It Came From the North

54 comments on “It Came From the North ”

• Comments are now closed

1. papa tuanuku 1

   29 September 2015 at 5:05 pm

   not sure why such a detailed article on scottish politics published here. could it have been more succinct? how does that effect nz politics? is there a paralell with something happening here?

   [lprent: Authors write on what they feel like writing about.

   We really don’t give a damn once they have a login provided they don’t put the site into court (and we don’t count legal idiots making up their own law for that). However if you want to dispute that philosophy, then I’d suggest you read the policy first and do your criticism very carefully in OpenMike.

   My first instinct for idiotic critics like yourself is to give them a a good long ban. That gives them the time they need so they can consult a dictionary as they read about the site. Something they should have done before they dropped their trousers to show their innocence, and started waving their dick around to show how simple they are.

   Does that answer your questions? (think carefully about answering) ]
   • Bill 1.1

     29 September 2015 at 5:25 pm

     It ain’t about Scottish politics, it’s an ‘not overly detailed’ piece about UK politics and what is about to happen.

     Given that Corbyn’s election is seen as the possible beginning of a resurgency for the Labour left internationally….then does that point you in the direction of enough potential parallels?

     Outcomes there will have an impact there. That’s how it is in the inter-connected portion of the world governed by social democratic structures that share a common past.

     Could you have used capitalisation? Could you have engaged a small portion of critical evaluation? Can I be bothered with you?
     • David 1.1.1

       30 September 2015 at 10:28 am

       “Given that Corbyn’s election is seen as the possible beginning of a resurgency for the Labour left internationally”

       It can also be seen as it’s death knell.
       • aerobubble 1.1.1.1

         2 October 2015 at 11:12 am

         Given democracy is about having ready to go governments when incumbents fail, then its surely obvious that the present dominance of a failed tightly ideological governing class. Then it could be much worse than a return to a older Labour as rising fascism parties. What’s fascinating is you cast that change is going to be a possible death for the left, like people will just give up to global corps, or run to the right.

         There is obvious need to move away from neolib politics, and also obvious needs for a moderate left party, that even moderate right knows will be better than ukip or worse.

         So sure Murdoch will put the evil eye on Labour, and maybe oust the leader but the Labour party ain’t going back to neolib politics. It can’t, it won’t, and even its opponents dont want lab to collapse and ukip to take off.
   • weka 1.2

     29 September 2015 at 5:27 pm

     doesn’t strike me as being overly long. Bill’s been writing about the SNP and Scottish politics for a while, heralding some interesting changes by actual left wing government in a country not too dissimlar to NZ. Many in NZ are following what is happening with Corbyn, and now thus the SNP. Parallels? See my comment at 2 😉
     • mickysavage 1.2.1

       29 September 2015 at 6:03 pm

       I think it is fascinating and you have to remember that UK politics and NZ politics are very similar, and the CT influence on both needs to be studied as much as possible.
       • Pat 1.2.1.1

         29 September 2015 at 10:16 pm

         there are undoubted parallels NZ/UK….not sure we have an area with 10% of the population with the will and the means to pursue a different idealogical model however.
       • North 1.2.1.2

         29 September 2015 at 10:42 pm

         Yeah…..I don’t have the time to do other than a quick flick over stuff available on UK websites. But Bill I trust and I’m grateful for his stuff. We could just overfocus on Richie for archetypal ‘Kiwi’ stuff I guess but…..ah……..nah ! It’s all relevant to NZ.
   • Lanthanide 1.3

     29 September 2015 at 6:08 pm

     Personally I find Bill’s posts on Scottish democracy pretty irrelevant. So I just skim them and don’t comment. Each to their own.
     • Bill 1.3.1

       29 September 2015 at 6:32 pm

       Am I hallucinating? Or is that a comment I see?

