The Scottish Politics Thread

[Tichtheid]

David Cameron regrets announcing “English votes for English laws” just hours after the Scottish independence referendum vote, according to friends of the former prime minister.

He broke his three-year post-resignation silence yesterday in an interview to launch his autobiography, in which he apologised for the division and uncertainty caused by Brexit.

Two chapters in his memoir, for which he was paid £800,000, cover the Scottish independence referendum in 2014 when, it is understood, he regretted announcing plans to limit Scottish MPs’ power at Westminster hours after the result was announced.

Cameron was widely criticised for declaring his English Votes For English Laws (EVEL) policy outside No.10 just after 7am as he welcomed Scots voting 55-45 vote to keep the Union.

A source said: “In hindsight, he did feel timing could have been better but it was important that other parts of UK were not forgotten.”

On the morning of September 19 2014, Cameron stood outside Downing Street and linked the promise by pro-Union parties of more devolved powers for Scotland to plans with limiting Scottish MP voting rights on English legislation.

This was a sop to John Redwood's wing of the party, the pro-Brexit mob. It certainly felt like that was more important to Cameron than the referendum vote, now that he had it in the bag.

[tc27]

Agree the timing of the announcement and I can understand why it was so offensive (it was awful 'optics' and typical of Cameron's slipshod and reckless approach to the constitution).

But to be fair it did not constitute a breach of any pledge made during the referendum.

[Biffer]

Agree the timing of the announcement and I can understand why it was so offensive (it was awful 'optics' and typical of Cameron's slipshod and reckless approach to the constitution).

But to be fair it did not constitute a breach of any pledge made during the referendum.

It was a demonstration of the England first priority. Which is a substantial part of the problem. And the fact that Cameron felt the need to do it at that point in time tells you a lot about where his concerns were - primarily with England, 9 hours after the biggest political vote on Scotland in history. It's absolutely demonstrative of where Scotland lies in the union - a secondary concern behind England.

[Tichtheid]

My recollection of "The Vow" that the party leaders signed and published on the front page of the Daily Record was that it was pretty vague, "more devolved powers" or something like that.

Anything that the Smith Commission brought about would have fulfilled that vow.

[tc27]

Agree the timing of the announcement and I can understand why it was so offensive (it was awful 'optics' and typical of Cameron's slipshod and reckless approach to the constitution).

But to be fair it did not constitute a breach of any pledge made during the referendum.

It was a demonstration of the England first priority. Which is a substantial part of the problem. And the fact that Cameron felt the need to do it at that point in time tells you a lot about where his concerns were - primarily with England, 9 hours after the biggest political vote on Scotland in history. It's absolutely demonstrative of where Scotland lies in the union - a secondary concern behind England.

Another perspective is that is was a (cack handed and poorly timed) attempt to answer the West Lothian question which if anything had placed those living in England at a democratic deficit vs Scotland/Wales/NI since devolution started.

Would also go over these points again - people living in Scotland are not worse off either in terms of representation, public spending or any other quantifiable metric than anyone else in the UK (in fact they get a layer of government people In England do not and they get more spending per head)

[Biffer]

Agree the timing of the announcement and I can understand why it was so offensive (it was awful 'optics' and typical of Cameron's slipshod and reckless approach to the constitution).

But to be fair it did not constitute a breach of any pledge made during the referendum.

It was a demonstration of the England first priority. Which is a substantial part of the problem. And the fact that Cameron felt the need to do it at that point in time tells you a lot about where his concerns were - primarily with England, 9 hours after the biggest political vote on Scotland in history. It's absolutely demonstrative of where Scotland lies in the union - a secondary concern behind England.

Another perspective is that is was a (cack handed and poorly timed) attempt to answer the West Lothian question which if anything had placed those living in England at a democratic deficit vs Scotland/Wales/NI since devolution started.

Would also go over these points again - people living in Scotland are not worse off either in terms of representation, public spending or any other quantifiable metric than anyone else in the UK (in fact they get a layer of government people In England do not and they get more spending per head)

This is the difference though. You see it as a cack handed, poorly timed one off mistake. I see it as an example of Scotland being permanently second in the thinking at Westminster.

[Tichtheid]

Has this public spending per head ever been broken down into minute detail?

It’s not something I recall seeing, but it occurs to me that if I stretch of road, say, costs £1 million, if it is in most parts of England it will be serving a lot more people than if it is in most parts of Scotland, Northern Ireland or Wales. So the spend per head will be much lower.

If the road is in Wester Ross or Sutherland it’s going to cost more to build it due to the location being further away from centres of population.

Now you could say that the heavily populated road will need more upkeep and so more will be spent on repairs than in a rural location, but I wonder how that all breaks down.

