Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

The government will simply say, as it has done over 20 times on such occasions during this Parliament, that this is merely an advisory vote and it can be simply ignored.

Mr Meacher also wrote: Cameron has tried to wash his hands of it by saying that he is not responsible and the inquiry is independent [but this]doesn’t wash. He closed down the Gibson inquiry into alleged UK involvement in US rendition when it became clear that its revelations could be highly embarrassing to the UK authorities, so there is no question that he could set a time limit for the Chilcot inquiry if he really wanted to.

No but if elected vote with Labour.

How many deposits will the UKIP lose in Scotland?


=======-=-=

Haze,

How many tories voted to invade Iraq and how many to invade Syria.
-=-=-=
I know you yourself to many are blinkered, but some take their blinkers off.

=======

QT last nite

Diane Abbott was a waste of space , would been better if they had a lump of lard

UKIP was very good , and the best was the man siting next to the UKIP man , Diane Abbott was spoiling the show

8:41AM GMT 23 Jan 2015
Instead of trying to wreck a country, perhaps they should focus on using their power to improve the lives Scottish people

There is a great Scottish phrase that springs to mind when one studies the comments of Scotland's First Minister on the latest proposals for more devolution. That phrase is: "he/she/they would rather have the grievance." This means that the complainant does not, despite what they say, want their gripe dealt with. They enjoy complaining too much and would rather have the grievance than any resolution.

It was in this spirit that Nicola Sturgeon welcomed the unveiling of substantial new powers on taxation and welfare for the Scottish parliament yesterday. Actually, no, she didn't welcome it. Of course she didn't. She attacked it and accused the Westminster parties of betrayal.

Ah, the betrayal narrative on which so much narrow nationalism rests. Apparently, the Westminster parties have watered down the Smith Commission (although they haven't) because any Scottish government adjusting benefits will need to, y'know, talk to the government in the UK about any changes. Such discussions are what happens in any federal set-up in a country that has not voted to split itself apart. No, this is a "veto," says Sturgeon. Disgrace, shout the Nationalists, who lost the referendum (did I mention that?).

This, they say, is a betrayal of the sacred "Vow" that was issued by the Unionist parties just days before the referendum. The vow, if you actually bother to read it, promised what the Unionist parties had been offering for ages. And it is now being delivered. But then, these are, of course, Unionist lies

What is sad is that this chivvying "rather have the grievance" approach – emphasising division and refusing to work in good faith – used to be endorsed by only about a quarter to a third of the Scottish voting population. Now, after the referendum, the virus seems to be spreading. The Nats are miles in front of the other parties.

All this as the UK cuts up its tax system and redesigns the United Kingdom to accommodate more powers (without justice for England). And that is after the Scots rejected independence by a solid majority.

One can understand the Nationalist determination to change the subject though. I suppose that anything is preferable to talking about the oil price, which if you remember the SNP said would be standing at $113 a barrel. It recently went below $50 a barrel and an independent Scotland would be contemplating a massive black hole.

But the latest row on more powers is a reminder that the SNP only has one aim. It exists to destroy the United Kingdom, and having failed by taking the direct route (a referendum on separation) it now seeks to engineer such an outcome by fostering grievance and winding-up English voters (see Sturgeon's disgraceful declaration that her party will prop up a future UK government that does not have a majority of seats in England.) The Nats want maximum chaos.

The truth is that they are much more interested in breaking up the UK than they are in using the powers the Scottish parliament already has to effect meaningful change in the life prospects of the poorest. Since 1999 the Scottish parliament has had full control over all manner of areas, including the NHS in Scotland (which has always been a separate service since it was established in the 1940s) and education. If the Scottish government's record on health is pretty lame its record on education is pitiful. In England the coalition has continued what was started by Blair and Adonis, which meant raising standards in the schools that millions of pupils attend, liberating them from the dead-hand of LEA control and making huge strides in attainment in a city such as London. Meanwhile, on schools the nationalist parts of the Scottish political class has done the square root of not very much, all the while demanding more powers, congratulating itself on its moral superiority complex and letting down pupils. That's what I call betrayal.

Fred2old - here is a thought to brighten up your day -------- a Labour/SNP alliance with Nicola Sturgeon as DEPUTY PM !!!!!!! Is that what you want, what you really, really want?

