|
Which Thread Title shall we name this new thread? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Independence Day 2: Resturgeonce |
|
44 | 21.36% |
| ScotPol - Unclustering this gently caress |
|
19 | 9.22% |
| Trainspotting 2: Independence is my heroin |
|
9 | 4.37% |
| Indyref II: Boris hosed a Dead Country |
|
14 | 6.80% |
| ScotPol: Wings over Bullshit |
|
8 | 3.88% |
| Independence 2: Cameron Lied, UK Died |
|
24 | 11.65% |
| Scotpol IV: I Vow To Flee My Country |
|
14 | 6.80% |
| ScotPol - A twice in a generation thread |
|
17 | 8.25% |
| ScotPol - Where Everything's hosed Up and the Referendums Don't Matter |
|
15 | 7.28% |
| ScotPol Thread: Dependence Referendum Incoming |
|
2 | 0.97% |
| Indyref II: The Scottish Insturgeoncy |
|
10 | 4.85% |
| ScotPol Thread: Act of European Union |
|
5 | 2.43% |
| ScotPol - Like Game of Thrones only we wish we would all die |
|
25 | 12.14% |
| Total: | 206 votes | ||
|
baronvonsabre posted:I presume that's from the European and External Relations Committee this morning. Didn't watch it myself, but the report will be available from 6pm today apparently. The panel of experts discussion doesn't appear to be up on the Scottish Parliament YouTube account yet, only the first part with Fiona Hyslop You can watch meetings live or immediately afterwards on Parliament TV, they take a little while to get uploaded to Youtube after that.
|
#
¿
Jun 30, 2016 18:26
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 16:36 |
|
|
In other news: http://www.parliament.scot/GettingInvolved/Petitions/adultconsensualincest Incest Petitioner posted:If Abraham the Patriarch of Judaism who the Bible says married his step-sister Sarah, came to live in Scotland today, would everyone agree that he and his wife should go to prison? In Israel he would not go to prison because ACI is not illegal there now.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 2, 2016 09:03
|
|
|
Jedit posted:They really are the newspaper for sad, bitter racist fucks, aren't they? "Och, I'd never have lost ma job on the telly if only Scotland had voted tae be free, but the English want tae oppress us!" Elaine C Smith was on the board of both YES Scotland and the Common Weal for two years, and as soon as she stepped down from that the Beeb gave her a new sitcom. If this loving idiot lost his job for his Indyref tweets it was for bringing his employer into disrepute, which is not a political matter. Calm down, friend.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 4, 2016 08:53
|
|
|
Jedit posted:It should come as no surprise to anyone that the "report" mentioned on the cover of the National comes from everyone's favourite unhinged SNP front, the Common Weal, and that it isn't actually a report at all. It was written by their own "voluntary researcher", Dr Craig Dalzell, an unemployed laser engineer who has no background whatsoever in economics, politics or law. Next thing the Tories will be employing a pet food salesman to write their economic policy papers.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2016 19:58
|
|
|
Niric posted:This would be a lot funnier if it weren't This is true to an extent, but pretending that the union isn't a dysfunctional, anachronistic mess and that there aren't legitimate grievances isn't going to defeat Scottish nationalism. At the end of the day, the SNP will always support independence. If you believe everything they say and do is part of a great masterplan to deliver it then you cannot credibly call on them to "get on with the day job", because you already believe they are intrinsically incapable of doing so (the electorate disagrees, of course). It's doubly disingenuous when the context of the "day job" has been completely changed by a reckless and incompetent UK Government. The decision to hold a referendum has done a huge amount of damage to our economy and the Scottish Conservatives are desperate for anything to distract from this embarrassing reality. Indyref2 is a useful scapegoat. Talking about independence is also a good way to drive a wedge between the SNP and more conservative voters who might support them. This was borne out by their decline in vote share across these constituencies recently. It's also worth noting that the last thing unionists want is for the constitutional debate to become softer, nicer and more honest, particularly now we are heading for Brexit. Either debate is shut down completely by the 2014 result, or we have loud and divisive arguments (usually based on how loud and divisive everything is) to drive people away and maintain the consensus of 2014. It's a fighting retreat, consistent with previous tactics. Meanwhile, the Lib Dems and Labour want to pretend that we live in an alternate reality where Scotland can maintain access to both unions, this is also unhelpful. If anything, the Lib Dems have been the most dishonest about the strength of their own Europeanism. British nationalism always comes first.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2016 09:17
