Full Fiscal Autonomy FFA

[rob murray]

Re my previous post I based it on this statement so we don't confused, I'd of thought you'd be throughly aware that the Scotland Bill and all its amendments are available to view online. Ah the joys of living in a 21st century fully westernised prosperous democratic country.

Sorry I knew they would be on line somewhere but couldnt find them until you sent me the url.

[BetterTogether]

Sorry I knew they would be on line somewhere but couldnt find them until you sent me the url.

No problems Rob you clearly stated earlier you hadn't read it and were unaware of what it entailed.

I find it difficult to comprehend someone who so vehemently attacks the Scotland Bill but hasn't had the good grace to actually read it and come to an informed decision.

Given some of the statements made about the Bill I can only conclude that the information provided was gleaned from other sources not the official one.

How can you speak with any kind of authority on a subject when you have failed at the first hurdle and not read the documents it's related to.

It's a bit like me reviewing a book I've never read and only been told about.

[squidge]

Guys, I can't answer any of this stuff till Wednesday. I'm in Edinburgh tonight and tomorrow for work and driving back and forth so I don't even have the luxury of a few free WIFI hours on the train.Meeting tomorrow and visiting a very poorly friend so I'm out of circulation for a while. I can't just rattle off replies as it's such a complex subject. And yes I've read it lol. Hadn't found the amendment when I spoke.

[BetterTogether]

Here's another link for you Rob or anyone else following the discussion.

Minutes from the discussions in Holyrood.



http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/pa...r=9891&i=90571

[squidge]

So much for FFA then. No surprise really.

Still this whole FFA debate pales into insignificance when you realise that Westminster just voted to have the ability to abolish the Scottish Parliament without asking the Scottish People.


Oh and your "that's not a veto" remarks earlier Better Together sound a bit hollow when Westminster just voted to allow itself to legislate on devolved matters without the permission of the Scottish Government and to repeal the Human Rights act in Scotland even if our parliament does not want it repealed.


What were the first words of the three illustrious leaders preposterous vow? " the Scottish Parliament is permanent"


Aye ............................Right!

Despite Labour saying they "strongly oppose" FFA, they sat on their fat hands and abstained. Can anyone tell me what on earth is the point of the Labour Party even turning up if they aren't going to vote.

[BetterTogether]

Call me cynical if you wish Squidge, but could you possibly give reference to the actual bill that was just voted on so I can read it myself, rather than rely on your interpretation of it. Then we may be able to have a reasoned debate on the issue.

Am I mistaken or did Alex Salmomd vote with the Tories on amendment 89 as well or have I misread something.

As for the abolishing the Human Rights Act if it's to be replaced with a British Bill of Rights that closes some of the abused and clarifies the poorly worded parts of that piece of legislation why is that such a bad thing ? ( also it's a Conservative Manifesto Pledge )

It's not as though it's being scrapped with nothing to replace it, but if it allows us to deport murderers, rapists and criminals who are abusing the current legislation is that such a bad thing.

All laws and legislation are written at the time and revised or scrapped and replaced when they no longer serve the purpose for which they where intended.

[squidge]

Were you not watching it on Parliament live? The transcript will be out tomorrow

[BetterTogether]

Were you not watching it on Parliament live? The transcript will be out tomorrow

Alas my better half doesn't allow me free reign to indulge my political interests fully.

Well when the transcript is released I hope you'll be kind enough to post it so we can debate the issue.

[BetterTogether]

Just read through yesterday's commons stuff, I'm sure you only do it to make me speed read and I've found what I think you may be referring to Alistair Carmicheals amendments.

But there is a caveat to the amendments so you have to read them carefully.

This amendment is to ensure that the Scottish Parliament can only be abolished with the consent of the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish people after a referendum.

We can now discuss

[Oddquine]

Just read through yesterday's commons stuff, I'm sure you only do it to make me speed read and I've found what I think you may be referring to Alistair Carmicheals amendments.

But there is a caveat to the amendments so you have to read them carefully.

This amendment is to ensure that the Scottish Parliament can only be abolished with the consent of the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish people after a referendum.

We can now discuss

You mean this one? Darn hard work trying to work your way through the Hansard verbiage, but did anything actually change in fact in Section 1 from the 1998 Act, given Carmichael withdrew his amendment.........I think?

