PatReilly wrote:

We're moving things a bit off Tek's topic I suppose Finn, but it looks like you and I won't really agree on the importance of state ownership and/or private intervention. 

Nonetheless, you are making sweeping statements in an attempt to turn folk away from the idea of Independence, such as "50% or more of working people are employed by the state" (following Independence) which isn't factual but an opinion of the ways things may go.

"The private sector has always built their buildings" in regard to hospitals is another which is only a development since New Labour, and one that has come at a heavy cost to the public purse. These PPP/PFI structures, throughout the public sector, have had massive issues due to their poor quality construction.

But it's hardly worth debating it here, we've possibly almost always voted differently, and won't change each other's political standpoint on a messageboard.   

I don't think I am making sweeping statements.  Granted I don't have my finger on the exact figures but I think those paid by the public purse to be employed in Scotland is around the 50% mark now (maybe also includes those being paid to be out of employment too).  In my view anything near that can only be sustainable if we have a very robust private sector raising significant taxes to pay for it - we don't.  As I said at the start I am not attempting to turn people away from independence but I do think they should be clear about what independence now is likely to mean.  I am not a Unionist, a realist.

Your point on the private sector only building buildings at the outset of PFI/PPP is also wholly wrong.  The private sector built the buildings before that and continue to do so and make profit out of it.  Neither Sick Kids in Edinburgh nor the QE Hospital in Glasgow are PFI/PPP model buildings for example, but they are built by the private sector.  There was a lot wrong with PFI/PPP (especially the initial ones) but in my view just as much if not more right with it.  People have always being making profit out of building public sector buildings and have always built a proportion of them badly regardless of the model - as they continue to do, But that  is a whole different debate, but as I have worked in the infra sector for over 20 years its one I know very well.  Happy to debate offline if you like? 

You might be surprised as to my political leanings.  I remain left of New Labour but well right of Corbyn.
 

PatReilly wrote:

Beharder

The Tory gains in previous Labour seats in England were down to Brexit and the anxieties stoked up by politicians and a compliant media. In Scotland over a 21 year period, in their best performance in 2016, they got less than a quarter of the votes cast. Enough said.
 
If your 60% figure isn’t based on the Civil Service figures, then I’m puzzled. As far as I’m aware, HMRC doesn’t collect figures on trade between the 4 UK nations, and I’m wondering where the figure comes from.
 
We aren’t going to concur about the importance of potential trade and the advantages and pitfalls in the future anyway, are we?
 
Finn
 
Acht we’ll agree to disagree. But  I’ll admit phrasing my comment about the timing of privately built public building wrongly, and also basing my knowledge of such practices on anecdotal evidence rather than the experience you possess. It’s the principle I’m against, therefore we’re hardly likely to agree.
 
Not really surprised to learn of your political stance, as you are a Labour supporter I’d expect you to be hopeful of their eventual resurgence at Westminster, which is something I just can’t envisage any time soon. Labour seems to excel at tearing itself apart.

I swithered last time around - really wanted to send Corbyn and Momentum a message.  I stuck with my MP though as I think he's pretty good.  If there had been a credible alternative that wasn't an independence party I would have voted for them.  In terms of British politics will swing from left to right and back forever and as much as New Labour screwed it up with Iraq a more centrist party is what is needed for stability - look at Germany.

I'd bet that if you didn't base it on anecdotal evidence then you'd change your view on the principle.  Unless you want to add a whole load of builders to the public sector employee list (see previous comments on too many public sector workers).  Where PFI/PPP went wrong was to privatise cleaners, security staff, caterers etc. - a mistake that was realised and reversed, but not before the bad publicity (unfairly imo) put the model on the untouchable list.  Everyone points to the lack of wall ties in the Edinburgh schools project as eveidence of shoddy PFI/PPP, but that corner has been being cut by builders for years - I had my own experience of that in relation to a cinema in Glasgow (which was not PFI/PP).  Anyway we have digressed.  Anyway, the SNP have been quietly using son of PFI for years until recently when Eurostat rules declared it off-side so don't think you are getting rid of it by voting for them either....

Last edited by Finn Seemann (08/10/2020 10:57 pm)

Finn Seemann wrote:

 
I swithered last time around - really wanted to send Corbyn and Momentum a message.  I stuck with my MP though as I think he's pretty good.  If there had been a credible alternative that wasn't an independence party I would have voted for them.  In terms of British politics will swing from left to right and back forever and as much as New Labour screwed it up with Iraq a more centrist party is what is needed for stability - look at Germany.

It's the swing to the right continually at Westminster which bothers me, Finn. Going back the past 100 years, there's been a Labour government in the UK for only about 30 of them, and that includes 13 years of 'New Labour', which Thatcher quoted as being her greatest achievement. Thus, not a lot of socialism in the UK.

Finn Seemann wrote:

 
........so don't think you are getting rid of it by voting for them (SNP) either....

Thanks for the infra stuff, from a more experienced viewpoint than my own. Mind, I'm not an SNP voter though: only voted for them once, in an attempt to get rid of the biggest arsehole MP Labour has produced since the WW2. 

Can you guess who that was?  
 

Beharder wrote:

Pat
Its not my 60% figure it's a figure issued by the Scottish Government. 60% of Scottish exports in 2019 went to RUK. I personally don't see it as a good idea to put a trading barrier in place. Why would you want to make it more expensive for Scotland to trade with by far it's biggest trading partner.