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:I've just found out that one of the Highland Tory MSPs is their Land Reform spokesman. And obviously he is a landlord (& 4th Baronet). For all that Ruth Davidson does well, you have to say that making a member of the landed gentry your land reform spokesman is a mite tone deaf. You must have missed this little exchange.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2016 12:27
|
|
|
Interesting that the Scottish Conservatives, who recently argued that a former MSP had no legitimate interest in the area he represented because he was a foreigner, are now paragons of equality and civil discourse.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2016 15:18
|
|
|
Apparently Douglas Ross, of Ruth Davidson's Strong Opposition Party, missed the vote entirely since he was refereeing in Switzerland.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2016 15:36
|
|
|
Niric posted:As amusing as the indycamp is, I don't think it's related, and that it's decidedly missing the point to claim so. My concern with the audience reaction wasn't that a small group of idiots did something extreme to make a dumb point, it's that the general feeling in the room conveyed something about what's socially acceptable amongst, at the very least, people who go see (left wing) shows about scotland at the citz. Trump appeared and was spontaneously booed, panto villain style. The SNP appeared and the audience, as a social mass, seemed to side with them - even though the character is presented within the context of the play as being part of the problem I also saw it, not sure I got the same vibes but there were fewer laughs than for the Better Together joke. Its obviously an effect of the lingering polarisation from indyref. People are, and were, continually dumstruck at how aggressively some sections of the media, political and business establishment pushed back during the campaign. It's become impossible to decontextualise political debate in Scotland, even overtly materialist and historical stuff like Cheviot, from the national question. There is nobody on the unionist side offering a mea culpa for the events of the campaign (a bit of humility on the EU stuff would be welcome, I mean, loving hell), or more importantly a sensible constitutional position. Even now we have columnists painting Scotland as a one party state and the SNP as some kind of proto-fascist movement. These people are incapable of offering a thoughtful or effective critique. It's no wonder SNP supporters are defensive when they are constantly surrounded by this kind of aggressive stupidity. The frustrating thing is that the most loyal members of the SNP are often just the same brand of shitheaded liberals as other party activists, once you scratch the surface. For example loads of people in the party are cheerleading Hillary Clinton right now, all the while praising Angus Robertson for questioning the UK's complicity in the bombing of Yemen or protesting Trident.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2016 17:50
|
|
|
Coohoolin posted:Unfortunately this won't do anything about the Act, since you don't repeal an act in Holyrood by voting against it in a motion, you need to pass a new act that supersedes the old one. Worth noting that this has been in the works for a while. Recent vote demonstrates that repeal has a parliamentary majority. SNP will need to compromise at some stage. http://www.parliament.scot/parliamentarybusiness/Bills/99956.aspx
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2016 15:49
|
|
|
Looks like Andy Wightman's amendment on local taxation just passed, another justified defeat for the Scottish Government.Niric posted:The peat worrier legal blog has an excellent and digestible piece on the problems with the Act and simple measures which can be done to improve it. As I understand it, these amendments wouldn't require a repeal or superseding act. Good piece. I doubt James Kelly's repeal act will actually pass, but something like that can exist as an ultimate threat to force the Government into action. The amount of power given over to ministerial discretion and SSIs is also another topic that has been concerning various Holyrood committees for a while.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2016 18:38
|
|
|
Niric posted:I mean, sure, it makes the SNP look a bit silly for a length of time equivalent to a short paragraph in articles about minor and rather unexciting tweaks to taxation ona chilly Thursday evening, and then be forgotten, but besides that? It's been a long day, so I'm hopeful I've overlooked something It's not a huge deal and the amendment was deliberately vague to attract support from the Conservatives, but any Government defeat is unusual. That passage leaves out what was probably the most significant section, calling for for "further discussions by all parties to seek to establish an enduring system of local government finance." This was included (though even more vaguely) in Derek Mackay's amendment (to the Green amendment) but that wouldn't have existed without the Greens making the first move. They are available to read here.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2016 12:24