       It’s fine that you to find UK politics irrelevant. Like you, if I see a post that doesn’t interest me I skip it. Oh wait…that hallucination again 😉
2. weka 2

   29 September 2015 at 5:24 pm

   Labour trying to headbut its natural allies, now where have I heard that before?
   • Bill 2.1

     29 September 2015 at 5:31 pm

     It’s a bit stranger than that. Corbyn votes alongside the SNP (and previously, often against Labour) in Westminster on many issues (Iraq, Syria, refugees, austerity, privatisation…to name a few). Then we get this…

     Labour will tank even worse in next year’s election than they did in the one just past if they proceed down this path. And when they do, the Dugdale’s and the Mandelson’s will rush in with picks and shovels…

     I find it all kind of depressing given that it will impact on possible future directions of travel for the NZ Labour Party.
     • Lucy 2.1.1

       30 September 2015 at 9:45 am

       Bill unfortunately Corbyn has never been near the top before and so is getting the worst advice possible! Happens hopefully he will figure it out but not sure we will ever know as the MSM is determined to oust him. There is one way that the future will be changed if he continues to do town halls as this will keep him in touch with Labour voters not the drooges in Parliament!
       • Bill 2.1.1.1

         30 September 2015 at 10:39 am

         If he keeps on the track he’s on, then Scottish town halls jam packed with bugger all Labour supporters are on the cards. In the middle of next year he faces his first major, and maybe crucial, electoral hurdle and he looks to be falling over before he’s even reached it.

         Both he and his deputy have lied about the SNP (all picked through and dissected in major Scottish newspapers and demolished on the wings over scotland web site) – and while it might wash ‘down south’ it’s only going to mightily piss people off ‘up north’. The only people in Scotland who will be buying his nonsense are those who already vote Labour – and that’s precious few.
3. weka 3

   29 September 2015 at 5:28 pm

   What’s the upcoming Holyrood election? Is it a byelection or general? (still don’t quite get the whole Scottish parliament thing).
   • Bill 3.1

     29 September 2015 at 5:39 pm

     It’s a general election. The SNP are currently a majority government. The opportunity was there for Labour to bounce off the back of a leader espousing genuine politics. All that’s going to be bouncing at this rate though is Jeremy’s head from the well aimed kicks of his own party’s members.

     I guess I’m looking at it terms of a general election being worth 100 bye elections in terms of voter intent. The Blairites and the press won’t compare any result from next year to Labour’s general routing in Scotland at this years UK general election, but in order to magnify the likely woefulness of the result, in relation to the last Holyrood election.

     And it’s bye-bye Jeremy.
     • weka 3.1.1

       29 September 2015 at 7:18 pm

       So what should be be doing in relation to the SNP and the election next year? Isn’t that a rock and a hard place?
       • Bill 3.1.1.1

         29 September 2015 at 8:01 pm

         Well, seeing as how you ask…if I was in Corbyn’s shoes, I’d have put the winning of Scotland ‘back to Labour’ on the back burner and let Dugdale and the other Blairites go to hell in a wheel-barrow next year. Then I’d have trundled their political corpses into some even deeper hole. 😉

         In the meantime I’d have forged good working relationships with the SNP in Westminster to bolster progressive possibilities in a house that has a government hanging by a slim majority.

         Two things.

         Scotland doesn’t need to vote Labour for Labour to form a Westminster government. The SNP would give a vote of confidence to a minority Labour government and work on an issue by issue basis (this all ties in again with the Fixed Term Parliaments Act)

         And Corbyn definitely doesn’t need to be seen to fail in next year’s election. He could have signaled a detente with the SNP and got on with building progressive alliances instead of falling back on the tired and stupid old SNP bashing that UK and Scottish Labour seem addicted to.
         • weka 3.1.1.1.1

           29 September 2015 at 8:06 pm

           ok, so the relationship building with the SNP over time would counter any bullshit from the right or the MSM when Labour misses out on seats in the Holyrood election next year? (again, sounds familiar in a potential solution elswhere).
           • Bill 3.1.1.1.1.1

             29 September 2015 at 8:25 pm

             Possibly. But only possibly. I mean, lets face it, the whole demonising of the SNP in the run-up to the UK election only worked because of pre-existing bigotry within sectors of the English electorate towards Scots and Scotland. Sadly.
           • Bill Drees 3.1.1.1.1.2

             1 October 2015 at 8:42 am

             The SNP is effectively a popular “Labour” party in Scotland. Most of its support was formerly Labour. Dugdale is a moron. Corbyn should tell Scotis Labour to stop focusing ALL of their efforts on slagging SNP and to rebuild with solid left values.
             The SNP has offered the hand of friendship in Westminster and Corbyn should accept.
             SNP has 56 out of 59 Scittish seats
             Tories have 1
             LibDems have 1
             Labour has 1 in a very middle class Edinburgh electorate.