[Biffer]

Has this public spending per head ever been broken down into minute detail?

It’s not something I recall seeing, but it occurs to me that if I stretch of road, say, costs £1 million, if it is in most parts of England it will be serving a lot more people then if it is in most parts of Scotland, Northern Ireland or Wales. So the spend per head will be much lower.

If the road is in Wester Ross or Sutherland it’s going to cost more to build it due to the location being further away from centres of population.

Now you could say that the heavily populated road will need more upkeep and so more will be spent on repairs than in a rural location, but I wonder how that all breaks down.

That's part of the fundamental reasoning behind Barnett

edit - apologies, this is wrong.

[Tichtheid]

Has this public spending per head ever been broken down into minute detail?

It’s not something I recall seeing, but it occurs to me that if I stretch of road, say, costs £1 million, if it is in most parts of England it will be serving a lot more people then if it is in most parts of Scotland, Northern Ireland or Wales. So the spend per head will be much lower.

If the road is in Wester Ross or Sutherland it’s going to cost more to build it due to the location being further away from centres of population.

Now you could say that the heavily populated road will need more upkeep and so more will be spent on repairs than in a rural location, but I wonder how that all breaks down.

That's part of the fundamental reasoning behind Barnett

I should probably read Barnett in detail.

(cough)

[Biffer]

Has this public spending per head ever been broken down into minute detail?

It’s not something I recall seeing, but it occurs to me that if I stretch of road, say, costs £1 million, if it is in most parts of England it will be serving a lot more people then if it is in most parts of Scotland, Northern Ireland or Wales. So the spend per head will be much lower.

If the road is in Wester Ross or Sutherland it’s going to cost more to build it due to the location being further away from centres of population.

Now you could say that the heavily populated road will need more upkeep and so more will be spent on repairs than in a rural location, but I wonder how that all breaks down.

That's part of the fundamental reasoning behind Barnett

I should probably read Barnett in detail.

(cough)

Actually, having checked, although I was always led to believe that, the calculation doesn't account for it in any way.

[Tichtheid]

That's part of the fundamental reasoning behind Barnett

I should probably read Barnett in detail.

(cough)

Actually, having checked, although I was always led to believe that, the calculation doesn't account for it in any way.

Aye, I've just read through it myself and it doesn't answer my question

[Tichtheid]

I found a couple of things, capital spending (roads, bridges etc) is higher per head in Scotland but there is no further detail on how or why.
Current spending (day to day stuff that has to be paid for every year like health, policing, education etc) is also higher, but again no details

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/re ... s/sn04033/

More geographical breakdown of spending, but again no digging in to it.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistic ... ember-2020

[tc27]

I think the fundamental reason public spending per head is higher in Scotland is a more dispersed population requires more services - example one GP can serve far more people in an urban area than a rural one just by dint of geography. And Scotland has relatively more rural areas

WRT to capital spending on roads ETC Barnett is pretty simple - any increased spending in a devolved area in England (for example HS2) means the devolved governments receive a per capita share uplift (so 9.2% in Scotlands case).

The point is Barnett is fair and in fact beneficial to Scotland - it results in an effective fiscal transfer of 9 billion a year (in a normal year - 2020/21 will be freakish).

[Tichtheid]

I think the fundamental reason public spending per head is higher in Scotland is a more dispersed population requires more services - example one GP can serve far more people in an urban area than a rural one just by dint of geography. And Scotland has relatively more rural areas

WRT to capital spending on roads ETC Barnett is pretty simple - any increased spending in a devolved area in England (for example HS2) means the devolved governments receive a per capita share uplift (so 9.2% in Scotlands case).

The point is Barnett is fair and in fact beneficial to Scotland - it results in an effective fiscal transfer of 9 billion a year (in a normal year - 2020/21 will be freakish).

Yes, but that wasn't the question I posed, it was whether or not the cost per capita of capital funding in Scotland is higher, and therefor requires a higher per capita level of funding, as per your first paragraph on current funding.

It's often presented as Scotland being some sort of charity case as opposed to the sheer weight of numbers and population density bringing the per capita cost down in the more populated parts of the UK

[tc27]

I think the fundamental reason public spending per head is higher in Scotland is a more dispersed population requires more services - example one GP can serve far more people in an urban area than a rural one just by dint of geography. And Scotland has relatively more rural areas

WRT to capital spending on roads ETC Barnett is pretty simple - any increased spending in a devolved area in England (for example HS2) means the devolved governments receive a per capita share uplift (so 9.2% in Scotlands case).

The point is Barnett is fair and in fact beneficial to Scotland - it results in an effective fiscal transfer of 9 billion a year (in a normal year - 2020/21 will be freakish).