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Absolutely - which is why we should pay attention to public opinion now and see how it changes, not wave it away as unimportant because we hope we'll prefer what it tells us at some point in the future. An important point, Pissflaps. We should carefully note contemporary polling so that when opinion eventually shifts in favour of independence, after the forthcoming recession and subsequent discontent at Whitehall's incompetence, we will be able to properly assess the impact of Brexit on the national question.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2017 21:30
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:It's a sad fact that many nationalists will be praying for economic misery for millions just to further their separatist aims. Truly sad, Pissflaps. I'm sure supporters of the union are happily welcoming the nascent recovery in the oil industry, having spent so much time developing constructive solutions to the sector's problems and contributing towards detailed plans for the diversification of the North East's economy, rather than making petty and irrelevant constitutional arguments based on 2014 alternate history scenarios.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2017 21:54
|
|
|
The two SNP abstentions were due to family issues and ill health, not political factors.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2017 16:03
|
|
|
Jedit posted:Anyone got a list of all the demanded cuts? Aberdeenshire Council has been told to find another £24m. They're having to consider a 2.5% rise in council tax because there's nothing left to cut. Breakdown of funding allocations, by local authority, is here: http://www.parliament.scot/S5_Local_Gov/Inquiries/20170203_SPICeLGCBriefStage1.pdf Also demonstrates why both sides can legitimately argue whether there have been cuts at all, since ringfenced funding means support to local authority services is increasing.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2017 17:00
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:I read it's been ten months since legislation was put before Holyrood - is that true? The Conservatives have the temerity to complain that too much parliamentary time is being spent on Brexit, then decide they want a new "stolen valour" Bill. Utter waste of time, importing the worst aspects of militaristic American neoconservatism.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2017 08:20
|
|
|
My understanding is that the Yes/No framing, and the broad franchise, was part of a compromise to abate any discussion of a devo-max option. Also the UK Government was extremely confident they would win with a decisive landslide regardless of the framing, rather than giving the SNP 100,000 members, a third term in Holyrood and almost every Scottish seat at Westminster. I've got no idea why the Yes/No framing would be rejected now, or why any other aspect of the referendum question/franchise would need to be revisited. Allowing EU citizens to vote will be particularly hilarious. Setting this precedent with the first referendum was pretty clever, in retrospect. Blame Salmond's memories of 1979. I agree that holding a referendum too soon would be a mistake. Wait for oil prices to recover, the Brexit disaster to unfold and the UK to devolve further into Daily Mail-style fascism. Also, the demographics are overwhelmingly on the side of independence (and this goes for middle-aged people in the working population). Give it a few years.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2017 08:26
|
|
|
The rate "hike" is part of an independent revaluation. I find it hard to believe that, had a transitional scheme originally been agreed by the Scottish Govt (and, if you look at the original consultation, a majority of local authorities were opposed), that would have been quietly accepted by the opposition without criticism. In the context of highly restricted public spending, you're telling me Labour/Lib Dems wouldn't have found some unsavoury company to have benefited from a transitional relief scheme, and complained that millions was being spent to subsidise them? We currently have MSPs arguing that the SNP specifically directed the revaluation to help their own HQ and Sports Direct! I think a limited national relief scheme is necessary due to reduced turnover in some sectors, especially in the North East. The alternative, which is presumably what Labour want, would be to increase income taxes to fund a much broader business rates relief package? This is the same proposed tax rise which has to cover a huge number of growing holes in public spending elsewhere (including: enterprise agencies, energy efficiency, the NHS, education, local authorities, sports, forestry, and every other area which is under criticism). Either that, or you increase borrowing/divert funding from elsewhere, but these arguments haven't been put forward. So, just to be clear, the SNP should raise taxes / borrowing / cut public spending further to help business? And this is with schemes like rural rates relief and the overly generous small business bonus still in place? The alternative is that the funding for a broader package of national rates relief would be allowed to fall on local authority budgets, but the whole point of the SNP's approach is that these decisions should be left to local authorities themselves, rather than central govt dictating that they should forego a portion of their income. Instead of bickering about these technicalities, lets all just agree that businesses who cannot or will not pay should be expropriated and collectivised as worker-run co-ops. After all, if they are such innovative and decisive agents of the capitalist market then they could have planned better.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2017 15:33