             Corbyn should never listen to Dugdale.
   • dukeofurl 3.2

     29 September 2015 at 5:50 pm

     Its for the full Scottish parliament, the last one was in 2011, so this one is well overdue as its supposed to be every 4 years. It was postponed because of the UK election this year (may 2015) so will be held in May 2016.

     Thats not the only crazy thing, in spite of being a so called proportional MMP, much like ours, its not and SNP have a majority , 69 out of 129, but only won 44% ( they should be minority government with say 57 seats)
     The losers of the “not MMP” are the Greens and the Lib Dems
     • CJess 3.2.1

       30 September 2015 at 11:17 am

       The “kind of” proportional representation system (Additional Member System) in Holyrood was intended to preclude majority government for Scotland, and indeed there wasn’t one until 2011. (2007-11 the SNP ran a minority government, the first two governments were Labour & LibDem). There have been particular changes in the political landscape which have meant that the SSP have disappeared, and the Greens left with only 1 MSP – but that’s not necessarily down to the electoral system. The LibDems (until 2016?) have done all right out of the system though – and until 2007 were partners in the Executive with Labour. Part of the 2011 outcome is down to low voter turnout too – Turnout in the election was 50.4% in the constituency vote and 51.1% in the regional vote. The constituency of Eastwood had the highest turnout with 63.2% and Glasgow Provan had the lowest at 34.8%. (from the Scottish Parliament website.)

       I don’t think the AMS is any less “proportional” than MMP. Unless a parliament was going to be made up purely of “list” type MPs on the basis of proportion of the vote then “true proportional representation” is not going to be found. There had been decades of discussion (in constitutional law, lobby groups and political parties) of the possibilities for PR type reform in the UK prior to the Scotland Act – and I know that the discussion included reference to the parliaments across Europe and how proportional (or not) they were). The Scotland Act was the result of a lot of research, and a lot of arguments and discussion. The only form of Parliament not on the table was first past the post!

       The problem is trying to find a balance between constituency (73) and list based (56) MSPs. Unlike NZ, the list works on a regional basis, and is designed to let the “small parties” top up their vote. In Glasgow region, for example, in the first two Parliaments Labour had so many constituency MSPs that they did not receive the proportion of list seats they *should* have had to reflect the actual vote – they reached the maximum number then dropped out of the list altogether. That meant that the SSP got some MSPs for that region.

       I don’t now why the Greens are showing a bit more of a bounce in the polls for May 2016 – Patrick Harvie got a lot of good exposure during Indyref, and seems generally well thought of. I would like to think that the Greens might, once the campaign starts proper, get some of their support back from the SNP and gain some new support for the list vote too. Interesting times.
       • dukeofurl 3.2.1.1

         30 September 2015 at 12:39 pm

         Not sure you have seen how ‘our MMP’ system works.

         Not having majority government is a bit of a red herring. Since no party doesnt get a overall majority of the votes they shouldnt have a majority of the seats. Thats the whole idea. Its not some perverse side effect.

         For the major parties NZ is definitely fully proportional, some smaller parties have ‘overhangs’ due to them winning seats but not having the list votes to cover that. The non proportionality in NZ is very small ( ACT 1 , NZ Future 1)

         In Scotland it strangely seems perversely to be the reverse, the newer Green party not having any seats but still losing out proportionally. The Conservatives and Liberals have traditionally held seats in mostly rural areas but they too are less than they should.

         We have a mix of seat Mps and list Mps, an overall parliament very similar in size ( 121 vs 129) a slightly smaller population ( 4.5mill vs 5.4 mill) and yet Scotland has a markedly strange result
         SNP gets 44% of votes but gets 53% of the seats.

         Yet in only ONE region did they get over 50% of the vote and under 40% in the Glasgow region.
         Each region seems to have 16 Mps in total ( 1 spare ?)

