Democratic mandates given to manifesto pledges are directly recognised by the chaotic British "constitution". Under the Salisbury Convention, a political party that has won a majority of seats in a general election is entitled to have its manifesto pledges passed by the House of Lords - and upon such "understandings" rests Britain's entire claim to be a democracy.
Last month, the SNP won an overwhelming majority of Scottish seats on an unambiguous pledge to introduce Full Fiscal Autonomy for Scotland after a transitional period. They subsequently introduced an amendment to the Scotland Bill to honour that pledge. The principle established by Salisbury is clear enough - if Scotland is truly a democracy, the Tory government should recognise the mandate for the SNP's manifesto, and allow the amendment to pass, regardless of whether or not they agree with it.
So is that what's happening? Oh, don't be silly - Scotland isn't a democracy. The Tories get to veto the people's verdict, and are doing so with characteristic abandon.
Now, don't get me wrong - the unionist parties are perfectly entitled to their view that Full Fiscal Autonomy would be a "disaster" and a "shambles". But the thing is, they put that argument to the Scottish people, and it was (to use the BBC's favourite word from September) "decisively" rejected. None of us are going to adopt Cameronite despotism by arguing that the result of the 2015 general election binds us all for "a lifetime", but it should certainly stand until another election produces a different result.
Imagine if the Scottish Government had reacted to the referendum result by saying : "Well, that's interesting, but we're just going to ignore it, and use our parliamentary majority to declare independence anyway. If we did anything else, it would be a disaster for the people of Scotland."
The Tories are doing to the exact equivalent of that. To hell with the respect agenda, this is the contempt agenda - and it's also why a second independence referendum is probably inevitable sooner or later. David Cameron should really have heeded the fair warning Nicola Sturgeon gave him when he came to Edinburgh. On his own head be it.
It's like the 1980's all over again. Tory policies rejected in Scotland, but Thatcher had the power in her hands so we had to like it or lump it. Well, we ended up lumping it, wiping out the tories completely in 1997 and voting for our own parliament. Their red cousins were all but wiped out last month. Let's wait and see what this current bunch of colonial masters do to their precious union. It's only a matter of time.
ReplyDeletePerfidious Albion. Britannia waives the rules.It's Cricket old boy.
ReplyDeleteOne good thing to come out of today. Like the second question in the referendum, it is unionists/Brit nats who have come out publicly and rejected significantly more powers for Scotland. They promised Devo max/federalism etc before the referendum, and have now rejected just that kind of a settlement. It is good for the Yes side because anyone with any sense will now know that Brit nats cannot be trusted to deliver. Of course we know and knew that, but it is how it plays with those who voted No which is the most important factor.
ReplyDeleteCameron is telling us all that his mighty 37%, of those who voted, gives him an outright mandate. Labour, and all the media, agree with this spin.
ReplyDeleteWhat then of the SNP 50% ? Why doesn't it count ?
But then I had heard the jokey friendly interview with Haw-Haw Starkey on the BBC this morning. Creeps like him get the red carpet treatment from the Beeb---imagine if an SNP person had vilified a Britnat in the same manner.
Why are English Tories even voting on the Scotland Bill? It kind of puts EVEL into perspective, doesn't it?
ReplyDelete"Under the Salisbury Convention, a political party that has won a majority of seats in a general election is entitled to have its manifesto pledges passed by the House of Lords - and upon such "understandings" rests Britain's entire claim to be a democracy. "
ReplyDeleteBut the SNP didn't win the majority of seats in the general election.
Let's not tediously pretend you don't understand the point, shall we? They won 56 out of 59 seats in Scotland, and have an overwhelming mandate in respect of Scotland. Full Fiscal Autonomy is about Scotland.
DeleteOf course I understand your point, but it wasn't a Scottish election. The voters didn't vote as Scotland, they voted in 59 separate constituency elections to send representatives to the UK parliament. It's all very good talking about mandates, but we also have to recognise the need to operate within the constraints a much lager state (A state of affairs that was endorsed by the electorate last year). Parties always put their special little wishes in manifestos, but reality dictates that such wishes can't be realised in all circumstances.
Delete@Stoat
DeleteThat is disingenuous in the extreme, Scotland votes as a nation in a UK general election. I thought you were better than that.
Stoat, if Scots MPs are the same as e.g. MPs from Essex, what's EVEL all about? What does the E stand for again?
DeleteWith EVEL giving devolution to England, surely the upper senate (Westminster with Scots MPs voting) should be one nation one vote?
EVEL hasn't gone through yet. So let's just quietly forget about it and hope it all goes away. Better that way.
DeleteWhich somewhat proves the point of Scotland being considered a mere region in the UK rather than an equal part of the Family of Nations, no?
ReplyDeletethis legend of the "family of nations" was designed to bamboozle the credulous.
ReplyDeleteHave a look at th havoc this dysfunctional "family of nations" has wreaked here. https://eurofree3.wordpress.com/2013/08/02/miss-gfa-northern-ireland-fails-driving-test/
Auntie Alba may well soon be triggering the next break-up!!
Can't you just see the headlines "joined her sister Eire Ireland in living independently after an acrimonious separation from her brother-in-law, retired Empire builder Mr UK Britain, who had insisted on grabbing and holding on to her natural inheritance"
have developed the thought a little further and added pics! Enjoy the breaking news ! best to all Ben
Deletehttps://eurofree3.wordpress.com/2015/06/15/this-dysfunctional-uk-family-of-nations/
I'm confused. Commentators from the Telegraph and Hootsmon had been chortling away for weeks that we could look forward to the spectacle of the SNP refusing an offer of FFA. Does this mean we can't look forward to that after all?