|
|
|
Surprised at the scale of this gamble from Sturgeon. UK Government completely outmaneuvered. Looking forward to voting Yes again.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2017 19:19
|
|
|
http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/15152631.SNP_raise___100_000_in_less_than_eight_hours_for_next_independence_fight/ £100,000 in less than eight hours. Is there anyone in this thread with strong opinions on pro-independence crowdfunding who can weigh in on this?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2017 20:56
|
|
|
The question hasn't been settled, which Pissflaps would know had he actually "read up" on the process. http://www.scottishconstitutionalfu...ho-Decides.aspx
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2017 14:29
|
|
|
Another day, another Tory candidate mired in controversy. http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15224625.Tory_candidate_denies_BNP_link_despite_details_in_database/ It's a shame that, under the laws of the endless Scottish culture war, all people who happen to share his constitutional position are now also responsible for his views and actions.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2017 11:04
|
|
|
My MP is Tommy Sheppard so I doubt I'll be voting Labour in the GE unless they get a properly solid candidate in place and significantly change their tune on the anti-Corbyn, tactical unionist guff. He deserves support for his work on Palestine alone.Niric posted:Not that it's any surprise at this point, but it's indicative of just how much of their heartlands Labour have lost - and how much the whole debate there is now about nationalism, not class I think its a bit of rosy view to say Scottish Labour campaigned on class, rather than on a lite version of Scottish nationalism mixed with anti-Toryism. The alarming thing isn't that the discourse has shifted, but that things haven't actually changed that much in spite of all the upheavals. Both the rhetoric and substance of the SNP is more similar to early/mid-2000's Labour managerialism than anything else. The role of the civil service, third sector and civic Scotland more broadly is important here. The frustrating thing about all of this is that the various failings of this kind of politics (economic timidity, reliance on apolitical forms of public sector governance etc.) is often attributed to generic "SNP incompetence" rather than the structural failings of modern liberalism, which is the actual source in many cases. The constitutional debate is now too heated and polarised to properly address this. None of this is to detract from the genuine gently caress ups, of course (CAP, Mesh implants, Police Scotland etc.) To take a quick example, does anybody really believe that Dugdale/Rennie would be enacting significantly more radical proposals on housing than LBTT/rent pressure zones/the 50k target and the rest? Even their calls from opposition are limited, an extra bump in certain forms of taxation or quibbling about whether 5,000 homes are for social rent or not. There are some areas of genuine disappointment, like local tax reform, but its impossible to imagine how Baillie, who was given an award by Scottish Labour for winning her seat despite campaigning explicitly against party policy, would be more radical than Mackay/Swinney.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2017 18:05
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:...you're planning to vote against labour because you support Jeremy Corbyn? I'm voting SNP because Scottish Labour is terrible and don't deserve my vote. I might change my tune if they radically revise their position and put up a good candidate. Don't see why this is hard to grasp. Who are you voting for, Pissflaps? You don't seem to be a fan of the current Labour leadership. Presumably the Lib Dem resistance?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2017 18:25
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Seems odd that youre seemingly pro-Corbyn but on the other prepared to vote against his party? I'm sympathetic to Corbyn's project, plenty of people in the Scottish left are, and I could be convinced to vote for a strong Labour candidate on those grounds. I've also worked for the SNP, campaigned for a Yes vote, and remain a supporter of independence. Though I'd happily accept some form of federalist compromise. Somehow I don't think Scottish Labour's campaign will be aimed at people like me, they did hire the former political editor of the Daily Mail after all, but you never know. I'll stay optimistic.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2017 18:44
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:I'm surprised that somebody 'more labour than labour' would end up in a centre left nationalist party. I'm surprised someone who has thousands of posts criticising the Labour leadership is so squeamish about the alternatives.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2017 21:10