         Its clear the whole thing of having regional seats AND regional lists gave this unbalanced and non proportional result.
         We dont have regional lists here but parties do spread their lists around, especially the larger ones.
     • Bill Drees 3.2.2

       1 October 2015 at 9:08 am

       This proportional system was selected to stop the SNP ever getting single party control. It failed due to the popularity of SNP and the laziness of the Labour hierarchy in Scotland.
       Labour big wigs decided that the real action was in Westminster and that Holyrood was of no import. While they became cheap cannon fodder for the Blairites in Westminster their second and third division players did a shite job in Holyrood.
       That is one of the reasons Labour lost all of its Westmibstet seats, will soon loose more Holyrood seats and in 2017 will loose most of its Local Council seats. It will only get worse under Dugdale
4. Anne 4

   29 September 2015 at 6:05 pm

   Bill, I bow to your vastly superior knowledge, but I find it hard to believe Corbyn would take advice from “Blairites” even if he thought it was sincerely given. We have our own Blairites in NZ and their woefully inadequate cognizance is plain for all to see. Surely Corbyn is way to savvy to fall for any of their tricks. He’s had 32 years to observe the UK political system and so there can’t be much going on he hasn’t seen before.

   Anyway that’s the thoughts of a ‘woefully inadequately informed’ commenter who does nevertheless have relatively recent hereditary links to the UK.
   • Bill 4.1

     29 September 2015 at 6:22 pm

     As a London based politician he’ll have bugger all knowledge of Scotland. It’s just the way it is. Maybe ( I dunno) it kind of corresponds to NZ pakeha politicians and maori politics?

     He doesn’t have anywhere else to turn for advice. There are no Labour mps from Scotland left in Westminster, well – there’s one. So he turns to the Labour mps in Holyrood who were always second stringers toeing the Blairite lines on everything.

     Now, he might not be aware of the powers the Scottish parliament has with regards nationalisation (none) , but he knows that rail was privatised in ’93 and he knows that the SNP voted against it.

     And yet he earnestly spouts shit about the SNP privatising rail.

     Did Dugdale (and her cohorts) spin over the tender process that saw Scotrail go to the Dutch? (There were heaps of misleading headlines and commentary at the time) It’s the only explanation that makes sense to me.

     The rest of it (the college places etc) dovetails seamlessly with Dugdale’s desperate and time worn attacks on the SNP.
     • dukeofurl 4.1.1

       29 September 2015 at 6:54 pm

       Not so fast. There was the little problem of what SNP were promising during the referendum and people other than Corbyn have seen this a hasty sellout ahead of increased devolution powers that could have brought a hugely state subsidized service back into public operation.

       “But rail unions and socialists who supported independence said the SNP had betrayed their promises.

       RMT leader Mick Cash said: “It is scandalous that just a few weeks after the referendum, and promises from all quarters that the Scottish people would have an increased say in every aspect of their lives, that the continued privatisation of Scotland’s railways has been bulldozed through with the SNP colluding with the political elite in Westminster to deny the opportunity for this franchise to be brought back into public ownership.”

       The RMT had united with train drivers’ union Aslef and white-collar staff union TSSA to call on MSPs to postpone the decision until after powers over rail franchising are transferred to Holyrood.
       Aslef general secretary Mick Whelan said: “It’s a particularly perverse decision by the SNP government, which was arguing for independence, and is getting many more devolved powers, to embrace privatisation rather than wait a few months, take a fresh look at the opportunities for rail services in Scotland, and make a considered decision next year.”

       http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/a-d08b-Outrage-as-SNP-sells-off-ScotRail-to-Dutch-firm
       • Bill 4.1.1.1

         29 September 2015 at 7:46 pm

         Yeah. That’s in line with a lot of the commentary of the time. The fact is that it was illegal (or unlawful) for the Scottish government to bid for and run public services. There is and has been no transfer of powers as yet.

         The commentary appears to have been based on the premise that independence was a given or that home rule was a given. As we know, neither of those has eventuated.

