To not understand why the SNP are so anti EVEL?

[ninaricci]

They have always abstained from voting (except on fox hunting ) on EVEL.

It's so hypocritical.

Euphemia

Sturgeon's letter to David Mundell (Scotland's only Tory MP) states: "Of the 20 Bills listed by the UK Government as not extending to Scotland, no fewer than 13 of them did. Several covered important areas such as charities, criminal justice and anti-slavery measures and had significant impacts on Scotland, over and above the Barnett implications that might flow from legislation."

I'd like to know how they did. And if tangles are caused by the Barnett formula, then it only highlights how much reform of the Barnett formula is overdue.

On the contrary op, I prefer it when Scottish people criticise the SNP. They have a majority in Holyrood and it is our responsibility as voters to constantly watch and leap on every mistake, otherwise they might come out with daft policies like saving up for sick pay and redundancy when we already pay tax and NI, for example.

I was incorrect in saying that it was the right to a referendum sorry, it was the right of the Scottish Parliament to exist. The Conservatives promised as part of the Vow that they would recognise the Parliament's right to exist, at the moment it can be dissolved by Westminster. The SNP proposed an amendment which would only allow the Parliament to be dissolved by the people of Scotland or by it's own act. It was voted down.

Regardless of if you think Scotland deserves the right to have it's own Parliament, surely if the majority of Scottish MP's were in favour the amendment shouldn't have been voted down by MP's not from Scotland, whose constituents it doesn't affect?

I think it's mainly because they have realised how little influence they have if they promise to abstain...

The whole of the SNP should take a lesson from Mhairi Black, who from what I can see isn't interested in these daft power games.

This fox hunting issue is what we refer to as someone's ripped knitting. And I worry for Scotland after next year. Poor opposition allows even poorer government. Sort out the schools, sort out the Southern General and raise taxes for the love of Job because we're all sick of the bleating about "Westminster".

Coffee

The Conservatives promised as part of the Vow that they would recognise the Parliament's right to exist, at the moment it can be dissolved by Westminster.

I would be astonished if the Tories promised that either.

The British constitution is premised on Parliamentary supremacy. It cannot be bound by previous laws or by referenda. As the Scottish parliament is a creation of Westminster legislation (the Scotland Act), it can be abolished by repeal of that legislation.

You're claiming that the Tories have promised the biggest constituational change not since 1707 but 1690, when Parliamentary supremacy was established.

I am Scottish coffee. I hope you aren't insinuating that anyone who criticises the SNP cannot be Scottish?

I'm Scottish and can't stand the bloody SNP. Along with a great number of other Scottish people.

Toad, so you think all MP's should vote on the Scotland Bill, as it is a Westminster Bill, even though it only affects Scotland.

OK, but by that same token, there is no problem with Scottish MP's voting on Westminster bills which only affect England, or Wales, or NI, as the bills are all Westminster bills and every MP has the right to vote on them, even if the bill has nothing to do with their own constituents.
Therefore it is fine for the Scottish MP's to vote on fox hunting bills that don't affect Scotland.

Toad it is a very small constitutional change, to allow a Parliament to be dissolved by itself rather than another Parliament. The power used does not change, only the body administering it.

Yes, I was astonished too, but as they had no intention of keeping any vows they could promise what they liked. And they did.

The problem is that Uk taxpayers' money all goes in the same pot. So for example, if high speed 2 is only going from London to Brum why should my tax pay for it. It does, so therefore my mp can vote on it

By this logic then all MPs should be allowed to vote on all Scottish spending decisions though.

I honestly don't know how far the EVEL Bills actually have the potential to impact Scotland but I feel that this move on fox hunting makes SNP look beyond petty, childish and untrustworthy. Even though I don't want to see the changes being proposed actually happen.

I think the Scotland Act does impact on all UK countries doesn't it?

Coffee

The Scotland Act doesn't 'affect' anyone directly. What it does is determine which bodies can pass legislation that does directly 'affect' people. For example, it determines that Holyrood can legislate in respect of Scottish education.

What any amendment to the Scotland Act does affect very directly is Westminster itself. As the sovereign parliament of the UK (Holyrood has no sovereign power of its own at all) all its elected members should vote on it. To say otherwise is to assume that Scotland is in some way separate to the UK, which is simply untrue.

If an England-only parliament was created (ie, full-scale devolution with all the fuss and expense that would entail), the Scotland Act would remain something within Westminster's powers to amend and presumably there would be no controversy about all its MPs voting on it.

Coffee

Sorry for double post, but only saw your comment now.

Toad it is a very small constitutional change, to allow a Parliament to be dissolved by itself rather than another Parliament. The power used does not change, only the body administering it.

There is no parallel between Westminster and Holyrood, and it's completely an accident that they are both called 'parliaments'. Westminster can, legally, make any law it likes. It is completely sovereign and has unlimited powers.

Holyrood is a creation of Westminster legislation, can only do what that legislation empowers it to do. The Tories' suggestion is that Westminster would be bound by Holyrood's decision. That's a major, major shift, and probably a good many legal commentators would question as to whether Westminster could be bound by it.

far more plausable that the Tories were telling fibs

"By this logic then all MPs should be allowed to vote on all Scottish spending decisions though."

Well in a way they do...as they set the budget.