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment proposed: 58, in clause 1, page 1, leave out lines 7 and 8 and insert—

“(1A) The Scottish Parliament is a permanent part of the United Kingdom’s constitution.

(1B) Subsection (1) or (1A) may be repealed only if—

(a) the Scottish Parliament has consented to the proposed repeal, and

(b) a referendum has been held in Scotland on the proposed repeal and a majority of those voting at the referendum have consented to it.”—(Angus Robertson.)

This amendment is to ensure that the Scottish Parliament can only be abolished with the consent of the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish people after a referendum.

Question put, That the amendment be made.

The Committee divided:

Ayes 271, Noes 302.


I was interested to see Carmichael becoming a federalist again, saying I was very disappointed by the Secretary of State’s response on the constitutional convention. Ultimately, if we are to continue with this Union, a federal structure is inevitable. That will have to be grasped sooner or later, and the way in which that will be done is through the calling of a constitutional convention.

[rob murray]

You mean this one? Darn hard work trying to work your way through the Hansard verbiage, but did anything actually change in fact in Section 1 from the 1998 Act, given Carmichael withdrew his amendment.........I think?

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment proposed: 58, in clause 1, page 1, leave out lines 7 and 8 and insert—

“(1A) The Scottish Parliament is a permanent part of the United Kingdom’s constitution.

(1B) Subsection (1) or (1A) may be repealed only if—

(a) the Scottish Parliament has consented to the proposed repeal, and

(b) a referendum has been held in Scotland on the proposed repeal and a majority of those voting at the referendum have consented to it.”—(Angus Robertson.)

This amendment is to ensure that the Scottish Parliament can only be abolished with the consent of the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish people after a referendum.

Question put, That the amendment be made.

The Committee divided:

Ayes 271, Noes 302.

Thanks very much, glad youve got the patience and ability to pin point / target what required clarification...does my head in looking through the government stuff

[squidge]

Alas my better half doesn't allow me free reign to indulge my political interests fully.

I know, the wild life I lead when I have a night in Edinburgh :/ insomnia and parliament live. There was a time it was late nights, loud music and lovers, cobbled streets and kisses but time moves on lol

[BetterTogether]

You mean this one? Darn hard work trying to work your way through the Hansard verbiage, but did anything actually change in fact in Section 1 from the 1998 Act, given Carmichael withdrew his amendment.........I think? Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.Amendment proposed: 58, in clause 1, page 1, leave out lines 7 and 8 and insert—“(1A) The Scottish Parliament is a permanent part of the United Kingdom’s constitution.(1B) Subsection (1) or (1A) may be repealed only if—(a) the Scottish Parliament has consented to the proposed repeal, and(b) a referendum has been held in Scotland on the proposed repeal and a majority of those voting at the referendum have consented to it.”—(Angus Robertson.)This amendment is to ensure that the Scottish Parliament can only be abolished with the consent of the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish people after a referendum.Question put, That the amendment be made.The Committee divided:Ayes 271, Noes 302.I was interested to see Carmichael becoming a federalist again, saying I was very disappointed by the Secretary of State’s response on the constitutional convention. Ultimately, if we are to continue with this Union, a federal structure is inevitable. That will have to be grasped sooner or later, and the way in which that will be done is through the calling of a constitutional convention.

It would appear nothing really changed much ado about nothing really !

But thanks for highlighting the part of relevance, it does make life easier when we can all read and digest what is actually in question.

[BetterTogether]

I've been sent this article by PM by someone interested in the topic but not wishing to partake in the debate.

As always I am most grateful for any useful articles and more than happy to express sensible opinions or ask questions for those who feel less comfortable doing so.


http://forargyll.com/2015/06/snp-now...y-full-fiscal/

[Oddquine]

It would appear nothing really changed much ado about nothing really !

But thanks for highlighting the part of relevance, it does make life easier when we can all read and digest what is actually in question.

Not much ado about nothing.......much ado about the VOW.

I highlighted the No vote figures and part of the Carmichael comment in the part of his speech just before it concluded. How is that a part of relevance and of relevance to what, exactly?

The bolded NO vote figures highlight only that Westminster (and predominantly, if not solely, the Tories in Westminster) have voted to continue to allow Westminster to keep the existence of the Scottish Parliament under its sole control, thus breaking the VOW which said it would make the Scottish Parliament a permanent institution. In an arena in which Scotland itself has only 59 votes out of 650, about an 11-1 vote disadvantage, the only way to do that, is to allow the Scottish Parliament/Scottish people to have the final say.