         So they couldn’t ‘do a Calmac’ (I can’t quite figure how that one worked btw) – and I think those bstards Serco are in the current tender process – and came up with a five year option to kill (re-tender) the Scotrail contract instead.
         • dukeofurl 4.1.1.1.1

           30 September 2015 at 10:30 am

           You are soft pedalling that so much Bill, are making a pavlova out of it ?
           • CJess 4.1.1.1.1.1

             30 September 2015 at 10:44 am

             Bill
             I think your article and comments are all spot on. I do know some pre-2003 Scotlab members who are considering rejoining (not SNP members btw but Yes voters). They were not remotely impressed with Corbyn on the SNP, and while it won’t dent their decision to “come home to Labour” there are probably many for whom it will.

             re Calmac & railways. The issue with the tendering for Calmac is that this is a requirement of EU laws, whereas the Scotrail franchising rules are a result of the Railways Act 1993. The EU rules do not preclude the public sector tendering for and running services (many EU countries have basically nationalised rail) but the Railways Act 1993 does.

             Hence Calmac can be bid for and run by the public sector whereas Scotrail lawfully can’t. Add to that that railways is a matter reserved to Westminster, so the Scottish Parliament can do nothing to change this.

             If the Labour MSP are so bothered about it why did they do nothing while Labour was in power at both Westminster and Holyrood to change it? That’s right, cos until Corbyn they weren’t in favour of nationalising rail. I agree with you on what I would advise Corbyn to do re Scotland too. May 2016 is way too soon to recover.
             • Bill …

               30 September 2015 at 11:43 am

               Thanks for commenting CJess. I get the impression you are a bit closer to the state of play than I am.
             • dukeofurl …

               30 September 2015 at 1:19 pm

               Thanks for your ‘ on the ground’ observations.

               Are you saying the Island ferries ( now run by CalMac a major ferry operator to 22 island destinations, state owned for 60 years) is allowed by EU rules to have a public sector operator but SNP put it out to tender anyway ( Serco is likely winner – but no decision announced until after Holyrood elections)

               “THE £1billion privatisation of the lifeline CalMac ferry services should not have gone ahead, according to an economic expert who quit as a transport adviser to the Scottish Government.
               Economics professor Neil Kay has backed the RMT union in claiming the tender process that could leave west coast ferry routes in the hands of the giant outsourcing firm Serco was completely unnecessary.
               http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/keep-calmac-carry-on-were-5916945

               While the ScotRail tender wasnt allowed a Scottish public sector operator under UK rail rules but ended up with a Dutch owned public sector operator instead ?
               • Bill …

                 30 September 2015 at 1:29 pm

                 CalMac had to be put out to tender because (from the post) “EU Community guidelines on state aid to maritime transport” and from Cjess’s comment “The issue with the tendering for Calmac is that this is a requirement of EU laws..”

                 Hardly a case of the government “putting it out to tender anyway”.

                 Scotrail. Your last para would appear to be accurate, yes.
                 • dukeofurl …

                   30 September 2015 at 2:24 pm

                   The jury is still out on had

                   The vessels and ports are state owned btw .

                   “Along with RMT, he[Economics professor Neil Kay ] believes there are legal examples across the EU that show other lifeline, state-run services do not need to be opened to market forces.
                   http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/keep-calmac-carry-on-were-5916945

                   The point is about EU rules, once you open it up to tender, it MUST be best deal.
                   The experts and RMT were saying , use EU loopholes and not open tenders in first place.

                   But too late for that SNP seemed to have ignored the best chance of keeping it in public sector operation ( never mind that they own the vessels anyway)
                   Im sure Cjess would agree ?
                   • Bill …

                     30 September 2015 at 2:50 pm

                     CalMac was split into two separate entities in preparation for the tendering process in Oct 2006.

                     The Scottish government in 2006 was a Labour and Lib/Dem coalition that dissolved in May ’07.

                     In Oct 07, the tender process concluded and CalMac got a 6 year contract.

                     edit: Here’s a link to Neil Kay’s own work and words as opposed to ‘the daily record’ tabloid. Note the name Tavish Scott (the minister responsible for the tendering process)
                   • dukeofurl …

                     1 October 2015 at 1:49 pm

                     Thats how it should be done to keep it as a public sector operator.
                     As Calmac explain in their own words

                     In 2006 the then Scottish Executive, decided that under EU rules ferry services were required to be put out to tender, but this presented an issue as the vessels required to operate the services, and many of the ports to which services ran, were owned by Caledonian MacBrayne Ltd, giving it an unfair advantage over potential competitors.

                     The solution was to rename Caledonian MacBrayne Ltd as Caledonian Maritime Assets Ltd (CMAL) in order to retain the vessels and ports in state ownership, and a separate ferry operations company, CalMac Ferries Ltd, was created. It is a wholly-owned subsidiary of David MacBrayne Ltd, which is wholly owned by Scottish Ministers. (CMAL also retained ownership of the Caledonian MacBrayne brand, which CalMac uses as a trading name under licence from CMAL. The lion rampant device is also used by CFL with the permission of CMAL.)

                     CMAL is also wholly owned by Scottish Ministers and is based in Port Glasgow, Inverclyde. CFL and CMAL are two entirely separate entities. CFL provides certain services to CMAL under contractual arrangements.

                     In 2007 the contract to provide services under the Clyde and Hebrides Ferry Service (CHFS) was awarded to CalMac Ferries Ltd for a period of six years. CMAL leases the vessels and piers to the operator of the Clyde Hebrides Ferry services (currently CFL) and is also responsible for the procurement of new ships and the maintenance and development of port facilities in its ownership. (Some ports are owned by local authorities or private harbour trusts/ authorities.)

                     In 2013, Transport Scotland, which is part of Scottish Government, announced it was to extend the period of the CHFS contract by a further three years, and go out to tender for a new contract to commence in October 2016. This process is now underway.”
                     http://www.calmac.co.uk/corporate/history

                     We see here the process to keep in state sector operation, notice the short extension ( all though that was for SNP political purposes to move the date after the Holyrood election.)
                     What the noise is about from unions , Scottish labour and others, is under EU rules loopholes, not to go out to tender.

                     Maybe that reverses their previous stand, but hey its politics, SNP are the government and THEIR decisions are open to scrutiny. Its not like some think, they are the Kirk and beyond criticism.
           • dukeofurl 4.1.1.1.1.2

             30 September 2015 at 11:13 am

             Just checked the recommendations of the Smith Commission ( set up to make recommendations for devolved powers)

             en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_Commission

             it is on the list of recommendations. And its section 49 of the proposed Bill.

             The Scottish Government will have power to allow public sector operators to bid for rail franchises funded and specified by Scottish ministers.
             http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/2015-2016/0048/16048.pdf

             So your belief that these sort of devolved powers arent in the pipeline is unvarnished baloney.
             “Can you honestly see the Scottish parliament getting any substantial powers devolved before the next UK election”

             No wonder the rail transport unions ( and Corbyn) are all hot and bothered about it.

             Bill you need to have better information than just repeating stuff from ‘Kiwiblog with a Kilt’ – ( wings over Scotland) especially when its totally debunked by a kiwi sitting in NZ.
             • CJess …

               30 September 2015 at 11:27 am

               Given that the Westminster parties’ “vow” in September 2014 was that there would be a new Scotland Act by the end of January 2015, the fact that a date for the Committee of the House and third reading has yet to be laid down a full year later, I am not sure I put too much store on the promised further devolution actually happening; and it certainly won’t b before the elections in May 2016.
               • dukeofurl …

                 1 October 2015 at 1:32 pm

                 Really ?

                 The draft proposals for legislation were announced in jan 2015

                 And here is what Brown said would be the timetable

                 “The former Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, made a speech on 8 September, at a Labour Party event, where he set out a timetable for action on further devolution. This was given as:
                  work to begin on the new legislation on 19 September, the day after the
                 referendum.
                  a “command paper” to be published by the present UK government setting out all
                 the proposals by end of October.
                  a white paper to be drawn up by the end of November after a period of consultation
                 setting out the proposed powers
                  a draft new law to be published for a new Scotland Act in January [2015].7
                 http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN06987#fullreport
                 [This is very comprehensive listing of what the politicians backing the Union said]
                 and
                 Sunday 25 January—Legislation published by Burn’s Night. A new Scotland Bill, ‘ready to be voted on’ by UK Parliament.

                 Ready to be voted is clever wording for waiting to be passed.

