To ask all Scottish MNrs to work together 2

[siiiiiiiiigh]

Sorry, filled the last thread with this, thought I'd better be part of Team Scottish MN and work together for those of us on the old thread...

Here's Armando's thoughts. I vote him in for everything.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/21/scottish-referendum-massive-voter-turnout-means-politics-changed-for-ever

I think it could have split the vote though, and not everyone wants more powers, so would need the second paper. We coped with two papers in 97 (which I counted - that was exciting, and really did feel like the overwhelming will of the people, although turnout not nearly as high as last week)

WHY do Mumsnetters not get to run the country?

tisall is it independence at any cost for you?

No. I'd be happy with a devolution of the majority of powers ie broadly WM retains control of defence/borders, everything else devolved. Ideally that'd be the same for Wales/NI too.

A second paper would be fine...I mean weren't people complying the paper was too small anyway? Lol

Yes it would have split the vote, but IMO I think properly worked out extra powers would have won, I'm only basing that on how many yes and no voters say they would have voted for that though...and I'm pretty sure with more options people would feel less divided now.

Complaining, not complying.

I think the gap between 45% to where the independence support needs to be is currently so large that immediate rallying for another referendum would be unwise and lessons need to be learned in that campaign. In the meantime, the same issues came up time and again in all the debates. Disgust at the foodbank indignities, commitment to not privatise the nhs, trident, preserving no tuition fees, etc etc. I will be listening to whoever, can talk change on these issues.

Absolutely Angelina I'd like to see people working on those issues and seeing what can be achieved before we go back down the referendum route. Although I almost feel like there should be a 'referendum recovery' programme - so many people put so much effort in, emotionally, mentally, physically, and so many people were so committed to getting the result, it seems like everyone needs to catch their breath.

It is dispiriting to read through these arguments.
I am a very disenchanted scot just now, I feel that we had non scots voting in the referendum, and when they gut the result they wanted are leaving anyway, a whole bunch of yessers not accepting the result and a whole bunch of no voters not understanding the upset felt by the yessers.
If we're not careful this will turn into Beirut ( tongue in cheek, obv)

I actually think and you can shoot me all down if you like, I kind of have had enough of the whole shenanigans , that we should get rid of the scottish parliament,and the welsh and northern Irish assemblies and go back to the situation of one parliament for the whole country.

All this devolution malarkey is causing divide snd disenchantment, and with a newfound engagement in politics people should get out there and vote for the one parliament concerned with this one country. I am just sick and tired of the infighting and bickering - we are either one country or we're not, half way houses apparently do not work . Ps I was anti the devovote in 1997 , myself.

Extra powers won't be the answer as the quid pro quo in rUK will mean that a potential labour govt in WM will not have a voice proper there, and apparently one majority cabinet will need to be achievable to work in both, it's a can if worms in my view .

I am retreating under my stone till about 2020' when hopefully this whole business will have gone away

Tab thank you for replying

Currency - Do you really think it would have just been a 'few years of instability' though? I don't, I think it would have been a few years in dire straights if not complete economic failure - and who would have bailed S out? Who would have helped them?

S couldn't have used the £ for very long & if it had, that's not really independence is it - no control over your own currency.

S would have needed two years (with a new currency) of stabilisation against the euro, it would have taken a lot longer than 2 years, if ever, to get that far - let alone any other hoops it would have had to jump through.

The NC wouldn't have any credibility & in danger of an initial depreciation, which would lead to imported inflation. As a consequence, investors would demand higher risk premiums on Scottish bonds. Interest rates in Scotland would rise, increasing the financing costs of households, businesses, and the government.

...and whilst on an individual level you might have been able to cope with it, how many people in Scotland couldn't have. The poor would have been crippled by it. Not just for a couple of years, but for many years.

What is it about independence that makes it so alluring for you, that it's worth risking that much?

One thing I think we can all agree on is that both campaigns were utterly lacking!

Labour relying on Scotland is overrated, I've linked to the reports twice today already and I'm too tired to do it again...but since WW2 the Scottish vote has only made a difference in 4 elections and one was the last one, it would have been conservative instead of a coalition...well it might as well be anyway, lol. In votes in parliament , since 1997 in over 5000 votes, Scottish MPs have made a difference to the outcome 21 times.

That is one of the issues I have with the current set up tbh.

OO

I think the whole thing would have been better with people like most of us in

Have you been earwigging I think most people think this.

I would also have enlisted some of the wonderful No ladies here (and maybe a few politicians) and had a radically different No campaign

That would have been brilliant, but even the local primary senior school would have done a better job.

