Labour Wins Glenrothes By-Election

[vulture]

A great result for Labour.And I hope as I vote Tory that now to combat Gordon Browns bounce back that the torys come up with some policys

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Polling Gordy

 

[Lord Bracknell]

I see the Tories' "unassailable" lead in the polls has now vanished.

On the basis of today's poll in the Independent, we can look forward to a hung parliament.

And Labour will win the Glenrothes by-election.

Told you.

 

[drew]

Nah they're too stupid to even think that. Seen how many vots the Scottish National Party got? What a piss take, independence my f***ing arse!

What everyone seems to have missed is, rather than the Scotts going independent is the threat that ZR may have a battle to stop his arse gaining its own independence. you could end up with an inbetween situation where his arse has a mind of its own but still have influence on the rest of his body. Alternatively, if his arse is going the whole hog to independence will he need to buy two seats at the Albion? Finally, if this is not an amicable split, could his arse blockade his waste disposal system causing carnage further up the pipeline!

 

[Marshy]

Im with Cameron on this one, let them look after themselves.
Thats what they want anyway.

 

[strings]

Can somebody please explain to a senile old man why they are independant and have their own parliament but still are represented at Westminster. If they want to be independant and govern themselves fine let them be but then do not have any MPs in London. This is not just the Scots but also the Welsh if they want to be independant.

Alex, Alex Dawson, oo, oo's answer is correct, so I am not disagreeing, but there is another reason that Scotland and Wales were offered devolution.

Basically, in order to get peace in Northern Ireland a power-sharing government was suggested (amongst many other things that we can now see in the Good Friday agreement). However, loyalists would not have supported this unless it was the normal thing in other parts of the UK. They wanted Northern Ireland to be treated like other parts of the UK, and not as a seperate case. By offering devolution in Scotland and Wales, the proposal of devolution in Northern Irelnad then became acceptable to Loyalists in Northern Ireland.

As I said, this was not the only reason for devolution in Scotland and Wales, but was a major consideration.

 

[London Calling]

I assume this election shows that a majority of SCots want to stay within the UK or they would have voted SNP?

 

[London Calling]

Alex, Alex Dawson, oo, oo's answer is correct, so I am not disagreeing, but there is another reason that Scotland and Wales were offered devolution.

Basically, in order to get peace in Northern Ireland a power-sharing government was suggested (amongst many other things that we can now see in the Good friday agreement). However, loyalists would not have supported this unless it was the normal thing in other parts of the UK. They wanted to be treated like other parts of the UK, and not as a seperate case. By offering devolution in Scotland and Wales, the idea of devolution in Northern Irelnad then became an acceptable proposal to Loyalists in Northern Ireland.

As I siad, this was not the only reason for devolution, but was a major consideration.

Read regionalisation, the European social model shows that regionalisation provides better Government, with the same applying in LOndon.

 

[sten_super]

Read regionalisation, the European social model shows that regionalisation provides better Government, with the same applying in LOndon.

Which European social model? Historically there has been far more regional government, I agree, and I'm guessing that's what you are taking about. However the current trend of giving increasing power to Brussels is a move in completely the opposite direction.

 

[London Calling]

Which European social model? Historically there has been far more regional government, I agree, and I'm guessing that's what you are taking about. However the current trend of giving increasing power to Brussels is a move in completely the opposite direction.

I always find this a strange one.

I personally haven't noticed any meaningful lost of powers.

 

[sten_super]

You don't think loss of monetary policy, trade policy or significant swathes of law are meaningful?

I'm not meaning to be sensational here; but I don't agree that there hasn't been a transfer of fairly significant powers to Brussels.

 

[London Calling]

You don't think loss of monetary policy, trade policy or significant swathes of law are meaningful?

I'm not meaning to be sensational here; but I don't agree that there hasn't been a transfer of fairly significant powers to Brussels.

I could see it as developing a more balanced management of economy, I prefer the social european model of managing economies, and law, what negative changes of law have been imposed on us?

Personally I prefer micr- management of our social and health services, I would break down the NHS to regional models and have the taxes for them levy at a local level to stay local.

I do note that the SE is not a region as recognised by the Germans lander etc. But managing Government locally is far better than this mess we have at the moment. Where 90% of a council Budget is determined nationally.

I like the devolution to Scotland, a similar model works in London.

 

[sten_super]

I could see it as developing a more balanced management of economy, I prefer the social european model of managing economies, and law, what negative changes of law have been imposed on us?

Personally I prefer micr- management of our social and health services, I would break down the NHS to regional models and have the taxes for them levy at a local level to stay local.

I do note that the SE is not a region as recognised by the Germans lander etc. But managing Government locally is far better than this mess we have at the moment. Where 90% of a council Budget is determined nationally.

I like the devolution to Scotland, a similar model works in London.

Again, I'm not talking about negative changes (necessarily). All I'm saying is that there has been a change, in recent times, to take power from nations and towards 'Europe' wide decisions (however you want to define it).

I agree entirely that micro-management is the way to go. Unfortunately it seems likely that the power and coverage of the RDAs and the RAs will be diminished rather than increased in the future (especially if the Tories get in).

