Extremely dumb-arse questions about UK politics

mmm quite fancy a deep fired Mars Bar now!
But not genuinely offended.

Agreed that industry has been much damaged but fortunately in recent years Scptland has had a lot of growth in the electronics/technology/tourism/pharmaceutical/AI/insurance areas (and no doubt more). And there's whisky. I was suprised by just how much revenue international sales brings in!

Due to devolution and the separate legal systems separation could be easier than first seems.

Sorry - just to clarify its not that I don't think scotland CAN be financially independent. My thoughts were that because scotland is currently part of the UK - to extract itself financially would be quite complicated so I was thinking in terms of who pays for what as in the defence budget example - question has been answered by referencing Isle of Man and Channel Islands.

BUT I am like I said politically ignorant and tend to put my hands over my ears and hum loudly if someone mentions politics

(and I'd like my deep fried mars bars back if I paid for them )

No I didnt mean anything like that. It just showed my complete ignorance of all things Scottish to be honest.
Sorry if I caused any offense I most certainly didnt mean to.

The recent governments have destroyed all the industry in all our countries.

Yes, we just sit here scoffing deep-fried Mars Bars and slurping Irn Bru, all paid for by our southern neighbours

I suspect people don't actually think about the fact that Scottish people pay tax to the UK treasury

Quite entertained by people finding it hard to understand how Scotland could be independent. Scotland has industries and resources, Scottish people pay taxes too! It is a bit like saying, "How can Denmark be independent, it so small and near to other countries".

t's quite late and I have the remains of a hideous migraine, but will do my best with what I know.

As I understand it, both Tories and Lib-dems want to scrap the barnett formula and replace it with some kind of "need-based" per capita UK wide funding. The difference between them is that the Lib-dems seem to want to transfer tax raising powers from Westminster to the Scottish parliament, so that they aren't s dependent on London funding.

THE SNP want to keep the Barnett formula as things stand, but aiming for independence would look to have tax raising powers and more economic powers.

Not sure about LAbour. They want, I think, to maintain the status quo.

Getting rid of the Barnett formula without allowing Scotland more fiscal independence to raise her own revenues would be very bad for the country because of things like our demographics, widespread areas of deprivation. and the difficulties of providing public services here.

THe whole not enough oil thing is a bit thin to be honest. There are huge reserves under the north west coast that have never been tapped that are separate from the North sea (obviously). SNP are keen on expanding our potential for green energy and other things like that as well. Part of the problem with long term stability is that, as a result of successive failures in Westminster, Scotland has very little industry left and has a mainly service based economy. I think that that is one of the things that would need to be addressed.

As for the coalition government thing, well it's hardly been a disaster here. There are things which haven't been achieved yet, mainly because the three other main parties "team up" to thwart the SNP on principle, but progress is definitely being made.

apologies for the lack of proper info and the
rubbish explanations. Perhaps I shal try again tomorrow when I feel a bit better.

NI are most definietly not trying for independance. The trouble over there is because the south want the north back, the north dont want to give it back. Simples.
Except I think lots of people dont really care too much anymore and they just want a job and not to get blown up!

I wonder how Scotland and Wales would survive full independance? Where would they get their money from? Not enough oil & gas left for a long term plan surely?

We have a Labour government which only secured around 35% of the countries vote last time. Hardley democratic.
However I dont want to see the situation of a constant coalition government which is what we would have should we introduce PR.

I can't find the bit on the BBC website about how it works, scottishmummy, have you got a direct link to it?

Also I was quite annoyed to see (as a first time voter) in the "First Time Voter" section a video of "Election explained by a glamour model" because young people will only listen to someone who is some kind of vague celebrity, of course.

1. How does this election affect the Scottish Parliament? Or does Scot Parliament have its own election? Are MSPs the same individuals as the MPs in Westminister?

IT DOESNT AFFECT THE SCOTTISH PARLIAMENT, UNLESS SAY, THE WINNER OF THIS ELECTION IS THE SAME WINNER AS IN THE SCOTTISH ELECTIONS, THEREFORE THEY WOULD PURSUE SIMILAR POLICIES. HOWEVER, IF SAY LABOUR WON THE UK ELECTION, THE SNP ARE STILL IN POWER IN SCOTLAND AND THEY EACH HAVE DIFFERENT POLICIES. THIS UK ELECTION WONT REALLY AFFECT DEVOLVED MATTERS OTHERWISE. THE SCOTS PARLIAMENT HAS ITS OWN ELECTION WITH THE NEXT ONE IN 2013 (I THINK...), MSPS AND MPS ARE DIFFERENT. I HAVE AN MP AND AN MSP IN MY CONSTITUENCY, BOTH FROM THE SAME PARTY, BUT CAN BE DIFFERENT PARTIES.

2. Why is it so hard for Lib Dewms to convert votes to seats? I know it's summat to do with first past the post system...is it because in any one constituency they are likely to come 2nd (or better), whereas Con and Lab are likely to come first or third?

