Balanced Question Time panel tonight - of course not!

[Wills2]

audidoody said:

Wills2 said:

I think you'll find we're still dealing with the Russian issue + the middle east (but having said that nothing much has changed as they have both been an issue since the end of the WW2)

If Iran lets one off over Israel then that will be the end of Iran and they probably love their children too. Sting all rights reserved

Thanks for the heads up. I didn't realise you had been appointed a moderator in this thread.

Sorry you've lost me? I just responded to your post, it's how these things called forums work.

You posted things have changed and we don't need a nuclear option etc....I pointed out that perhaps we do as things haven't really changed.

Feel free to disagree but I have no idea what your second post means.

Edited by Wills2 on Saturday 21st February 00:01

[jimbobsimmonds]

Wills2 said:

arp1 said:

But it's ok for rUK to decide on scottish issues that msp's cannot vote on? Also Snp traditionally do not vote on rUK matters but when it affects our pocket money then rightly they should be able to vote on such matters. You wanted scotland to stay as an equal partner, let's see how you like eating that cake...

The facts are, the VAST majority of people do not vote for the SNP even in Scotland during a GE and no one votes for them in the RUK so the thought that they could hold the balance of power in the UK is ridiculous.

You're not equal.

HTH.

Agreed.

Im not sure what arp means by 'equal' either. I could be wrong but aren't their more Scottish MPs per capita than English? Seems like things are a bit 'more equal' for the scots as it is.

Or are people seriously considering that the voice of 50+ mil English is equal to that of 6 mil? Scots?

[hidetheelephants]

Troubleatmill said:

Let's break it down into small points so we don't get any misunderstandings.

UK based issues - Westminster. 650 MPs decide
Scottish based issues - Edinburgh 129 MSP's decide
rUK based issues - Westminster. 600 MP's should decide


If we take education as an example.
Why should 50 Scottish MP's get to vote on education matters for rUK?
As rUK has no reciprocal agreement to vote on Scottish education matters.


Scotland wanted to stay. Get over it - and enjoy life.

Scottish MPs must be allowed to vote on legislation that has Barnett consequentials; these have a direct impact on the scottish budget so they affect Scotland. Why would rUK want or need to vote on scottish education matters?

[arp1]

jimbobsimmonds said:

Wills2 said:

arp1 said:

But it's ok for rUK to decide on scottish issues that msp's cannot vote on? Also Snp traditionally do not vote on rUK matters but when it affects our pocket money then rightly they should be able to vote on such matters. You wanted scotland to stay as an equal partner, let's see how you like eating that cake...

The facts are, the VAST majority of people do not vote for the SNP even in Scotland during a GE and no one votes for them in the RUK so the thought that they could hold the balance of power in the UK is ridiculous.

You're not equal.

HTH.

Agreed.

Im not sure what arp means by 'equal' either. I could be wrong but aren't their more Scottish MPs per capita than English? Seems like things are a bit 'more equal' for the scots as it is.

Or are people seriously considering that the voice of 50+ mil English is equal to that of 6 mil? Scots?

So in other words, english matters rule westminister, everything else comes a distant second, hence the 'worry' that plaid, Snp or Sinn Fein will actually have a bigger voice at the UK table...

[McWigglebum4th]

arp1 said:

So in other words, english matters rule westminister, everything else comes a distant second, hence the 'worry' that plaid, Snp or Sinn Fein will actually have a bigger voice at the UK table...

I believe it is called democracy

Where the majority get what they want

Of course Scotland is fundamentally the same as england

[///ajd]

arp1 said:

jimbobsimmonds said:

Wills2 said:

arp1 said:

But it's ok for rUK to decide on scottish issues that msp's cannot vote on? Also Snp traditionally do not vote on rUK matters but when it affects our pocket money then rightly they should be able to vote on such matters. You wanted scotland to stay as an equal partner, let's see how you like eating that cake...

The facts are, the VAST majority of people do not vote for the SNP even in Scotland during a GE and no one votes for them in the RUK so the thought that they could hold the balance of power in the UK is ridiculous.

You're not equal.

HTH.

Agreed.

Im not sure what arp means by 'equal' either. I could be wrong but aren't their more Scottish MPs per capita than English? Seems like things are a bit 'more equal' for the scots as it is.

Or are people seriously considering that the voice of 50+ mil English is equal to that of 6 mil? Scots?

So in other words, english matters rule westminister, everything else comes a distant second, hence the 'worry' that plaid, Snp or Sinn Fein will actually have a bigger voice at the UK table...

scot nat thinks fair representation = 8% of pop having equal say to other 92%

maths worthy of the white bog paper

are you banned from the indie thread? you could try and 'help' stroker and xjsdrivel - they are both struggling a bit and getting their proverbials handed to them on plates. not that they are able to see it of course.

back on topic, sturgeon totally of of her depth and a real liability. please be careful scotland - the SNP could really damage the UK, but the aftermath won't be a rosy indie scot utopia of free money; don't kid yourselves.