Of course one of the primary reasons for the national setting of budgets is what was touched upon earlier; they are a redistribution of incomes. If we changed away from national control of budgets then areas that currently receive net subsidies from taxation such as Scotland (and, I'd imagine, Wales, the North East, etc.) would stand to be worse off.

 

[London Calling]

Again, I'm not talking about negative changes (necessarily). All I'm saying is that there has been a change, in recent times, to take power from nations and towards 'Europe' wide decisions (however you want to define it).

I agree entirely that micro-management is the way to go. Unfortunately it seems likely that the power and coverage of the RDAs and the RAs will be diminished rather than increased in the future (especially if the Tories get in).

Of course one of the primary reasons for the national setting of budgets is what was touched upon earlier; they are a redistribution of incomes. If we changed away from national control of budgets then areas that currently receive net subsidies from taxation such as Scotland (and, I'd imagine, Wales, the North East, etc.) would stand to be worse off.

Fair point, its getting the balance. But can easily be done, for example the Business Rate goes into a national pool and then redistributed locally.


Its interesting in LOndon at the mo.

The Government has forced a 15% cut in the LDA budget (London's RDA) but Boris is claiming all the credit because itsuits his and the Govt agenda.

Boris is cutting back TfL projects, even though the money has already been earmarked?

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Can somebody please explain to a senile old man why they are independant and have their own parliament but still are represented at Westminster. If they want to be independant and govern themselves fine let them be but then do not have any MPs in London. This is not just the Scots but also the Welsh if they want to be independant.

Yawn, is that the time?

Age old and very boring 'A' level discussion. You know the answer, as we all do. What subject next, drugs should be legalised?

 

[Clapham Old Mug]

Can't see why anyone thought the ScotNats would win this election.
Since their mighty triumph at Glasgow East, the price of all that oil they claim to own has halved and their two banks have gone bust.
Not much left to shout about, is there?

 

[fatbadger]

Oh my, the cliches and myths.

As an Englishman living in Scotland (for fifteen years), I'm going to have my tuppence-worth.

It's a myth that English taxpayers pay for Scotland. Utter tosh, in fact. Leaving aside the tax take up here (the average person living in Scotland pays more tax than the average person living in south-east England (excluding London), for a start), as someone else pointed out, government money is collected and then distributed around the country (ie the UK) - there are some things Scots pay equally for, but don't get a fair share of, just as there are some things Londoners, for instance, pay for but don't get a fair share of. That's just the way it goes. In an independent Scotland, Edinburgh and Aberdeen would shell out considerably more than they receive; the islands would receive considerably more than they pay out. It's what the state, and the government, does. If you don't like it, start campaigning for the abolition of state and government.

The myth, ironically, was created in order to try and counter pro-independence feeling, but has actually done the opposite. Of course, a Scot who wants inpendence doesn't give a monkeys about the financial issue - nationalism is about identity and emotion. Just as those who want to retain the union don't give a toss whether or not they will be better off or worse off in the UK, supporters of independence would be happy either way. What the myth has done is create support for Scottish independence in England.

Recent support for the SNP has been based on a (partly eroneous) belief that they are a social democratic party. Scots are, in the main, social democrats, and the SNP is clearly more social democratic than Labour, the Tories and the LibDems. However, Brown is starting to speak like (if not act like) a social democrat, and the bounce, in Scotland, is far from negligible. I doubt it will have the same effect in England, but we'll see.

There is of course, something else to be considered when looking at Glasgow East and Labour. In Glasgow East, the SNP was already very popular, and the unquestioned opposition to Labour; the Tories and the LibDems were nowhere. In Glenrothes, the LibDems and (to a lesser extent) the Tories had a fair bit of support. The mathematical swing looks like a small swing Labour to SNP; actually, it's a very large swing of LibDem and Tory voters, knowing that their parties had no chance, swinging to Labour. Leaving aside the very real reasons for calling the SNP the 'Tartan Tories' (a popular phrase up here), LibDem and Tory voters in the east of Scotland know which of Labour and SNP suits them most and is closest to their own beliefs (and not just on the union).

On support for the union/independence: many SNP voters don't support independence; many Labour, LibDem and yes, even Tories, do. Don't take support for the parties to reflect support for independence and union. Nevertheless, most Scots do not support full independence, although the very large majority of Scots do support devolution, and very many of them would like to see it extended, with more powers transferred to Holyrood.

Whenever I hear people in England complaining about something the Scots have that they don't (eg the student funding settlement, free bus travel, free care for the elderly and so on), my simple answer is this: it's what Scots want, it's what they have campaigned for, it's what they have voted for. If England, or the rest of the UK, wants the same things, then start campaigning for it and start voting for the parties who would offer it.

I could go on, but I suspect I'm already boring everyone.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I always remind people that who go down the road of Scotland-is-subsidised-by-the-English by telling them everywhere outside of London is subsidised. London raises something like 70% off all taxes. If you cut the so called subsidies for Scotland surely money from central government should also be cut for places like Brighton?

Besdies, they spend their money a lot wiser than we do and actually look after their people. I'd prefer if Scotish politics were imposed on the English. We'd all be better off.

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

Is that the time ?

 

[sten_super]

For anyone interested (probably no-one) there is an article on the Barnett formula (used to calculate how much government revenue each region should receive) on wikipedia.

Barnett formula - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia