Scottish Independance and other things

Have your say on news and issues from around East Yorkshire
Post Reply
plook
Valued Member
Posts: 1109
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 9:17 am

Scottish Independance and other things

Post by plook » Sun Oct 30, 2011 3:05 pm

I say yes, give them their independence. Then kick all Scottish MPs out of the British Parliament and give them their fair share of funding for 5 yrs then let them get on with it. The English will stop meddling in Scottish affairs when they stop meddling in ours.

Did you know that the Government pays consultants to the tune of £300,000 a week to advise the Ministry of Defence how to spend its money!

DF
Posts: 205
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2004 9:46 pm

Post by DF » Mon Oct 31, 2011 2:32 pm

Here Here!!
But make them raise all their own taxes and pay their own MPs from day one.

Dee
Posts: 228
Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 12:00 am
Contact:

Post by Dee » Wed Nov 16, 2011 2:40 pm

Couldn't agree more. But I much prefer the sound English Independence, so we get our own Parliament. That way, we'd save millions of pounds by not paying the neighbours to travel to Westminster, where over 90% of the business conducted relates to England only. Your way, we'd get MPs from there, negotiating with MPs from there, on the divorce settlement, in the British Parliament. Reckon we'd get a fair deal out of that?

Not sure how the English meddle in their affairs, though? I could see their argument pre-1997, but they all have Home Rule now, except us. They have their own Parliament, and separately elected national government [something we are not allowed]. England's MPs are not allowed to sit in the Scottish Parliament, whilst we are governed by the British Parliament, which has MPs from all over the UK telling us what we can and can't do or have.

It's rather like having Tescos directors sitting on the board of Morrisons and telling them what they can and can't stock, how much they can charge for items and how much they have to give Tescos from their profits, whilst banning Morrisons from attending board meetings at Tescos. It stands to reason that Tescos would look after its own interests to the detriment of Morrisons. It wouldn't work in business and it doesn't work in government, either.

Having said that, I totally support the neighbours having their own Parliament as well. I even go so far as to wish each a prosperous future, without the drag and baggage of the British establishment, which no doubt would have a few years of enthusiastic shredding if abolished. Heaven knows what carp they've been up to over the years, in our names. Time they were towed out to sea and set adrift with no lifeboats.

And if the UK can't work out with just a few neighbours speaking the same language, imagine the future of the EU, being governed from Brussels and with a miriad of different cultures. As with all governments, including the British one, they'll cling onto power until the very end. They have no shame. Only a price.

So here's to a happy, prosperous, friendly, but separate future for all the Home Nations.

plook
Valued Member
Posts: 1109
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 9:17 am

Post by plook » Fri Nov 18, 2011 3:48 pm

Yes I agree. I cannot understand why we helping the bankers. Germany and France have benifitted most from the EU so let them help the banks. Unfortunately globalisation makes countries economies interlinked but why should a Chief Executive get 14 million a year including his bonuses and the rest of us are all in big doo-doos together according to
David Cameron? Its unjust , unfair and dangerous.

Dee
Posts: 228
Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 12:00 am
Contact:

Post by Dee » Sat Nov 19, 2011 2:22 pm

Unfortunately, when the banks were bailed out previously, it gave them carte blanche to lend money to nations without the wherewithall to repay those loans. The banks knew that the money was guaranteed by governments, because they placed such a high value on banks not being allowed to fail.

If we go back to Northern Rock, that bank should not have been bailed out, but sold, or made to close and the government could have guaranteed the customers their savings, rather than bailing out the bank. This would have sent the message to the banks that their reckless lending would not be tolerated and they would not be saved.

Of course, the seeds were sown many years ago, when the previous BofE Governor issued a warning that the nations economy was based on borrowed money. Oddly, he didn't issue this warning while in office. He waited until Mervyn King took over.

Gordon Brown made things worse by persuading Lloyds to buy out RBS, but on condition they kept the head office in Scotland - Gordon Brown was playing for votes in that country. The bank was so taken with Brown they didn't question Brown's assurances and when they "saved" RBS, the debts were much bigger than they were told. That then plunged the "rescuers" into debt, making that bank unsafe. But hey, Brown saved his own political arse by securing the deal.

Since then, our taxes, which used to go to the BofE, were wholly diverted, by Gordon Brown, to the RBS, which now "looks after" all the UK taxes. Mr King was a very good friend to Mr Brown, when Chancellor and thought this was a good idea.

Germany benefitted more than us, because Gordon Brown wasn't in charge of their finances. They spent their money more wisely and more to the point, they didn't spend trillions they never had, either. We could have been in their position, but our politicians are rubbish. Whatever the colour of their rosettes.

plook
Valued Member
Posts: 1109
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 9:17 am

Post by plook » Fri Nov 25, 2011 3:15 am

One CE Banker gets 14 million and another 4 million working in banks that have failed.Its an obscenity. More good news on the way........
next week Osbourn , bless him, is going to save the world. I am really fed up with the lot of them.

Post Reply