[QuantumTokoloshi]

Slaav said:

When I saw Tarzan was on I actually cringed slightly as a few of his more recent appearances were not his finest moments; to the extent that on one occasion he was slightly embarrassing to the point that I thought his mind was going.

On Thursday this week, he just came across as someone who was a little old rather than losing it and I loved his honesty about Ant and Dec.

'50 shades of Red' was a lovely set up and caught Flint (especially) out - hook line and sinker!

Sturgeon was an embarrassment and at times was almost ridiculed. I have not seen her that bad before; and that is really saying something when my opinion of her was pretty poor to begin with.

It was nice to see Tarzan back as a figure that I agreed with and admired over the years! He is what I would call a 'proper Politician' and not one of these modern 'career politicians'

When did it suddenly become so easy for people to have a career in Politics without ever having a proper job? It used to be rare - it now appears the 'norm'! And how much worse it is as a result?

Flint is bl00dy awful as well - and to think I thought she was reasonably attractive when she first came on the scene????

I was impressed with Hesseltine, I suspect the old duffer thing is largely an act, used to deflect when he does not want to get involved in a subject. Rupert Murdoch has this down to an art. Rambling, disjointed then suddenly pin sharp.

He was certainly had more gravitas and authority on the subjects than the rest of the panel, actual thought and insight rather than just the party line.

I am getting a little tired of the unending focus on the SNP of late. The referendum is done and decided, time for England, Wales and NI to remind the SNP there are other components of the UK with equal input and demands on the UK State.

The current political discourse is not for the sole purpose for the supply of benefits to the SNP. They are now a corrosive influence within the union and is in their interest to create disorder and conflict within.

[Troubleatmill]

hidetheelephants said:

Troubleatmill said:

Let's break it down into small points so we don't get any misunderstandings.

UK based issues - Westminster. 650 MPs decide
Scottish based issues - Edinburgh 129 MSP's decide
rUK based issues - Westminster. 600 MP's should decide


If we take education as an example.
Why should 50 Scottish MP's get to vote on education matters for rUK?
As rUK has no reciprocal agreement to vote on Scottish education matters.


Scotland wanted to stay. Get over it - and enjoy life.

Scottish MPs must be allowed to vote on legislation that has Barnett consequentials; these have a direct impact on the scottish budget so they affect Scotland. Why would rUK want or need to vote on scottish education matters?

As I understand it - Barnett is going to be cut by 2/3rds
All residents in Scotland will pay their income tax to the Scottish Govt.
The first 10% of VAT goes to Scottish Govt
Other taxation - goes to Westminster for things of nation interest like defence, DVLA etc.


Why would rUK wish to vote on Scottish education matters? Well.. Scottish MP's can vote to raise university tuition fees for rUK. But continue to offer free education for Scottish universities.

Also not forgetting that right now. Scottish universities offer free education to EU citizens - except the English, Welsh and Northern Irish.


( Edit. missed the word "to" in the last sentence )

Edited by Troubleatmill on Saturday 21st February 11:10

[NoNeed]

hidetheelephants said:

Scottish MPs must be allowed to vote on legislation that has Barnett consequentials; these have a direct impact on the scottish budget so they affect Scotland. Why would rUK want or need to vote on scottish education matters?

To prevent them from further dividing a nation with their hate fueled anti-english policies.

[///ajd]

Troubleatmill said:

As I understand it - Barnett is going to be cut by 2/3rds
All residents in Scotland will pay their income tax to the Scottish Govt.
The first 10% of VAT goes to Scottish Govt
Other taxation - goes to Westminster for things of nation interest like defence, DVLA etc.


Why would rUK wish to vote on Scottish education matters? Well.. Scottish MP's can vote to raise university tuition fees for rUK. But continue to offer free education for Scottish universities.

Also not forgetting that right now. Scottish universities offer free education to EU citizens - except the English, Welsh and Northern Irish.


( Edit. missed the word "to" in the last sentence )

Edited by Troubleatmill on Saturday 21st February 11:10

Does anyone know if the Scottish free uni policy will bite them eventually?

I know at the moment it is a bit early, but at some stage UK uni will be funded partially by repayments of student loans - c £27k a student over several years. Scotland will not have this income, so will their universities be funded at a lower rate to ensure English students are not subsidising Scottish? Ir has this bridge not been crossed yet?

We should be told!

I do understand the need for some kind of tuition contribution as there there is a funding crunch - but I don't want my kids repaying £27k whilst their equivalents in Scotland get BOTH the benefit AND pay nothing. F*ck that!