LOL!!

I think rather than a 7 way debate which will be a right mess they should do it as knock-out rounds. That way by the time your left with 3 parties it'll be a better debate. Thinking about it, if its going to be a knock-out bout then you could just have a public vote for the winner like in x-factor and effectively scrap the old fashion way of polling and going to vote!! Maybe they could call it, x-politician or something, it'd be far more interesting and would get it all over and done with far quicker.

Good idea Shortie, and the one with the biggest tits wins!

SCOTTISH Labour leader Jim Murphy has come under renewed pressure to declare whether he will stand as an MP in May after confirming he remains “the candidate” for East Renfrewshire.

He was unanimously reselected by the party for the Westminster seat in November 2013 but has since made clear his intention to become an MSP at Holyrood by 2016 after winning the Labour leadership.

Political opponents last night accused him of “leaving open” his options and insisted the area needs a full-time MP.

Mr Murphy, who became Scottish Labour leader in December, has given a “cast-iron” commitment to be Labour’s candidate for first minister in the 2016 Scottish Parliament election and to take a seat at Holyrood.


A spokesman for Mr Murphy said: “Jim Murphy is currently the MP for East Renfrewshire and the candidate. If that changes his constituents will be the first to be told.”

Tory leader Ruth Davidson last night called for Murphy to clarify his position. “East Renfrewshire deserves an MP who will put local people’s needs first,” she said.


Speaking on television last month, Mr Murphy said: “I’ve given a commitment that I’ll be in the Scottish Parliament in 2016 and Labour’s candidate for first minister in 2016.

“I’d like to be there sooner than that and in terms of how we do that and what we do, of course I’ll let my constituents know first and my constituency party know first. But there’s a cast-iron guarantee to be a candidate in 2016 at those elections, if not before.”

Former first minister Alex Salmond previously served as MSP and MP simultaneously, but Mr Murphy said that option is “not something I’m attracted to”.

Kirsten Oswald, the SNP’s candidate for the East Renfrewshire seat, said: “After weeks of dodging the issue, Jim Murphy’s intentions in May are still as clear as mud – with just over three months to go until voters go to the polls, Mr Murphy is still leaving open the option of not standing in his East Renfrewshire seat.


“Local voters deserve some real clarity from Jim Murphy as a matter of urgency.

“If Jim Murphy finally decides that he will be the Labour candidate, I’m looking forward to debating with him and holding him to account on campaigning side by side with the Tories for two years, his party’s support for the Tories’ austerity programme, and his continued commitment to wasting £100 billion on a new generation of weapons of mass destruction.”
Conservative candidate David Montgomery said: “East Renfrewshire needs a full-time MP, not someone with one foot out the door.

“If Jim Murphy’s serious about Holyrood then why is he standing for the Commons once again?

“I am committed for the long haul and will always fight for East Renfrewshire.”

Mr Murphy holds a majority of 10,000 in the seat which was once a Tory stronghold.





Couple of comments:-
Not one Labour MSP is offering to stand aside for Jim Murphy. He is the beloved Labour leader in Scotland in name only. Many now suspect MSP's do not want Jim Murphy as leader.

will murphy give up his m p expenses that allow him to claim approx. 19k pa for the rental of a home in London so that he can rent out the home in London he owns to gain him a yearly income,miss out on five tickets at man city that allows five people to be wined and dined these are the perks jim bhoy would have to give up in his fight for equality for the poor all these claims can be found on ipsa at the house of commons web site.

SCOTTISH Labour leader Jim Murphy has come under renewed pressure to declare whether he will stand as an MP in May after confirming he remains “the candidate” for East Renfrewshire.

He was unanimously reselected by the party for the Westminster seat in November 2013 but has since made clear his intention to become an MSP at Holyrood by 2016 after winning the Labour leadership.

Political opponents last night accused him of “leaving open” his options and insisted the area needs a full-time MP.

Mr Murphy, who became Scottish Labour leader in December, has given a “cast-iron” commitment to be Labour’s candidate for first minister in the 2016 Scottish Parliament election and to take a seat at Holyrood.


A spokesman for Mr Murphy said: “Jim Murphy is currently the MP for East Renfrewshire and the candidate. If that changes his constituents will be the first to be told.”