The bolded part of the Carmichael remarks, apart from noting the novelty of a Scottish LibDem suddenly finding his long forgotten federal UK principles, is more predicated on his inference that unless there is a federal solution, the Union is doomed. (unless you can interpret it differently). I concur with his statement. However, given the Calman Commission was set up in 2007, didn't produce its report until 2009, did not get through the Westminster wrecking ball until 2012, and won't be fully implemented until 2016...any constitutional convention would have to have produced definitive conclusions/actions in a much shorter time scale than nine years, if it is going to head off the currently equally inevitable indyref2, which won't take another nine years of Westminster Governments on much the same lines as this one, to be in some party manifesto for Scottish elections.

[Oddquine]

I've been sent this article by PM by someone interested in the topic but not wishing to partake in the debate.

As always I am most grateful for any useful articles and more than happy to express sensible opinions or ask questions for those who feel less comfortable doing so.


http://forargyll.com/2015/06/snp-now...y-full-fiscal/

If you are happy to read and discuss any useful articles, I am sure you will be more than willing to read Wings, written in simple language, which will undoubtedly offer you plenty to argue with, but also includes links to facts, and are not just off the top of the head opinion pieces.

A small selection for you....
http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-bes...orst-of-times/

http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-magic-number/

http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-broken-promise/

http://wingsoverscotland.com/a-straightforward-offer/

[rob murray]

If you are happy to read and discuss any useful articles, I am sure you will be more than willing to read Wings, written in simple language, which will undoubtedly offer you plenty to argue with, but also includes links to facts, and are not just off the top of the head opinion pieces.

A small selection for you....
http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-bes...orst-of-times/

http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-magic-number/

http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-broken-promise/

http://wingsoverscotland.com/a-straightforward-offer/

Thanks a quick squint and theres some good stuff here will spend time reading them !

[golach]

Thanks a quick squint and theres some good stuff here will spend time reading them !

all submitted by oddquine are written by a professional troll who is neither a Reverand or a resident Scot

[BetterTogether]

Not much ado about nothing.......much ado about the VOW. I highlighted the No vote figures and part of the Carmichael comment in the part of his speech just before it concluded. How is that a part of relevance and of relevance to what, exactly?The bolded NO vote figures highlight only that Westminster (and predominantly, if not solely, the Tories in Westminster) have voted to continue to allow Westminster to keep the existence of the Scottish Parliament under its sole control, thus breaking the VOW which said it would make the Scottish Parliament a permanent institution. In an arena in which Scotland itself has only 59 votes out of 650, about an 11-1 vote disadvantage, the only way to do that, is to allow the Scottish Parliament/Scottish people to have the final say. The bolded part of the Carmichael remarks, apart from noting the novelty of a Scottish LibDem suddenly finding his long forgotten federal UK principles, is more predicated on his inference that unless there is a federal solution, the Union is doomed. (unless you can interpret it differently). I concur with his statement. However, given the Calman Commission was set up in 2007, didn't produce its report until 2009, did not get through the Westminster wrecking ball until 2012, and won't be fully implemented until 2016...any constitutional convention would have to have produced definitive conclusions/actions in a much shorter time scale than nine years, if it is going to head off the currently equally inevitable indyref2, which won't take another nine years of Westminster Governments on much the same lines as this one, to be in some party manifesto for Scottish elections.

Given that what the fuss is about is someone somewhere stating the UK host could disband holyrood at will, we than have to look at the realities. The documents provided show there is a lot of wrangling going on over wording and phraseology but the reality is NO one except certain factions of the SNP are saying that the Scottish Govt might be dissolved, it's another case of taken the most extreme possible interpretation of a document and twisting it to suit purpose i.e creating a perceived grievance where there is non.

[BetterTogether]

If you are happy to read and discuss any useful articles, I am sure you will be more than willing to read Wings, written in simple language, which will undoubtedly offer you plenty to argue with, but also includes links to facts, and are not just off the top of the head opinion pieces. A small selection for you....http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-bes...orst-of-times/http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-magic-number/http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-broken-promise/http://wingsoverscotland.com/a-straightforward-offer/

I consider useful articles those provided, such as minutes of parliamentary meetings and committees. To provide links to wings over Scotland is really only useful to those with an interest in a purely nationalist warped perspective of issues.