[Thorodin]

Sturgeon is so virulently anti-English. How can she and the rest of her party be considered as suitable for 'holding the balance of power' in any coalition - they are conspiring against the UK. That's sedition surely?

[///ajd]

Thorodin said:

Sturgeon is so virulently anti-English. How can she and the rest of her party be considered as suitable for 'holding the balance of power' in any coalition - they are conspiring against the UK. That's sedition surely?

Yep, like the Lib Dem said - the SNP are anti UK so what would they do as Kingmaker? His words "it would be horrific".

As Hesseltine said - she has effectively publically said they will try and extort £180Bn extra lending from the UK to spend even more in Scotland at the expense of everyone else.

Quite impressed he was so blunt about it - most politicians tend to shy away from saying the Scots get more than their fair share, which is obviously a highly controversial thing to say (i.e. anyone saying it can be expected to totally p*ss off and hence lose vote of at least 45% of scots). Problem is, post referendum, 55M of the population are now thinking it, and watching closely to ensure a fair deal.

I hope the Uni thing is clarified. If the Scots want fee uni for millionaires, it must not be at the expense of your average rUK student.

[jimbobsimmonds]

arp1 said:

jimbobsimmonds said:

Wills2 said:

arp1 said:

But it's ok for rUK to decide on scottish issues that msp's cannot vote on? Also Snp traditionally do not vote on rUK matters but when it affects our pocket money then rightly they should be able to vote on such matters. You wanted scotland to stay as an equal partner, let's see how you like eating that cake...

The facts are, the VAST majority of people do not vote for the SNP even in Scotland during a GE and no one votes for them in the RUK so the thought that they could hold the balance of power in the UK is ridiculous.

You're not equal.

HTH.

Agreed.

Im not sure what arp means by 'equal' either. I could be wrong but aren't their more Scottish MPs per capita than English? Seems like things are a bit 'more equal' for the scots as it is.

Or are people seriously considering that the voice of 50+ mil English is equal to that of 6 mil? Scots?

So in other words, english matters rule westminister, everything else comes a distant second, hence the 'worry' that plaid, Snp or Sinn Fein will actually have a bigger voice at the UK table...

Sorry Im late and what Im about to say is a repeat of others.

But that is what I'm saying, but please allow me to qualify. If something is of benefit to England to the deficit of rUK then England, being the near 9/10 majority, has to take precedence. It is how democracy works. You go with the majority.

Of course the rUK may not be happy about this. They can democratically they could vote to leave the union with their far larger neighbour. In fact Scotland recently did a similar thing. And despite being pissed off at being ruled 'by a Tory party they never voted for', the majority chose to remain part of the UK.

What you are suggesting is that smaller entities have equal say, despite a massive difference in population. fk it, for arguments sake I now consider it infuriating that Kent occasionally gets Labour governments we never vote for. And I see this as blatently unfair. I demand that Kent has equal say over rEngland.

But suggesting that Kent should hold sway over rEngland would be silly, wouldn't it?

Edited by jimbobsimmonds on Sunday 22 February 21:36

[Welshbeef]

Happy for that to be the case provided rUK MPs can vote for things in Scotland.




Else you could end up with Scottish MPs voting for Scotland to cut income tax but Scottish MPs voting for rUK to increase taxes. It doesn't and cannot work

The SNP were canny previously stating they only vote in things which impact Dcotland but when pressed on this the biggest and sole thing they could think of was fox hunting in England. Says it all doesn't it.
Vote for all rUK council properties to be revalued heck yes Scottish MPs same for Scotland oh no vote against that.


They must take us for idiots - no wonder they tend to call us bunglow ie not much upstairs.

[carinaman]

Did former QT panelist 'Soubers' use a naughty word?:

http://www.totalpolitics.com/blog/448082/did-anna-...

I'd have never have thought of using those two words together, but then again I am not a Barrister.

[irocfan]

[quote=carinaman]Did former QT panelist 'Soubers' use a naughty word?:

http://www.totalpolitics.com/blog/448082/did-anna-...

I'd have never have thought of using those two words together, but then again I am not a Barrister.[/quote


thing is she would not be wrong vis-a-vis millipede

[carinaman]

irocfan said:

Thing is she would not be wrong vis-a-vis millipede

[turbobloke]

irocfan said:

I'd have never have thought of using those two words together, but then again I am not a Barrister.

From the link and judging by what she allegedly said to the journalist, she may well be putting her own version to use in the near future.

[Chimune]

What?
No comment on the crazy 80s makeup girl ?

[mcelliott]

Chimune said:

What?
No comment on the crazy 80s makeup girl ?

Genuine lol moment! Grant Crapps - got a bit of Tony Blair about him.