View Full Version : Who DOES decide independence?
Rupert Murdoch & News International are reportedly no longer supporting the SNP in their independence bid.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/snp-leader-alex-salmond-faces-referendum-rethink-as-sun-sets-on-alliance-with-rupert-murdochs-news-international-8556199.html
So just who is pulling the strings in the background, Murdoch or Cameron?
Rupert Murdoch & News International are reportedly no longer supporting the SNP in their independence bid.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/snp-leader-alex-salmond-faces-referendum-rethink-as-sun-sets-on-alliance-with-rupert-murdochs-news-international-8556199.html
So just who is pulling the strings in the background, Murdoch or Cameron?
Did Murdoch ever really.....bar as a method of giving the "Up Yours" to the UK Government? If strings are being pulled....I'd say it was Cameron pulling Murdoch's...maybe he has promised to enable another look at Sky ownership if Murdoch rejoins the Union media and starts singing from the Government prepared hymn-sheet?
The Scottish Electorate decide Independence. All types of media can influence that and will try to do so but the only place the decision is made is at the Ballot Box.
The Scottish Electorate decide Independence. All types of media can influence that and will try to do so but the only place the decision is made is at the Ballot Box.Are you really that naive or just playing this for giggles. Do you really believe that a concerted effort by the likes of NI would not sway voters, one way or the other, for whichever 'team' / result? Do you not see the game playing in the background? Do you really believe all politicos speak nothing other than the truth?
Of course I dont. But you asked who DECIDES and WE decide. You didnt ask who influences, you didnt ask who commments you asked who decides. The main stream media is largely pro union, online there is much pro independence stuff. Twitter and facebook offer something for everyone but the DECISION, phil is made at the ballot box. The press all predicted a spectacular SNP failure at the last elections and they actually secured a majority.
People make the decision phil otherwise why do we have any elections at all? We could just let the editors of the (steadily declining in influence) papers choose for us.
People make the decision phil otherwise why do we have any elections at all?That's why we have a UK Gov't that the majority wanted implementing policies that the majority agree with. *
We could just let the editors of the (steadily declining in influence) papers choose for us.I think there is a change in the influence, driven by social media and the use of online services, but I don't think overall the influence is declining, in certain areas increasing.
Politicos of all persuasions utilise the media in overt and covert ways to push their message be it by soundbites, leaks or backroom deals. Lots of time and money has been invested in social media also, some big hitters pushing party political messages. The fall out from Levenson still sees sections of the media on a very overt attack on certain people.
I do not believe this referendum will be won or lost on sound, serious fact based debate backed up with legitimate data. It'll be decided by a twisted, underhand set of smoke and mirrors ran out with pure drivel and lies.
That's why we have a UK Gov't that the majority wanted implementing policies that the majority agree with. Thats also why we are having a referendum.
*I think there is a change in the influence, driven by social media and the use of online services, but I don't think overall the influence is declining, in certain areas increasing.Politicos of all persuasions utilise the media in overt and covert ways to push their message be it by soundbites, leaks or backroom deals. Lots of time and money has been invested in social media also, some big hitters pushing party political messages. The fall out from Levenson still sees sections of the media on a very overt attack on certain people.I do not believe this referendum will be won or lost on sound, serious fact based debate backed up with legitimate data. It'll be decided by a twisted, underhand set of smoke and mirrors ran out with pure drivel and lies.Only if we let it be so. We have to do our best to decide what for each of us is the truth. An example of that was the service vote issue recently. The media published a lie... That service men and women were being denied a vote by the Scottish Government. That wasnt true, it wasnt hard to find the truth, ten minutes or so but many many people will have seen it and read it. We... The voters ... Need to be savvy, we need to LOOK for the answers... Now those answers might not be the same for you and me. John Little talked about how we see the answers we want to see but it is important that we look and decide for ourselves what we believe is right. Neither way... yes or no ... is a road to certainty. The future cannot be predicted. There are people who will continue to believe that Alex Salmond is denying service personnel the vote, even when the facts are pointed out to them and that is ok. If that is what they want then so be it. But if we just give up, throw our hands up in the air and say... "The newspapers will decide" then we are failing ourselves and each other.
Thats also why we are having a referendum. Only if we let it be so. We have to do our best to decide what for each of us is the truth. An example of that was the service vote issue recently. The media published a lie... That service men and women were being denied a vote by the Scottish Government. That wasnt true, it wasnt hard to find the truth, ten minutes or so but many many people will have seen it and read it. We... The voters ... Need to be savvy, we need to LOOK for the answers... Now those answers might not be the same for you and me. John Little talked about how we see the answers we want to see but it is important that we look and decide for ourselves what we believe is right. Neither way... yes or no ... is a road to certainty. The future cannot be predicted. There are people who will continue to believe that Alex Salmond is denying service personnel the vote, even when the facts are pointed out to them and that is ok. If that is what they want then so be it. But if we just give up, throw our hands up in the air and say... "The newspapers will decide" then we are failing ourselves and each other.
