 2014
quotequote all
XJ Flyer said:
The Barnett formula is actually set in stone as part of the settlement that Cameron has signed up to to 'save the Union'.
Until the new 'devolved' UK is in operation. Then a new settlement will be made. (and Cameron is history). Not even sure that Camerons promise will make it through parliament intact.

XJ Flyer

5,526 posts

129 months

Tuesday 23rd September 2014
quotequote all
s2art said:
XJ Flyer said:
How can it be a 'UK' parliament if it has been devolved to the point where it no longer functions as a UK parliament but it also doesn't function as a Confederate one either.Because as I said we don't have the right of Veto or opt out when setting the respective Scottish share of the UK budget which is rigged so that the Scottish get more per head from it than we do as a net contributor.Which is one of the same reasons given by UKIP for withdrawal from the EU federation.
I think you will find its not going to work like that. The Scots will be told 'this is your share of the budget' based upon a much much smaller budget as the scots will be given more tax raising power and Scots income tax will go direct to Holyrood, if they want to spend more then they can tax their electorate more. When this is finally recognised by the Scots, even the YES voters will be pining for the old days.
'Who' exactly are the Scots going to be 'told' by of this 'change' in their share of the UK budget.Being that Cameron doesn't have a majority in the UK government and hopefully is never going to get one and the Barnett Formula is set in stone anyway.Gordon Brown might not be so interested in getting a good deal for the English within the UK but he's obviously no idiot in looking after Scottish interests.

XJ Flyer

5,526 posts

129 months

Tuesday 23rd September 2014
quotequote all
s2art said:
XJ Flyer said:
The Barnett formula is actually set in stone as part of the settlement that Cameron has signed up to to 'save the Union'.
Until the new 'devolved' UK is in operation. Then a new settlement will be made. (and Cameron is history). Not even sure that Camerons promise will make it through parliament intact.
The new devolved system won't give the 'English' parliament the right to set any budget other than the share agreed by all the members of the UK parliament together of which the Cons,luckily,don't hold any majority.In the case of Scotland that share already having been set in stone.Although I'd guess that 'if' the UK wants to back track on that there's no need for Scotland to adhere to any agreement concerning a new referendum being called by the Scottish parliament for secession.


Edited by XJ Flyer on Tuesday 23 September 19:59

s2art

18,937 posts

252 months

Tuesday 23rd September 2014
quotequote all
XJ Flyer said:
s2art said:
XJ Flyer said:
The Barnett formula is actually set in stone as part of the settlement that Cameron has signed up to to 'save the Union'.
Until the new 'devolved' UK is in operation. Then a new settlement will be made. (and Cameron is history). Not even sure that Camerons promise will make it through parliament intact.
The new devolved system won't give the 'English' parliament the right to set any budget other than the share agreed by all the members of the UK parliament together of which the Cons,luckily,don't hold any majority.In the case of Scotland that share already having been set in stone.Although I'd guess that 'if' the UK wants to back track on that there's no need for Scotland to adhere to any agreement concerning a new referendum being called by the Scottish parliament for secession.


Edited by XJ Flyer on Tuesday 23 September 19:59
The UK parliament (government at the time) will set the budget, allowing for the fact that income tax will already be allocated directly. Scotland can ask for a referendum any time they like, doesnt mean the UK parliament will grant it. In fact thats it for a generation.
Its been admitted that the Barnett formula is unfair (even by Barnett) so its only a matter of time before its replaced.
BTW the UK doesnt need to 'back track' on anything, only Cameron has promised this, not parliament. Any nothing is ever set in stone.

edh

3,498 posts

268 months

Tuesday 23rd September 2014
quotequote all
s2art said:
edh said:
s2art said:
Looks like the Tories, and UKIP, are pushing for 'English laws by English votes', and it seems popular. Plenty of big issues for English matters, NHS, Education, infrastructure, tax and spending etc etc. I guess stuff like energy production would be in the UK matters camp.
I'd expect most of that to be devolved to a more local level - as it is in Scotland. Tax and spending, well some of that will be UK wide, some devolved, and a limited amount English.
Disagree. The NHS in England will not be devolved further than the current plans, why should it be? Education too, its been devolved as much as it sensibly can be. As England represents approx 85% of the UK it wont be 'a limited amount' WRT to tax and spending, how could it be?
I disagree - control of the NHS and Education has been centralised. Academies answerable to DFE, hospitals answerable to DH. Many tax & spending decisions won't be "English" only - will affect 100%, not 85% of constituencies. The budget & autumn statement are UK-wide, not English.

turbobloke

103,742 posts

259 months

Tuesday 23rd September 2014
quotequote all
edh said:
The budget & autumn statement are UK-wide, not English.
At the moment.

edh

3,498 posts

268 months

Tuesday 23rd September 2014
quotequote all
turbobloke said:
edh said:
The budget & autumn statement are UK-wide, not English.
At the moment.
and would continue to address matters not entirely devolved to Scotland, Wales, NI & English regions/cities

turbobloke

103,742 posts

259 months

Tuesday 23rd September 2014
quotequote all
edh said:
turbobloke said:
edh said:
The budget & autumn statement are UK-wide, not English.
At the moment.
and would continue to address matters not entirely devolved to Scotland, Wales, NI & English regions/cities
Any more than that and you must be in the Cabinet wink

The business of English votes determining English policies, alongside devo-max for Scotland including powers over taxation, means that what was formerly a UK matter may well not be so in the near future. Autumn Statements and the like will either go or be adapted to suit, in whatever way is finally agreed. Without knowing details of what the coalition/individual parties are planning, that much is obvious.