Oh yes, to be fair - I would have voted for a good devo max option, I was yes because it was yes or no

I think there are a lot of people who feel like this. A lot of 'yes' were actually we want change... A lot of yes voters have said they were relieved it was NO. I think the 'yes' people saying they have 45% support of independence are wrong.

WHY do Mumsnetters not get to run the country?

Because there's not enough Gin and we'd never agree on policy

Is it all about independence for you? No. I'd be happy with a devolution of the majority of powers ie broadly WM retains control of defence/borders, everything else devolved. Ideally that'd be the same for Wales/NI too

What about England?

Chelsy - weirdly, my last post sort of answers your one...it wasn't meant to, lol.

A few years is 5-10 (based on the few impartial opinions I could find) actually no my personal circumstances don't mean I would definitely be fine.

But IMO I live in a country that doesn't get to elect it's own government or make a huge difference to which policies are put in place and I don't think that's right.

Sorry - chipping, lol

Told you I was tired.

Christ on a LuckyTwo I think we finally agree on something

enough of the whole shenanigans , that we should get rid of the scottish parliament,and the welsh and northern Irish assemblies and go back to the situation of one parliament for the whole country. All this devolution malarkey is causing divide snd disenchantment, and with a newfound engagement in politics people should get out there and vote for the one parliament concerned with this one country. I am just sick and tired of the infighting and bickering - we are either one country or we're not, half way houses apparently do not work

It's how I feel too.

BUT with a major overhaul of how it's done.

Lol chipping - I have thought so long and so hard and can't see anything else that can really work.
I'm not saying it's the best answer just that it's the only answer for this union. Anything else just can't work, and if Scotland don't want independence, why on earth the cost of 2 levels of government ? Pointless waste of time -ahem- except for the free tuition at uni and free prescription fees.

Tab Yes, please don't confuse the pair of us Just remember I still call it Holland

As I said, I think it would have been bad, really bad, not just a but unstable, but 'crashing bad. Thankfully we'll never know.

But IMO I live in a country that doesn't get to elect it's own government or make a huge difference to which policies are put in place and I don't think that's right

^^ the problem is, you aren't alone. I think the vast majority of people across the UK feel like this & I live in the SE of England!

I think there are other things we need to look at to get what we ALL want, without tearing bits of the UK off and I do think going back to No Devo is one option.

NZ uses MMP which is basically...

^MMP is the system we currently use to elect our Parliament.

It is a proportional system, which means that the proportion of votes a party gets will largely reflect the number of seats it has in parliament.

Each voter gets two votes.

The first vote is for the political party the voter chooses. This is called the party vote and largely decides the total number of seats each political party gets in Parliament.

The second vote is to choose the MP the voter wants to represent the electorate they live in. This is called the electorate vote. The candidate who gets the most votes wins. They do not have to get more than half the votes.

Under current MMP rules, a political party that wins at least one electorate seat OR 5% of the party vote gets a share of the seats in Parliament that is about the same as its share of the party vote.

For example, if a party gets 30% of the party vote it will get roughly 36 MPs in Parliament (being 30% of 120 seats). So if that party wins 20 electorate seats it will have 16 List MPs in addition to its 20 Electorate MPs.

Coalitions or agreements between political parties are usually needed before Governments can be formed^

There are many many other options used world wide.

except for the free tuition at uni and free prescription fees

Yes, sorry, I did notice seconds later to be fair..

Oh if it was up to me I'd change the voting system as well, and break up England into smaller chunks as well...with the second level of government having power over big national things like defence and currency - a proper federal system.

Basically I'd redo the whole lot, lol .

But it's ok, I'm not standing so no-one had to vote for me

Chipping I think you quoted a couple of other people there (just in case anyone is in any doubt about my views I would support) but to pick up on your devo point and what about England - we could have a 'Council of the North' (Richard Duke of Gloucester used to run that one . I think the problem there will be the nature of devolution and how funding works. Various areas of the UK will cost more than they contribute in financial terms. I don't want to get into naming them. They will vary over time.

I should go and do some research on how federal countries address this.

I also don't know how many layers of government there should be. Or what the views of people in areas across the UK are. No point imposing something unpopular.

tabula if we get enough MNers on the same page (unlikely) we can stage a coup. Then we can be a 'monstrous regiment of women'

Please note

My post at 23.31 - the quotes weren't all from OO, I was only referring to her for the top little bit, my highlighting went all to fuck. Sorry OO :(

"Then we can be a 'monstrous regiment of women' "

Rofl

No problem Chipping hope I wasn't snippy about it.

Oh and on that note, someone pointed out somewhere (it might have been here, so sorry if it's a repeat) that if Nichola Sturgeon becomes leader of the SNP then that's the 3 main parties in Scotland with women leading them.

I like that.

This has become a shitty thread.