If all is fair and above board with who is voting in the referendum, why bring school kids into the equation for one time only? I personally think this is a ploy by the Snp, but I was glad to see the Glasgow Students kicked the yes vote out of the park.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/scottish-independence-blog/2013/feb/22/scottish-independence-mock-referendum
And again in my opinion the statement about the Scottish servicemen be they Navy, Army or Airforce not getting a vote is true,not all soldiers serving in the forces are on the Scottish Electoral roll, many serve and dwell out with Scotland, are married to English lassies and live in garrison towns in England, why be on a Electoral roll if you live elsewhere? But if your a bairn at school special dispensation is being made for them and not the Servicemen. If I had any school kids in my home
I would not be adding them to my electoral roll.
If all is fair and above board with who is voting in the referendum, why bring school kids into the equation for one time only? I personally think this is a ploy by the Snp, but I was glad to see the Glasgow Students kicked the yes vote out of the park.http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/scottish-independence-blog/2013/feb/22/scottish-independence-mock-referendumIts been policy for the SNP to allow 16/17 year olds to vote for many years... Probably even when you supported them Golach and they have introduced it where they have had the power to do so since forming a government. :) If you think its a ploy then that is up to you. When it was suggested that this decision was a ploy I went to look it up and see how long it had been their policy. Thats what I found. That was enough to suggest to me that it was not a deliberate ploy thought up in order to swing the referendum in 2014. I was delighted to see Glasgow uni run a mock referendum even though it produced a victory for the No campaign. The more we engage young people in the process and encourage a discussion the better.
Servicemen and women can choose to register wherever they want. It is THEIR choice. They dont need special dispensation because they already have the right to vote in the Scottish Elections if they want and many do. You ask why live somewhere and vote somewhere else... Well, thats the point of the service vote. If Scotland is home and they want to vote here then they can, if it isnt and they dont then they wont. I dont really understand what more you want for service personnel. How are they BEING DENIED a vote? I truly do not understand what special dispensation you want them to have. Please explain it to me because as I can see, they can vote if they want.
Also many 16/17 year olds wont be schoolkids, they may be working or even in the armed forces.
That's why we have a UK Gov't that the majority wanted implementing policies that the majority agree with. *
If I remember correctly the last election gave us hung parliament in which no party had an overall majority; I don't recollect a single soul in the UK voting for a Conservative/LibDem coalition.
If I remember correctly the last election gave us hung parliament in which no party had an overall majority; I don't recollect a single soul in the UK voting for a Conservative/LibDem coalition.Thank you!
(sorry, couldn't find the tongue in cheek smiley)
:D
Its been policy for the SNP to allow 16/17 year olds to vote for many years... Probably even when you supported them Golach .
When I became a member of the SNP voting age was 21 Squidge, never any mention of getting bairns to vote then [lol]
Well 16/17 year old voting plans were introduced by Nicola Sturgeon between 1986 and 1992. I am not sure of the exact year but I think Nicola Sturgeon secured the commitment when she was Youth Affairs Vice convener and was voted on and agreed at conference. Were you not there?Can I ask again please what other special provision you want made for service personnel Golach?
As an ex-Serviceman I was allowed to either use a Proxy to vote for me or vote by post. I doubt very much has changed and these arrangements would be easily used for the referendum. However what does concern me is the likelihood of servicemen and women from out with Scotland voting in the referendum while they are serving a two or three year posting here before moving back to wherever they come from. A lot of Sailors, soldiers and airmen/women living in Scotland do so on only a temporary basis and have no stake in the country’s future.
equusdriving
03-Apr-13, 00:05
Who gets to vote? Essentially, everyone over the age of 16 who lives in Scotland.
The voter "franchise", as it's known, is largely the same as for a Scottish Parliament and council elections, with the addition of lowering the voting age from 18. why do you think that is then squidge? desperately clutching at straws maybe?
Ok Equus you must be right. Given that the SNP committed themselves to lowering the voting age to 16 at least as long ago as 1992 then they are obviously trying to sway the vote, clutching at straws.
They must have got hold of a crystal ball in 1992 which told them to prepare because in 1999 the First session of a new Scottish Parliament would be held. This crystal ball clearly told them that against all other predictions they would win an election and form a majority government in 2011. It obviously told them there would be a referendum in 2014 and so they all sat down to agree to lower the voting age in 1992. Clearly a dastardly and cynical ploy to sway the referendum results.