I SAW A GOOD EXPLANATION ON THE BBC WEBSITE OF HOW IT WORKS. BASICALLY SAY THERE ARE 3 SEATS AVAILABLE. LABOUR GET THE MOST VOTES IN 2 SEATS, TORIES IN 1 SEAT BUT OVERALL WHEN VOTES ARE COUNTED UP ACROSS ALL SEATS ITS THE LIB DEMS WITH THE MOST VOTES BUT THEY DIDN'T WIN THE SEATS BECAUSE THEIR VOTES GO ACROSS THE BOARD, NOT IN EACH SEAT. SEE BBC WEBSITE IF THIS DOESNT MAKE SENSE

(SCUSE THE CAPS)

Ah thank you - its difficult cos I get so of no prescription charges, no tuition fees, no sats etc etc and I think what are we (england) getting??

An interesting point about Scottish MPs not voting on English matters, where does Gordon Brown, MP for Kirkcaldy, Scotland, fit? He certainly gets involved in matters that do not effect his constiuents, such as English education and health. He would also be out of a job if Scotland went independnt, so definately not keen!

In case anyone concerned about interest in schools, one of my plans is for funds for PTA and similar projects to be given out by one of my websites - handled as a charity under independent control - with income from another UK-wide site accepting paid business adverts to challenge Yellow pages/ Thomson/ Google.

The one with UK-wide ads would have information, such as local schools, local government contact info, family- friendly entertainment and attractions... ie no gambling or similar, no drinking / lapdancing etc clubs, or other 'adult' nightspots.

Since it would aid PTAs and would have local businesses on, it would hopefully get plenty of links and support... one way to 'give back' to education even though I have no children.

The Lib Dems tend to come second a lot. So they have a lot of votes piled into candidates who don't get seats.

Thing I most dislike about the "separation" issues is that in different places there are completely different schemes, whether for care home funding, travel schemes, even assessment of schools.

For example, OFSTED reports on schools in England and were happy to provide me with a list. Welsh statistical office happy for me to have a list, but banned from using it on the web. Scottish office responded with 'you can get a list of schools from XXXX' {XXXX is a Surrey based mailing list firm, charging hundreds of pounds). Gave up before asking the NI office in case they asked if I was Catholic or Protestant!

What I'm getting at is that within this "United Kingdom" one cannot easily compare education, health care, even council tax (NI still has rates system, I think, and other differences.. is 17 still age of consent in NI ?)

scrappydappydoo - re Welsh Assembly...

Fewer areas of control (you constantly hear about laws for England and Wales), depends much more for funding from Westminster (and gets less).

As for being keen on independence, it depends on whether you talk to Welsh language activists/ speakers or not, in part.

As for Scotland, I think they'd want to be like the Channel Islands or Isle of Man and have UK forces for defence, but use Oil and Gas (plus green energy schemes) to help pay for themselves, possibly get EU funds as a smaller nation with special interests (crofting, Gaelic language, history)

so what about the welsh assembly - does this operate the same way as the scottish?
If scotland did vote for independence - will that mean that they won't be part of the uk so will be a completely separate country (like france for example) and if yes - if they have to rely on money from westminster (did I understand that correctly?) then how will be financially independent?
Are the welsh and northern irish also keen on independence?
Final question (honest) - is there a party which is promoting the set up of an english parliament? and why is an english parliament a bad thing?
Sorry I'm very politically ignorant!

Amuminscotland yes - i have always wondered why they don't just do all the english business at westminster on a thursday and let the scottish MPs begin the long journeys back to their constituencies a day early.

They really need to spoil their paper with a "None of the Above" message, so the major parties can get to see the level of distrust, as not voting only does that in a mostly hidden way.

SNP MPs don't vote on westminster issues that are devolved, iyswim, only on issues that affect the UK as a whole. I agree that Scottish MPs should not be voting on devolved issues. It's one of the drawbacks and inconsistencies of devolution as opposed to full independence.

I still think that it deeply unfair to have a whole country governed by a party who have no real support. I also firmly believe that no Westminster government, regardless of colour, really gies a button for Scotland or the welfare or opinions of the Scots. This is amply demonstrated by the fact that none of the other mainstream parties will work with a democratically elected SNP government in Holyrood, at the behest of their London based string pullers.

To be honest, Labour is losing a lot of their established voter base here, just like everywhere else. I think that some Labour MPs will be in for a big shock on May 7th. Sadly, though, more and more people are just saying that they won't vote because they can't bring themselves to vote for any of the three main parties.

Personally, I'd like England to have a Parliament/Assembly which votes on purely English matters, rather than Scotland becoming fully independent. Or maybe the Westminster Parliament could have days/sessions when they dealt with UK policy and ones where they dealt with English policy. It's certainly a very strange situation where Scottish MPs can vote on policy which doesn't affect Scotland.

Good reason to move north isn't it.

(Thanks for the Scottish parliament info btw I didn't know much about it)

"I would like to hope that a Tory government would make more folk vote for independence"

I also hope they do for a different reason why should Scotland have a say and a vote in the westminister government with issues that are nothing to do with them, just so they can prop up Labour.

And if we cut off scotland labour lose all those votes in westminister and goodbye Gordon Brown and his ilk.