Yes, but that wasn't the question I posed, it was whether or not the cost per capita of capital funding in Scotland is higher, and therefor requires a higher per capita level of funding, as per your first paragraph on current funding.

It's often presented as Scotland being some sort of charity case as opposed to the sheer weight of numbers and population density bringing the per capita cost down in the more populated parts of the UK

It is a basic principle of fairness in redistributing money to try and providing the same level of services for everyone irrespective of where the tax comes from.

[Tichtheid]

It is a basic principle of fairness in redistributing money to try and providing the same level of services for everyone irrespective of where the tax comes from.

I'm trying to explore the reasons behind this bolded part

Would also go over these points again - people living in Scotland are not worse off either in terms of representation, public spending or any other quantifiable metric than anyone else in the UK (in fact they get a layer of government people In England do not and they get more spending per head)

As I say, the reasons aren't often, if at all, drilled down into to explain why there is a greater spending per capita in Norn Irn and in Scotland

[Biffer]

Really interesting breakdown here in section 4.6 on where Scotland Wales and Ireland spend more money than the rest of the UK

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistic ... is-release

Things that are obvious and justifiable are things like the cost of policing and transport being higher in Scotland; bigger area with a much lower population. Education will hit a little bit of that but I'm not sure if university costs are in there or how they're handled in the calculation. It's also pretty obvious that community amenities in lower density population areas would likely cost more for an equivalent provision. The shocking thing for me is that there's substantially more spent on economic development in London than in deprived areas of the North and Midlands. The disparity in transport spend between London and the regions is unsurprising but I still think it's a scandal - a reflection on how most transport projects are about connecting and area to London rather than providing good transport across and between regions.

My general take on all this btw is that we should all be paying more tax - for three or four decades we've ben conditioning to expect lower taxes and higher public services as successive governments of both sides have bolstered spending by using privatisation costs, oil money, PFI, windfall taxes and borrowing as revenue spend to cover the holes in the tax revenue / public spending. I've no problem with borrowing, and I don't think balancing the budget is a necessity, but we don't pay enough tax in the UK.

[Big D]

Well lads and lasses, I like to think we are a friendly bunch. May you vote for whoever you want and for your own reasons. It doesn't make you less/anti Scottish* or anti British*. I wish I could say I'm looking forward to a time where views on nationality, nationalism, the flags of Scotland and the UK aren't a political tool etc but I'm not optimistic.

*unless of course you do hold those view then fair enough.

[tc27]

Nave you Scottish NPRers voted yet? Weather any good? Any impression of the turn out?

[S/Lt_Phillips]

Nave you Scottish NPRers voted yet? Weather any good? Any impression of the turn out?

Done by post (as always), so couldn't tell you how turnout feels. Weather here is freezing and sleet/hail showers earlier, with sunshine now. I was wondering if that might discourage older voters, but no idea how that might affect the result (if it was a referendum, you'd imagine that would skew it towards the young who are more likely to be yes voters).

[dpedin]

Queue of about 20 folk waiting to vote in my place at about 1pm, covid19 restrictions aside it seemed a decent turnout?

[Biffer]

Nave you Scottish NPRers voted yet? Weather any good? Any impression of the turn out?

Done by post (as always), so couldn't tell you how turnout feels. Weather here is freezing and sleet/hail showers earlier, with sunshine now. I was wondering if that might discourage older voters, but no idea how that might affect the result (if it was a referendum, you'd imagine that would skew it towards the young who are more likely to be yes voters).

Absolutely chucking it down in Edinburgh now. I voted when it was nice and dry this morning.

[dpedin]

Nave you Scottish NPRers voted yet? Weather any good? Any impression of the turn out?

Done by post (as always), so couldn't tell you how turnout feels. Weather here is freezing and sleet/hail showers earlier, with sunshine now. I was wondering if that might discourage older voters, but no idea how that might affect the result (if it was a referendum, you'd imagine that would skew it towards the young who are more likely to be yes voters).

Absolutely chucking it down in Edinburgh now. I voted when it was nice and dry this morning.

It really is pissing it down now as you say - torrential. I can see a lot of folk turning away when they have to wait outside to vote. Lets see if it brightens up for the folk coming home form work, if anyone does these days?

[westport]

Nave you Scottish NPRers voted yet? Weather any good? Any impression of the turn out?

Back of 9 this morning. Bloody freezing. There were 3 before me and half a dozen after me.

[Blackmac]

Done by post (as always), so couldn't tell you how turnout feels. Weather here is freezing and sleet/hail showers earlier, with sunshine now. I was wondering if that might discourage older voters, but no idea how that might affect the result (if it was a referendum, you'd imagine that would skew it towards the young who are more likely to be yes voters).