ReplyDeleteWestminster unionists seem to be doing a very good job of destroying their beloved "united" kingdom. Let's sit back and watch them succeed.
ReplyDeleteAye, it's quite fascinating to watch.
DeleteTo be honest though, when indy comes, we should really go and find some Tories from down south and give them a big thank you hug. They have done so much for the cause.
You can hug Ms Anna Soubry if you want to, Scottish_Skier, I'm not that brave enough. I wonder what Ann Widdecombe is up to these days.
Delete'Imagine if the Scottish Government had reacted to the referendum result by saying : "Well, that's interesting, but we're just going to ignore it, and use our parliamentary majority to declare independence anyway. If we did anything else, it would be a disaster for the people of Scotland."
ReplyDeleteThe Tories are doing to the exact equivalent of that.'
The difference being of course that UDI is by all intents illegal and Tory UK rule is not. We had the opportunity to deny Tory rule in perpetuity last year - Scotland rejected it.
Iref was ages ago; result doesn't really matter any more. Things have moved on.
DeleteIt's the here and now that matters.
As the old saying goes... 'A week is a long time in politics'.
UDI is accepted as legal by the UN, NATO, The EU, The UK, China, USA, Russia.
DeleteCome back and have another go when you've got more than 1 brain cell, quisling!
Must be a burden to carry all that bitterness - what a black heart. I pity you.
DeletePlease IGNORE the poster above claiming to be ScotBrit2014. He is an impostor, as you can doubtless tell from his pathetic Cybernat syntax. I am the real ScotBrit2014.
DeleteThere are a lot of freaks on this website :/
DeleteHe's doing it again. Utterly shameless. Please listen only to the REAL ScotBrit2014.
DeleteUK ICM Scotland subset, Westminster intention.
ReplyDelete48% SNP
22% Con
16% Lab
8% Green
5% Lib
1% UKUP
SNP + Green = 56%.
Lab behind Con again. Oh dear.
Labour in Scotland have been reduced to a clique around the political giants that are Ian Murray and Kezia Dugdale. Those two typify the SNP bad mantra that has partly got SLAB into the position that they now find themselves in. Their bitterness knows no bounds.
Deletehttp://www.predictableparadox.co.uk/2015/06/permanency-and-parliaments.html?showComment=1434443484271#c2109085285677538336
ReplyDeleteI suggest you go read this. It makes perfect sense. The commons rejected the amendment, not the permanency of the Scottish parliament. Once again nationalist spin to create a scandal without presenting all the facts.
I think my irony-meter has just exploded. The claim that the Scotland Bill as it stands establishes the permanence of the Scottish Parliament is almost the textbook definition of 'spin'. The current wording offers no legal protection whatever - as the SDLP's Mark Durkan put it, it's merely "commentary" on the facr of the Bill.
DeleteAnd neither does the amendment, by the way talking of spin did Swinney ever find the £7.6 billion he would need if he had got FFA? or was that also just lies to scare everyone.
ReplyDeletehttp://chokkablog.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/explaining-76bn-ffa-black-hole.html
Has Osborne ever found the umpteen billion he needs to abolish the UK deficit? Oh wait...
Delete"by the way talking of spin did Swinney ever find the £7.6 billion he would need if he had got FFA? or was that also just lies to scare everyone."
DeleteHi, Simon. I didn't realise it was you.
"And neither does the amendment"
You're not going to get away with that, I'm afraid. Due to the insanity of the UK's unwritten constitution, it's true that 100% watertight legal protection is not possible. But the SNP's amendment offers substantial legal protection, while the wording as it stands is simply a meaningless political statement (and a half-hearted one at that) with no legal force whatever.
I've pointed out over on Wings that we are being goaded. Goaded into recklessly calling another referendum before the polls are sufficiently in our favour. We cannot assume that like last time our vote at the start can only increase. We persuaded all the low hanging fruit last time. The shy unionists just ignored us and they will do so again. And besides, not enough of the elderly unionists no matter what have died yet. Watch the 16 and 17yo's and our European fellow residents here chafe when the Euro Referendum comes by being exclude and who they blame. That is an opportunity for us. Especially if the result is close and doesn't settle the argument. Which polity will they feel safer in as Europeans? iScotland or the UK? Ditto for pro-EU English people here.
ReplyDeleteWe need to hold out cool. Remember, revenge is best served cold. We should certainly record this, log it for use. Make it plain that it will be used for our benefit. By all means mention it to Noes of your acquaintance, drip, drip. We must be ice cold when we vote in the next referendum, secure all over Scotland like we were here in Dundee that we have delivered a Yes. The momentum is with us, let it build.
"And besides, not enough of the elderly unionists no matter what have died yet."
DeleteOh for heaven's sake, we're not going to win independence by waiting for people to die. Apart from anything else, life expectancy is increasing, and we should all be grateful for that.
The elderly of today, concerned about their pensions, will be replaced by the elderly of tomorrow, concerned about their pensions. Nobody owns the 45% of people who voted Yes - they can change their minds, just like No voters can. Whenever our next opportunity comes, we'll have to go out and persuade people the hard way.