                 So it seems that the draft laws presented by Jan 2015, which is what happened.
                 Nowhere did it say the laws would be “enacted by jan 2015.”

                 Somehow those people in Scotland get their kickers in a twist over things that arent true. Sure there is an element of politicians weasel words to make it ‘seem’ it would all be done by jan. But sorry Cjess, you are wrong.
             • Bill …

               30 September 2015 at 11:28 am

               You don’t seem to understand that a cross party committee found that the Smith Commission proposals were not being delivered by the current UK government.

               That leads on (in part) to the suggestion or threat by the Scottish government that they might block the proposed devolution of powers as they currently stand.

               The five year kill clause keeps the option open for government control, yes? What some unions wanted was for nothing to happen until…whenever. I suspect that wasn’t a viable option. (ie – who would be running Scotrail right now if that course of action had been pursued?)

               But I think I’m going to back to not engaging with you seeing as how you exhibit such an obvious lack of nous beside an over abundance of rather infantile passive aggression.
               • dukeofurl …

                 30 September 2015 at 12:06 pm

                 You mean this :
                 Draft Scotland Bill “falls short” in some “critical areas”- Devolution Committee
                 ‘The previous UK Government’s draft legislative clauses for the new Scotland Bill do not meet the “spirit or substance” of the Smith Commission’s recommendations on welfare and benefits, and require extensive redrafting in other key areas, a Scottish Parliamentary Committee said today.”

                 No mention of major problems with public sector rail franchises ?

                 AS for the unions, they seem to have pushed for an extension of existing franchise for up to 2 years ( as has happened before). Thats a long way from ‘doing nothing’

                 You seem to be digging your hole deeper .

                 To me it seems the SNP is playing political games over the devolved powers bill until after the 2016 election, if they do as you say and refuse consent. Much better to campaign on some trumped up assertions they are being shafted by Westminister
5. Ad 5

   29 September 2015 at 6:15 pm

   Seeking some conspiracy that forgives any future Corbyn failure is typical of those with a Corbyn-Crush.

   So when he loses, it wasn’t his fault reeeeeeealy, it was, oh, dem nasty Blair Capitalist Roaders.

   Corbyn either leads as a superior leader, on his merits, or he loses.

   Fall out of love, Bill.
   • Bill 5.1

     29 September 2015 at 6:29 pm

     heh – you missing all those comments that call me for a Labour Party basher? What about the ones entreating me to give up on Sturgeon and the SNP? 😉

     If Corbyn falls over the head of the Holyrood election results, it will be his own fault for being so stupid as to take Dugdale at her word. But I’ll personally be a bit depressed at the reactionary right wing backlash rushing to bury left leaning social democratic policy platforms for good in England and Wales. And the wave that will hit NZ shores to the same end.

     Still. At least Scotland will then go solid left and independent.
     • dukeofurl 5.1.1

       29 September 2015 at 7:13 pm

       I think it you that’s taking SNP at their word.

       Its not only Corbyn who are talking out about the new long term rail franchise deal.
       Amoung those against it are RMT- the rail and maritime union, Aslef and TSSA unions.

       Who would have thought Corbyn was supprting the unions involved.

       You have been misleading us Bill.

       ” it will be his own fault for being so stupid as to take Dugdale at her word.” – indeed ?
       • Bill 5.1.1.1

         29 September 2015 at 7:51 pm

         Yes, indeed, in relation to your last sentence.

         And as I commented up thread, that Scotrail deal has a five year ‘kill’ option built in. So hardly ‘long term’. Can you honestly see the Scottish parliament getting any substantial powers devolved before the next UK election in 2020 or even, should Labour win that election, any powers devolved afterwards?
         • Ad 5.1.1.1.1

           30 September 2015 at 1:43 am

           Agreed there.
           SNP so far as I can see have not had the further devolution that Cameron and Brown promised them in return for the No vote.
           I’d be pissed if I were them.
           • dukeofurl 5.1.1.1.1.1

             30 September 2015 at 7:45 am

             Its only been 6 months – with a general election in between. Were you expecting a 5 min rush job.

             Never mind, lets write it all off now, never mind that THERE WILL BE increased powers for Scotland. After all they have health, education ( incl tertiary) and police ( a complete reorganization has been done).