Tory leader Ruth Davidson last night called for Murphy to clarify his position. “East Renfrewshire deserves an MP who will put local people’s needs first,” she said.


Speaking on television last month, Mr Murphy said: “I’ve given a commitment that I’ll be in the Scottish Parliament in 2016 and Labour’s candidate for first minister in 2016.

“I’d like to be there sooner than that and in terms of how we do that and what we do, of course I’ll let my constituents know first and my constituency party know first. But there’s a cast-iron guarantee to be a candidate in 2016 at those elections, if not before.”

Former first minister Alex Salmond previously served as MSP and MP simultaneously, but Mr Murphy said that option is “not something I’m attracted to”.

Kirsten Oswald, the SNP’s candidate for the East Renfrewshire seat, said: “After weeks of dodging the issue, Jim Murphy’s intentions in May are still as clear as mud – with just over three months to go until voters go to the polls, Mr Murphy is still leaving open the option of not standing in his East Renfrewshire seat.


“Local voters deserve some real clarity from Jim Murphy as a matter of urgency.

“If Jim Murphy finally decides that he will be the Labour candidate, I’m looking forward to debating with him and holding him to account on campaigning side by side with the Tories for two years, his party’s support for the Tories’ austerity programme, and his continued commitment to wasting £100 billion on a new generation of weapons of mass destruction.”
Conservative candidate David Montgomery said: “East Renfrewshire needs a full-time MP, not someone with one foot out the door.

“If Jim Murphy’s serious about Holyrood then why is he standing for the Commons once again?

“I am committed for the long haul and will always fight for East Renfrewshire.”

Mr Murphy holds a majority of 10,000 in the seat which was once a Tory stronghold.





Couple of comments:-
Not one Labour MSP is offering to stand aside for Jim Murphy. He is the beloved Labour leader in Scotland in name only. Many now suspect MSP's do not want Jim Murphy as leader.

will murphy give up his m p expenses that allow him to claim approx. 19k pa for the rental of a home in London so that he can rent out the home in London he owns to gain him a yearly income,miss out on five tickets at man city that allows five people to be wined and dined these are the perks jim bhoy would have to give up in his fight for equality for the poor all these claims can be found on ipsa at the house of commons web site.

Not one Labour MSP is offering to stand aside for Jim Murphy. He is the beloved Labour leader in Scotland in name only. Many now suspect MSP's do not want Jim Murphy as leader.


perhaps that should be rephrased ......
the unions who fund the scottish MPs don't want jim murphy

Yeah maybe, you could also have a panel and each politician being judged afterwards. Russell Brand could maybe scrutinise the politicians answers and statements to add a little flavour... Keith Lemon could be host, and we'd need a nerd to check the numbers, maybe Carol Vorderman!!

sat in the club last night with the lads we could not believe that stupid racist woman called abbot she is a bloody disgrace to parliament and we all looked at each other and said we can not vote for this vile person to have any power so we are back to
square one . we are going to look who is going to kerb family allowance for girls to breed for a living cut family allowance from the election to max of two

DB3 and 1/2,


It was in this spirit that Nicola Sturgeon welcomed the unveiling of substantial new powers on taxation and welfare for the Scottish parliament yesterday. Actually, no, she didn't welcome it. Of course she didn't. She attacked it and accused the Westminster parties of betrayal.

Well many think Cameron and Osborne has betrayed many in the UK..

I think the majority of voters in Scotland have little or no time for the ideology and many of the tory policies. (Reminders of the clearances linger.)

--------

Secondly, I don't think Sturgeon is standing for election in May and therefore could not be deputy PM of UK.

But I suspect Salmond will be elected, and could be a more representative Deputy PM, if the Scots returned about 25 MPS. But again, the SNP UK MPs would possibly have no formal agreement with Labour and Lib/Dems, but have an informal association on majority of policies.

Quite happy for the latter.

That would really seal Cameron goose.

Back to the Tories then T.
2517

Hey TANK don't upset GF (Billy Liar Tribute Act), Abbott is a sexy lady she's a Labour hottie!

Napoleon,

Are you suggesting the unions are more representative of the Scottish Labour voters.

If so, I wonder the reason for their resurgence.

Abbott I think is only there so that they can tick the ethnicity boxes and call themselves a diverse party. Personally I think she should be muzzled..