|
|
|
This is a new one, unionists are using anthrax threats now.Niric posted:Probably. By "just been published" I meant "i have just read this paper after seeing it mentioned today in the NHS Scotland health inequalities research email round up so it'll have been published in the last month or so." But that was rather long winded. Do you work for NHSHS? We do their parliamentary monitoring. MSPs constantly getting the organisation's name subtly wrong really annoys one of my colleagues.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2017 17:40
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Until the perpetrator is caught we don't know what their political stance is. Yeah it's probably a false flag. A British nationalist would never murder an MP.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2017 13:49
|
|
|
Skinty McEdger posted:Is there anywhere with a good write up on what has been happening in Glasgow council over the last few years. When I stayed there I could never imagine it flipping from Labour. There's usually lots of stuff on a thousand flowers on the various ghouls inhabiting Glasgow council.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2017 17:25
|
|
|
Lady Galaga posted:Does anyone in this thread still actually care about independence or is flaps just pissing into the abyss again I might actually vote Labour. Still undecided. Wish the Scottish branch weren't so poo poo. They are probably going to double down on the British nationalism today in response to this. Hopefully Kez and the gang will eventually be sidelined by the left.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2017 08:40
|
|
|
Baron Corbyn posted:Britain Elects's NowCast now has East Renfrewshire and Edinburgh North and Leith as likely to go to Labour. Good eggs or bad eggs running in those seats? Edinburgh North & Leith, Gordon Munro, Campaign for Socialism, good egg East Renfrewshire, Blair McDougall, former head of Better Together, bad egg
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2017 14:54
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:The problem all these people have, but especially Findlay, is that they are still loving fanatical in the "SNP BAD INDEPENDENCE BAD" mindset, & I'm sorry but Labour need to accept that plenty of left wing people are pro-independence & be more welcoming to them. They can stay unionist broadly but the way they do it is loving intolerable. Yeah this is a key issue. I think, especially for people like Findlay, its actually about being a long-term party loyalist and an expression of tribalism rather than a particular attraction to British nationalism, but its still toxic. They also need to sort a message on tuition fees and sever themselves from some of Labour's past mistakes. Fresh faces would be very helpful, but they are in short supply at Holyrood. I don't think Scottish Labour needs to be waving saltires, simply not talking about independence as if it was some sort of armageddon scenario would be a start. Apart from anything, it undermines the key argument that austerity is a political choice rather than a budgetary necessity. Indyref2 is absolutely dead, for the time being (I was definitely wrong to say calling it was a good move by Sturgeon, though she didn't have much choice from the perspective of a centrist europhile). Let the Tories and SNP fight out the constitutional battle, seize the future and rise above Scotland's parochial constitutional focus with a UK-wide, socialist message. Labour could sweep the central belt again, some of those SNP majorities are tiny.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2017 22:16
|
|
|
Aramoro posted:Because much like it says in that article, the SNP are the party of the left....wait the hunting lobby want something, why didn't you say so. This is the gist of it, yeah. More specifically: A previous devolved administration gave a commitment to reviewing the ban after it was implemented. There were a number of studies showing that docked/shortened tails resulted in less pain overall (but one of them was self-selecting, advertised in country sports magazines). There were also lots of reports of people going to England to get litters of puppies docked and bringing them back. This all convinced the Scottish Government to allow tail shortening as a preventative measure for specific breeds, with lots of emphasis on the professional judgement of individual vets working in rural areas.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2017 11:31
|
|
|
http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-findings/a-tale-of-two-referendums-the-2017-election-in-scotland/#.WYLZIYTytaT Interesting study on how the EU referendum drove seat changes. Demonstrates that there wasn't a uniform SNP > Tory shift, but a churn among the other parties. Labour needs to stop talking about the constitution.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2017 09:48