God I'm sick of all the 'Westminster'and 'Tories' rhetoric. Nicola sturgeon really needs to be wary of appearing to be more interested in power play in Westminster than sorting out some problems in devolved public services in Scotland: education, the new mega hospital and austerity cuts all affecting services.

"I am Scottish coffee. I hope you aren't insinuating that anyone who criticises the SNP cannot be Scottish?"

I definitely feel that there is a real belief amongst some Nationalists that anyone who does not support independence, is a traitor and a turncoat. I am also very uncomfortable about the way that the Saltire has been appropriated by the Nationalists. I love Scotland - we chose to live here and would hate to have to move - but do not feel I can show my support for Scotland by using the Saltire, because I do not support the nationalist/independence cause - I suspect there are people who would say I was not entitled to use it/ought to be ashamed to use it because I do not support independence.

There were comments after the referendum that anyone who voted No should be ashamed to sing Flower of Scotland at Murrayfield, at the rugby.

Well I agree with your last sentence, Toad .

But the Westminster Parliament isn't 'sovereign, with unlimited power'.

Absolute power rests with the monarch. It is devolved to the Westminster Parliament. In practice, it will never be given back, but the whole basis of the Parliamentary system is that the monarch's absolute power is given to Parliament to use.
In the same way, Westminster devolved these powers to Holyrood. It is exactly the same process.
However, the right to dissolve the Holyrood Parliament still rests with Westminster. Making it depend on the Scottish people or itself for dissolution just devolves another power.

I'll admit what I really loved was 'the people' replacing 'the monarch' as the other party Parliament is answerable to. If only every Parliament would think about that more!

"I am Scottish coffee. I hope you aren't insinuating that anyone who criticises the SNP cannot be Scottish?"

Can people please stop saying I implied that op could not criticise the SNP because she was not Scottish.

I said 'care to swap?' meaning my situation of a Scotland Bill being passed which will negatively affect my future, for hers of worrying about the SNP voting on a fox hunting bill (which if the op lives in Scotland, shouldn't affect her future at all?

She misunderstood me and since then three people have quoted her mistake, and used it to say how much they have the SNP.

This is absolutely your right, but please don't tell me you are doing so on the basis of comments which I've made when I haven't, and in fact when I've gone on to say you should criticise anyone in government.

Scoobydoo The problem is that Uk taxpayers' money all goes in the same pot. So for example, if high speed 2 is only going from London to Brum why should my tax pay for it. It does, so therefore my mp can vote on it.

You can make the same argument about parts of Scotland. e.g. Orkney and Aberdeen are quite wealthy, so why should their taxpayer's money fund anti-poverty measures in Glasgow City Centre, which they have almost nothing in common with? In fact, Orkney didn't even vote in an SNP MP, used to be part of Norway and is mainly rural, so its a stronger argument still.

How low down do you devolve?

Yes because they were only really interested in independence...post referendum they have to actually work in the system we have IMO, because Scotland voted to stay in that system.

I'm not sure that penny has dropped but I hope so.

I can't stand Eck or Nicola or the SNP but I think what she did was right re fox hunting.

TheChandler...that's not the same argument at all because Orkney and Averdeen's MSPs can vote and nobody is proposing they don't.

Coffee,

Supreme lawmaking power is not vested in the monarch but Parliament. You can look this up in any constitutional law textbook.

Well in a way they do...as they set the budget

Yes but within that budget, Scotland MPs decide on spending In Scotland. The comment I was responding to suggested that purely because tax is a common pot then SNP MPs should get a vote on English matters. That's not quite the same.

Yes, it will tell you it was vested in Parliament by the monarch. The Magna Carta was the first ever devolution of power to the royal council, which later became the House of Lords. It was a peace treaty against rebels, but in promising to limit the king's powers, which until then were absolute, it paved the way for all of the monarch's powers to be devolved to Parliament.
Before this, absolute power lay with the monarch, and it is only given to Parliament by Acts, in the same way that Westminster gives the same powers to Holyrood by Acts.

Nicola S needs to get on and do the job she is paid very handsomely for. At the moment her life seems to be one round of photo ops, visits abroad (she's just back from NY and I'm sure I read today that she very recently delivered a speech somewhere in Europe) and anti Tory press statements which are made purely because she thinks an anti Tory agenda will increase SNP popularity (she may be right about that).

However, while she is swanning around doing all of these things she is neglecting her role as first minister. EducAtion and health, which are both fully devolved matters are in a shocking state in Scotland.

The reality is that the SNP appeal most to people in the least wealthy parts of Scotland, and this was borne out by the referendum results last year. Sadly for the SNP and Scotland SNP voters are also most likely to be against any rise in income tax rates. Seems quite possible that tax rises in Scotland will be the death of the SNP as they start to lose their core voters.

Coffee, are you trying to say that Parliament doesn't have sovereignty? Sure the Queen puts her signature to Acts, but that is just a constitutional nicety. I'm pretty sure that Parliament could vote to get rid of the monarchy if it wanted to.

"Yes but within that budget, Scotland MPs decide on spending In Scotland. The comment I was responding to suggested that purely because tax is a common pot then SNP MPs should get a vote on English matters. That's not quite the same."

But that depends on whether project spending comes out of normal department budget...or if it's a separately funded budget.