Or could it be that since winning the election they have lowered the voting age wherever and whenever they have the power to do so... In crofters commission and Nhs board elections and after the Edinburgh agreement, which transferred power to holyrood to run it, in the referendum as they have said they would do since at least 1992.
But no, I'm sure YOUR version is the correct one . Sigh
equusdriving
03-Apr-13, 09:43
Ok Equus you must be right.
I'm sure YOUR version is the correct one . Sigh
Phew finally the penny drops!
Phew finally the penny drops!Lol! :) :)
John Little
04-Apr-13, 09:23
Rupert Murdoch & News International are reportedly no longer supporting the SNP in their independence bid.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/snp-leader-alex-salmond-faces-referendum-rethink-as-sun-sets-on-alliance-with-rupert-murdochs-news-international-8556199.html
So just who is pulling the strings in the background, Murdoch or Cameron?
Neither.
In answer to your question I would say Money will decide for a lot of people.
The SNP is fond of pointing out that Scotland contributes 9.9% of UK tax revenue but only gets back 9.3% of UK spending.
Which is true,
But UK income does not only come from tax. UK PLC earns an awful lot more from invisibles.
So getting back 9.3% of spending is rather more than 9.3% of tax.
The UK generates more than its separate parts.
What are "invisibles" then John?
John Little
04-Apr-13, 10:10
http://archive.treasury.gov.uk/pub/html/top/top7/main.html
Thanks John but have you anything more up to date? This report is nearly 20 years old.
equusdriving
04-Apr-13, 11:38
Thanks John but have you anything more up to date? This report is nearly 20 years old.
perhaps he is waiting for 2016 like you:lol:
Neither. In answer to your question I would say Money will decide for a lot of people.Hmmm, maybe. But is that who controls the money or uses money to control?
macadamia
04-Apr-13, 16:23
Money will make more than a tad of difference to the vote in the end. Just say these three names, one after the other, and choose which one is right for you -
a) European Central Bank
b) Bank of England
c) RBS
Remember if you vote for a) or b) you ain't going to get independence.
John Little
04-Apr-13, 17:09
I have guests and no time.
However I point out that I was asked what invisibles are.
That is all.
Not for current figures.
I have no time at the moment to look up current invisible earnings. The information is to be found if you google UK invisible earnings and fill in the year of your choice.
John Little
04-Apr-13, 17:51
I have had no time to study this properly but it appears to give some pause for thought.
http://www.globalbritain.org/BNN/BN63ProperDefinitionofTrade.pdf
So the way I am reading this, for the year 2009 which is the first example I can find, total UK earnings for that year were £228 bn in goods. A lot of that no doubt would come from Scotland.
From income (investments abroad) £174 bn. Some not doubt from Scotland, but most funnelled through the City.
From services £159 bn. Some through Edinburgh, most through the City.
From Transfers by people abroad, £17 bn.
Total earnings which are non goods £350bn which is then taxed. So 'invisibles' generates quite a lot of cash.
The City of London is one of the three premier markets of the world. It generates a lot of cash and a lot of it ends up in UK spending.
So I repeat that 9.2 per cent of UK spending is probably quite a bit more than UK personal tax receipts.
How much the UK gets in tax income might be worth finding out....
John Little
04-Apr-13, 21:09
The gross domestic product of the UK in 2011 was £2810.971 billion.So £350 billion in invisibles has to be seen as a significant figure.To put this into perspective total Scottish revenue from non oil sources was £46.3 billion.
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2013/03/GERS6313
It might appear that cutting ones self off from such a lucrative revenue source was rather self defeating.
Revenue from North Sea oil last year seems to have been c £6.4 bn.
Is it 'invisibles' Mr Salmond is planning on running his version of an independent Scotland on? Or am I confusing the invisibles??
What does seem to be invisible is the magical figures, fact based, on the oil revenue and how this is broken down.
John Little
06-Apr-13, 18:32
Scotland is doing pretty well growth wise it must be said; according to this they are growing while the rest of the UK is not. Then of course there is the scale of things to bear in mind.
https://www.uktradeinfo.com/Statistics/RTS/Pages/default.aspx
Okay.
I am truly puzzled.
Total UK oil income last year was £11.1 bn.
Scotland's non oil revenue was £46.3bn.
Total 57.4 bn.
Scotland's expenditure was £64.5bn.
That's quite a gap. Even if Scotland had all the oil revenue.
Now although I fully realise that Scotland could 'make it' If independent, I would be most glad if someone could explain to me how it could be done without considerable cuts and rises in tax.
I must - just must be missing something, though for the life of me I cannot see what.
Reason is Life's sole arbiter, the magic Laby'rinth's single clue:
Worlds lie above, beyond its ken; what crosses it can ne'er be true.
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.