Thanks for that, Beharder, and I accept that figure as a genuine estimate from the SG. If I can be petty, it’s from 2018 and I was looking in the wrong place for a figure.
I’d imagine a very large chunk of that 60% will be services like insurance, and scientific and technical ventures: why do you think heavy tariffs would be put in place by the importer for these, and for such as oil and chemical trades, as it’s unlikely our three neighbours will suddenly find a new source?
 
Nonetheless, we’re maybe going round in circles, but the discussion has been polite. 
 

Always polite Pat, let's leave the verbals to the younger generation.
Cross border tariffs will be in place if Scotland Becomes an EU member, we won't have a say on it .  We will have to live with the deal the EU strikes with RUK.
A deal which will be more focussed on cars than the more important to Scotland food and drink sector.
Which kind of brings me back to where this all started - What the SNP is offering is not real Independence.

Pat not sure I can guess your Labour MP - there have been plenty that are unelectable...

Finn Seemann wrote:

  Granted if I voted personally and with my own self interest at heart then I should vote Tory but despite my education I vote for who i think is best for all people. 

 
I’m hoping rather than ‘despite’ your education, it’s because of your education you vote for the benefit of the population, Finn. And have a go at the SNP all you want, it’s a reflection of how bad the other main parties are that the poorly named SNP, who I agree are right wing (but I think of Labour as right wing too) have so much support in Scotland.
 
As an aside, one of my best friends, who I regard as being off his head, thinks the Tories are of the left. He’s also a Covid denier right enough.
 

Beharder wrote:

 What the SNP is offering is not real Independence.

I'll reiterate that I'm not an SNP supporter, and there is no guarantee that their bastard child will have power after Independence. But it is true they have used the mantra ‘Independence within Europe’ in the past.
 

Finn Seemann wrote:

Pat not sure I can guess your Labour MP - there have been plenty that are unelectable...

 
It was Eric Joyce, for 15 years, which is almost unbelievable, given his behaviour throughout his time at Westminster, and his record prior to that in employment, and even at school in Perth, where he twice assaulted female members of staff.
 

Beharder wrote:

 
Yes absolutely Finn
" I may not agree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say
it"
Mr Hamza Yousuf please bin the ridiculous hate speech bill.

 
I’ve met Hamza Yousuf and found him to be extremely caring and helpful in a health project I was involved in, but he’s wide of the mark in this endeavour. It appears politicians have many blind spots, and waste their energies where there are more important matters needing attention.
 
Nevertheless, I don’t entirely agree with the sentiment of that quote: free speech, aye, but I wouldn’t defend some rocket’s utterances ‘to the death’. 

I too have met Hamza before.  I found him to be polite, committed, caring and ambitious.  However, I didn't think he was fully on top of his remit and much like a lot of the SNP (and other politicians of various colours) he's a populist and wants to say what people want to hear rather than actually consider and come up with the right answer especially if that might be unpopular.  I'd guess that they think that the hate speech bill appeals across an element of the population and perhaps one that hasn't traditionally supported the SNP. 
Much of what we are seeing in terms of poorly drafted covid rules and other poorly drafted legislation comes from the fact that these politicians really aren't the sharpest tacks in the box (sweeping generalisation aside) there is a reason that everything that is done that is not an emergency has to go to consultation first.  They're not listening at that stage they're just allowing 'experts' to iron out the wrinkles because they can't trust themselves to do so.  That's why consultees are sometimes surprised that the legislation isn't always what they thought it would be - they aren't listening remember.

I'm also an avid supporter of freedom of speech, but my willingness to fight to the death for yours/anyones depends on your/their level of intelligence I'm afraid.  Defending statues - maybe fair enough.  Defending statues in your Rangers strip and UJ combo - you're on your own...

Self-publicists would also be on my 'stay in bed rather than defend their freedom of speech' list.  For example, i'm all for William and David Attenbrough's stance on endangered species, but i'd be quite happy if Patrick Harvie became extinct...suspect his Green credentials would become somewhat tarnished if somehow saving the world wasn't all about him.

And whilst we are on about cretins, Eric Joyce...

Last edited by Finn Seemann (09/10/2020 5:16 pm)

Beharder wrote:

A man in in Kilmarnock arrested for comparing Sturgeon to a Nazi in an email.
Normally I would check to see if it's April 1st but sadly it's true.
The hate speech bill appears to be far worse than I anticipated.
A very bad day for free speech in Scotland

If it's the person (Brian Smith) who sent emails to Sturgeon in August you are referring to, he's been charged under telecommunication legislation, nothing to do with the so called 'hate crime bill', which hasn't been passed as yet. 

 

Hen Broon wrote:

PatReilly wrote:

I’ve met Hamza Yousuf and found him to be extremely caring and helpful in a health project I was involved in, but he’s wide of the mark in this endeavour. It appears politicians have many blind spots, and waste their energies where there are more important matters needing attention.

It's not only him. Why aren't the rest of the SNP politicians fighting him on it? It's an absurd and incredibly dangerous piece of legislation that the rest of the party seem to be blindly going along with.

Because other members are scared to go against the 'Wokeratti' sect of the SNP (which has deeply infiltrated the party).

For fear of being labelled a bigot, racist, homophobe, misogynist, blah de blah blah.
 

Beharder wrote:

As you say Pat an absurd and incredibly dangerous piece of legislation.
Demonstrating that many of our current elected representatives are out of touch with many of the electorate.
Whole canteens of workmen & women .       ( better get that in before I'm lifted for sexism) will be arrested, not the Scotland I want to live in.

 
It's Hen Broon you're quoting there, Beharder.

For my part, I reckon the legislation is not worth the time, as already laws appear to cover the intended miscreants.

I'll leave this in here, as it's interesting set of figures.