Absolutely chucking it down in Edinburgh now. I voted when it was nice and dry this morning.

It really is pissing it down now as you say - torrential. I can see a lot of folk turning away when they have to wait outside to vote. Lets see if it brightens up for the folk coming home form work, if anyone does these days?

I voted by post, but our usual polling station has been changed to one at the extremities of the area. It is in a terrible location with no parking. Given the weather its not hard to see a pathetic turn out.

[dkm57]

Just back from exercising my franchise. Turnout has been non-stop all day in oor wee village, be interesting to see if that is reflected everywhere and or/if that has any effect on the results.

[tc27]

Just back from exercising my franchise. Turnout has been non-stop all day in oor wee village, be interesting to see if that is reflected everywhere and or/if that has any effect on the results.

Turnout another interesting dynamic in this election considering the arguments that are likely to follow.

[Biffer]

BBC reporting high turnout, contrary to the projections / opinions that did the rounds a bit last week. Even with the shitty weather.

[Slick]

Sadly I'm down in London and realised too late to organise a postal vote.

I'd only have cock and ballsed the ballot anyway to be honest

[tc27]

Im also hearing turnout is going to be high..not sure what this means yet

[Biffer]

Im also hearing turnout is going to be high..not sure what this means yet

Neither am I.

Did the Conservatives get their vote out by the 'stop another referendum' argument? Or did people for whom that was a priority stay at home because they were convinced that Boris Johnson won't allow one?

Did the SNP get their vote out to get over the line to a majority? Or did people for whom that was a priority think they were home and hosed?

Did Anas Sarwar stimulate traditional labour voters to come out in numbers? Or was he viewed as more of the same?

Did Willie Rennie.... um no can't think of anything relevant.

Did Patrick Harvie and Lorna Slater enthuse the youth vote? Or did they get pushed back by Alba?

[Slick]

Im also hearing turnout is going to be high..not sure what this means yet

Neither am I.

Did the Conservatives get their vote out by the 'stop another referendum' argument? Or did people for whom that was a priority stay at home because they were convinced that Boris Johnson won't allow one?

Did the SNP get their vote out to get over the line to a majority? Or did people for whom that was a priority think they were home and hosed?

Did Anas Sarwar stimulate traditional labour voters to come out in numbers? Or was he viewed as more of the same?

Did Willie Rennie.... um no can't think of anything relevant.

Did Patrick Harvie and Lorna Slater enthuse the youth vote? Or did they get pushed back by Alba?

My guess would be SNP types getting out to block Alba, I just didn't pick up on much interest from anywhere else in this election

EDIT: The Willie thing made me chuckle.

[Biffer]

Im also hearing turnout is going to be high..not sure what this means yet

Neither am I.

Did the Conservatives get their vote out by the 'stop another referendum' argument? Or did people for whom that was a priority stay at home because they were convinced that Boris Johnson won't allow one?

Did the SNP get their vote out to get over the line to a majority? Or did people for whom that was a priority think they were home and hosed?

Did Anas Sarwar stimulate traditional labour voters to come out in numbers? Or was he viewed as more of the same?

Did Willie Rennie.... um no can't think of anything relevant.

Did Patrick Harvie and Lorna Slater enthuse the youth vote? Or did they get pushed back by Alba?

My guess would be SNP types getting out to block Alba, I just didn't pick up on much interest from anywhere else in this election

EDIT: The Willie thing made me chuckle.

Willies make you chuckle. Noted for future use.

[tc27]

Turnout seems to be up 8-10%.

Probably good news for the SNP though it does appear significant tactical voting is also at play

[westport]

Sturgeon must have serious memory problems after all.

Imagine walking to the polling station and forgetting that you had voted by post.

It must be contagious as Willie whatshisface did the same

[Biffer]

Can't tell much from the first few results. Swing from LD to SNP in Orkney, SNP to Con in Aberdeen Donside, Con to Lab in Milngavie, still SNP over 50% in the Western Isles.

[tc27]

Yeah no clear sign yet of a uniform swing but high turnout probaly means SNP get most of the seats in the FPTP allocation

[tc27]

My SLabs friends Jonah curse continues - campaigned in Dundee West against Joe Fitzpatrick who resigned as a minister over drug deaths - he increased his majority

Say most people he met did not even know he was a minister.

[Tichtheid]

Can't tell much from the first few results. Swing from LD to SNP in Orkney, SNP to Con in Aberdeen Donside, Con to Lab in Milngavie, still SNP over 50% in the Western Isles.

I thought for a minute there that you meant that those were the results, rather than swings - that would have been quite something in all of those seats!

[dkm57]

Seems to me that there's a significant tactical (stop the SNP) vote for the constituencies, feck knows what's happening with the lists, those could be very interesting.