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:I think the Cybernat outrage is predictably tedious but it's a pretty poorly worded statement nonetheless. Yeah, it's true that we have an entirely separate legal system with major differences in terms of its underlying logic and history, but it's not true that this actually presents a barrier to economic integration and growth in the way that regulatory barriers or divergence in immigration policy would. All of the big, important stuff is dealt with at the UK or EU level (which is kind of the point of independence). Corbyn on Scotland always sounds either clumsy, or like he is repeating Scottish Labour line verbatim. Welsh Labour's tepid, centrist management of it's corner of the country is also unfortunate. The SNP are using it as a tool to attack him and it pretty much confirms that Dugdale et al would be governing us in the same way.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2017 16:07
|
|
|
Findlay or Rowley seem likely from the left, maybe Monica Lennon will have a punt if they want to play the gender angle, probably facing Sarwar from the right. Jackie "I love nukes" Baillie might also be in the running. Richard Leonard seems like a cool guy from what I've seen in Parliament, but he sounds English as gently caress and would face an uphill battle if it came to an election for First Minister. It's the Natalie Bennett problem. From what I'm hearing in the left, nobody actually forced her out,. but who knows really. More likely its the right trying to take the initiative behind a refreshed leader with a renewed mandate. Hope it backfires for them.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2017 07:16
|
|
|
Jedit posted:Using the regular Tory excuses for not taxing the rich is not a get-out for siding with them. They may as well just say "Yes, the SNP haven't in fact changed since 1934, we're still just Tories who hate the English." Weird, then, how they didn't actually side with them and instead allowed Labour's motion on increasing income tax to pass.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2017 17:15
|
|
|
Niric posted:Instead they bravely abstained on the non-binding motion in the hope everyone will have forgotten about this by the time the budget rolls around This doesn't make them "Tories who hate the English" though. It makes them centrists who've spent too long around business lobbyists and civil servants. They are in the same category as the previous Labour/Lib Dem administrations. Ignoring this and pretending they occupy some especially right-wing category is what Labour moderates have been trying to do for the past decade, since it gives them cover to posture as authentically left-wing in precisely the same way that the SNP did in opposition. The entire policy consensus in Holyrood, shaped by 'Civic Scotland', is broken. Fairytales about the evils of nationalism in government only serve the Labour right and Lib Dem irrelevants. The left needs to break this consensus, which means moving past referendum-era nostrums and constitutional bickering. Jedit posted:I think it would be fair to say the McSturmer better represents the views of SNP voters than (necessarily) those of the SNP itself. I remember people attacking CommonSpace as an SNP mouth piece. There is plenty of shite in the National, and some SNP supporters believe a lot of shite, but ascribing a majority view on the basis of the slant taken by a single article is silly. Give them a conference vote on land reform or fracking and the members will become (embarrassingly, for the leadership) radical.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2017 18:25
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 16:36 |
|
|
jre posted:The SNP position on tax is not exactly left of centre. They froze council tax when it needed to be raised to cope with increased demand on services and only relented when local councils were at the point of collapse. They are also have a history of using the "the rich will avoid it so why even bother" argument to try and get out of income tax rises as well. I didn't say the radicalism of conference members "makes up for them being to right of centre" in Government. I used it as an example of the differing views of SNP membership in the context of using a National article as some kind of authority on the issue. I didn't say the SNP position was "left of centre". I said it was "centrist" and informed by business lobbyists. Note that they did not pass on the Conservative tax cut for high earners, for example, this is about triangulation. I fully understand their betrayals on local and income tax, it informed my vote in the last two elections. I used to work for the SNP. I've talked to people in the party about why these concessions were made. It's not because they are secret Tories, it's because they've capitulated to a managerial and incremental politics. The left needs to find some unity on these issues, which is my concern and my main contention with the ongoing constitutional rhetoric around things like tax policy. The point isn't that the SNP are OK really, and we should stop complaining. The point is that if we want to move past the politics of managed decline that the SNP represent, then we need to stop pretending that Anas Sarwar or Willie Rennie are going to get us there.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2017 19:52
|
|