Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
They had their best shot last year. Unpopular Tory Govt, austerity, high oil price, decent oil production and a still-weak economy. All this and a pro-Yes campaign whose ever-ludicrous claims of a tartan-clad utopia were going totally unchallenged.
If all those factors didn't convince them to go, then today's low oil price, much lower oil production, very weak tax revenues without Barnett, a strong economy, plus greater awareness among Scots of the true state of their finances, is highly unlikely to see them want to leave next time.
Cameron is going to give them enough tax autonomy to show the SNP in their true colours. They have had 8 years to change the income, business and council taxes over they have current control but have changed none whatsoever. The thing is, they can't increase taxes as they England will undercut them. If they cut them, they can't afford all those spending promises.
They had their best shot last year. Unpopular Tory Govt, austerity, high oil price, decent oil production and a still-weak economy. All this and a pro-Yes campaign whose ever-ludicrous claims of a tartan-clad utopia were going totally unchallenged.
If all those factors didn't convince them to go, then today's low oil price, much lower oil production, very weak tax revenues without Barnett, a strong economy, plus greater awareness among Scots of the true state of their finances, is highly unlikely to see them want to leave next time.
Cameron is going to give them enough tax autonomy to show the SNP in their true colours. They have had 8 years to change the income, business and council taxes over they have current control but have changed none whatsoever. The thing is, they can't increase taxes as they England will undercut them. If they cut them, they can't afford all those spending promises.
I hope you're right I really do, but it wasn't strictly a Tory Govt last time. (sorry I'm being pedantic). But just look @ the election results up there, they more or less swept the board. Its like an unstoppable juggernaught & I fear they will go, in fact its just a matter of time. But go they will, of that I'm convinced.
I cannot believe yvette Cooper has put herself forward.
I found it very hard to stomach her husband being shadow chancellor, but her being leader would just take the biscuit.
If you unsure why I have reservations about this pair, with the whole expenses scandal many had to resign for claiming a duck house, these two shared two houses which they flipped, 3 times EACH. They were living as a married couple but both claimed their house allowance separately.
And they big end up high up in the labour party, says a lot for the parties ethics
portchesterblue wrote:I cannot believe yvette Cooper has put herself forward.
I found it very hard to stomach her husband being shadow chancellor, but her being leader would just take the biscuit.
If you unsure why I have reservations about this pair, with the whole expenses scandal many had to resign for claiming a duck house, these two shared two houses which they flipped, 3 times EACH. They were living as a married couple but both claimed their house allowance separately.
And they big end up high up in the labour party, says a lot for the parties ethics
I don't think it says anything at all about the Labour Party's ethics that you couldn't say about the Conservative Party's ethics with the same reasoning.
Let's face it very few apart from the odd MP here and there came out of the expenses scandal with any credit.
It wasn't a Party thing.
Stop looking for solutions to symptoms and start identifying the disease.
I agree it wasn't a party thing, but how many were made to stand down over it, and yet Cooper and balls seem to have risen to the top despite being two of the highest value defrauded.
portchesterblue wrote:I cannot believe yvette Cooper has put herself forward.
I found it very hard to stomach her husband being shadow chancellor, but her being leader would just take the biscuit.
If you unsure why I have reservations about this pair, with the whole expenses scandal many had to resign for claiming a duck house, these two shared two houses which they flipped, 3 times EACH. They were living as a married couple but both claimed their house allowance separately.
And they big end up high up in the labour party, says a lot for the parties ethics
I did not know this. How the Donald Duck did they get away with claiming double allowances when everyone knows they are married??
They had their best shot last year. Unpopular Tory Govt, austerity, high oil price, decent oil production and a still-weak economy. All this and a pro-Yes campaign whose ever-ludicrous claims of a tartan-clad utopia were going totally unchallenged.
If all those factors didn't convince them to go, then today's low oil price, much lower oil production, very weak tax revenues without Barnett, a strong economy, plus greater awareness among Scots of the true state of their finances, is highly unlikely to see them want to leave next time.
Cameron is going to give them enough tax autonomy to show the SNP in their true colours. They have had 8 years to change the income, business and council taxes over they have current control but have changed none whatsoever. The thing is, they can't increase taxes as they England will undercut them. If they cut them, they can't afford all those spending promises.
I hope you're right I really do, but it wasn't strictly a Tory Govt last time. (sorry I'm being pedantic). But just look @ the election results up there, they more or less swept the board. Its like an unstoppable juggernaught & I fear they will go, in fact its just a matter of time. But go they will, of that I'm convinced.
I think that what we're seeing in Scotland is a desire to have their cake and eat it. They still want to be a part of the Union, because they fully realise that they are even more of a basket-case outside of the Union than they are inside it. However, they do want as much self-determination as possible, and they see the SNP as the vehicle to get it.
I suspect that if Cameron does give Sturgeon sufficient rope with which to hang herself, that the SNP's fall from favour in 2020 will be as large as the LibDems 10 days ago.
I before E except when you run a feisty heist on a weird beige foreign neighbour
portchesterblue wrote:I cannot believe yvette Cooper has put herself forward.
I found it very hard to stomach her husband being shadow chancellor, but her being leader would just take the biscuit.
If you unsure why I have reservations about this pair, with the whole expenses scandal many had to resign for claiming a duck house, these two shared two houses which they flipped, 3 times EACH. They were living as a married couple but both claimed their house allowance separately.
And they big end up high up in the labour party, says a lot for the parties ethics
I did not know this. How the Donald Duck did they get away with claiming double allowances when everyone knows they are married??
God, I ducking hate politicians.
This is what Wikipedia says about it:
Allegations over allowances[edit]
Main article: United Kingdom parliamentary expenses scandal
In September 2007, with his wife Yvette Cooper MP, he was accused by Liberal Democrat MP Norman Baker of "breaking the spirit of Commons rules" by using MPs' allowances to help pay for a £655,000 home in north London.[46] Balls and Cooper bought a four bedroom house in Stoke Newington, and registered this as their second home (rather than their home in Castleford, West Yorkshire) in order to qualify for up to £44,000 a year to subsidise a reported £438,000 mortgage under the Commons Additional Costs Allowance, of which they claimed £24,400. Both worked in London full-time and their children attended local London schools. Balls and Cooper claimed that "The whole family travel between their Yorkshire home and London each week when Parliament is sitting. As they are all in London during the week, their children have always attended the nearest school to their London house."[47]
Balls and Cooper "flipped" the designation of their second home three times within the space of two years.[48] In June 2008 they were referred to the Standards Commissioner over allegations that they were claiming expenses for what was effectively their main home in London, their combined claim was £24,000 i.e. "slightly more" than the single MP allowance.[48] The commissioner exonerated them, adding that their motives were not for profit as they paid full capital gains tax.[48]
portchesterblue wrote:I cannot believe yvette Cooper has put herself forward.
I found it very hard to stomach her husband being shadow chancellor, but her being leader would just take the biscuit.
If you unsure why I have reservations about this pair, with the whole expenses scandal many had to resign for claiming a duck house, these two shared two houses which they flipped, 3 times EACH. They were living as a married couple but both claimed their house allowance separately.
And they big end up high up in the labour party, says a lot for the parties ethics
I did not know this. How the Donald Duck did they get away with claiming double allowances when everyone knows they are married??
God, I ducking hate politicians.
This is what Wikipedia says about it:
Allegations over allowances[edit]
Main article: United Kingdom parliamentary expenses scandal
In September 2007, with his wife Yvette Cooper MP, he was accused by Liberal Democrat MP Norman Baker of "breaking the spirit of Commons rules" by using MPs' allowances to help pay for a £655,000 home in north London.[46] Balls and Cooper bought a four bedroom house in Stoke Newington, and registered this as their second home (rather than their home in Castleford, West Yorkshire) in order to qualify for up to £44,000 a year to subsidise a reported £438,000 mortgage under the Commons Additional Costs Allowance, of which they claimed £24,400. Both worked in London full-time and their children attended local London schools. Balls and Cooper claimed that "The whole family travel between their Yorkshire home and London each week when Parliament is sitting. As they are all in London during the week, their children have always attended the nearest school to their London house."[47]
Balls and Cooper "flipped" the designation of their second home three times within the space of two years.[48] In June 2008 they were referred to the Standards Commissioner over allegations that they were claiming expenses for what was effectively their main home in London, their combined claim was £24,000 i.e. "slightly more" than the single MP allowance.[48] The commissioner exonerated them, adding that their motives were not for profit as they paid full capital gains tax.[48]
That sure sounds like a tidy return on an investment heavily financed by the taxpayer, taxes paid or not. How much will they make on their Stoke Newington house which was entirely financed from allowances? How much will the taxpayer see from their London home when they sell up?