             Surely a bigger say in regional Scottish passenger trains isnt something Westminister will want to die in the ditch for. The existing British long haul services arent covered, as the services are entirely within Scotland ( except for a service to the border town Carlisle)

             Never mind, as instead of a say 2 year extension of existing contract, while they organise ( arms length) public sector based bid, thats out of the question as a 7 year contract has been let to a new provider.
             Westminister managed to bring the railtrack franchise back into the private sector, so its not impossible under current rules, let alone the higher flexibility that increased devolution will bring.

             Its a funny world when the SNP has rapidly foll lowed the neo liberal prescription ( with their apologists saying “there is no alternative”) while Corbyn who is supporting the transport local unions, is somehow be led up the garden path by the rump Scottish labour Blairites ?
             • Bill …

               30 September 2015 at 8:54 am

               Duke. The proposed extra powers may be blocked by the Scottish government. That might sound odd to you. But when the powers on offer are inadequate and akin to a gin trap, then only a fool would accept them. A cross party committee in Holyrood agreed that the previously promised powers are not on offer and that far too many hooks are attached to the ones that are on offer.

               It might be worth noting that not one amendment to the Scottish Bill (the bill containing the devolved powers) was accepted by the current UK government.

               If you wanted to be serious in your argument about Scotrail, then it would help if you read the links provided in the post that in turn contain links the ‘official record’ that shows SNP opposition to rail privatisation.

               For the Blairite ‘gaming’ of Corbyn, read ‘Normal Service Resumed’ at wingsoverscotland.com. It lays it all out with references and links to the appropriate Holyrood debates and discussions.

               If and when you read that, feel free to offer intelligent and informed comment.
               • dukeofurl …

                 30 September 2015 at 10:54 am

                 I can see that SNP have policy opposing rail privatization but in practice want to rush into a long term contract. ( 10 years) Go figure.
                 As for your 5 year break point- aint going to happen as we know with all these private sector deals.

                 My knowledge of the finer details is small ( probably the same with you ) but its significant those unions in Scotland who are involved in the rail system feel they have been shafted.
                 And the Morning Star cant be brushed off as some sort of Blairite rump .

                 For goodness sake the winner Abellio is a Dutch government fully owned SOE.

                 “Our parent company, Nederlandse Spoorwegen, has a concession for operating the core rail network in the Netherlands.”
                 And had a history of of carrying Jews to the extermination camps.
                 Too add to it they run their finances through an Irish subsidiary NS Financial Services to avoid taxes.

                 And its laughably that you refer to “wings over Scotland” website, which you seem to have done a cut and paste, its more like a Kiwiblog with a Kilt
6. greywarshark 6

   29 September 2015 at 7:01 pm

   I really don’t know why the politicals who want to get a fresh clear idea of what thinking people have in mind about the country and policy don’t host a post, set up a question and invite people to discuss. Why go to the Labour leader and cronies in Scotland.
   Why sit in a circle in NZ and play pass the parcel with some old worn-out thing thats not worth peeling off the brown paper to get. When the prize is likely to be something odd like a whoopee cushion.

   If you open to discussion, amongst all the different opinions there will be clear trends, that is if the question is open enough to invite all.
7. RedLogix 7

   29 September 2015 at 8:42 pm

   Somewhat tangential to the OP, but another interesting read:

   The entire landscape of post-crash Britain is littered with zombie ideas that should have been killed off after 2008, but instead march relentlessly on, throttling our politics. Let me list some: the sanctity of the City; the rightness of austerity; the law of political gravity that says tax rates must only ever go down. Before the meltdown and its ensuing slump, all of these things could have been questioned. After them, none can be defended. Yet what Orwell termed the “smelly little orthodoxies” of Britain’s political economy continue to reign.

   http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/29/corbyn-zombie-ideas-economy-labour
   • Ad 7.1

     30 September 2015 at 1:45 am

     Very true, but I haven’t yet seen the left in say Spain, Greece, Britain, Australia, Canada and NZ unite behind singular and coherent policy alternatives, even by degree.
8. Bill Drees 8

   1 October 2015 at 2:20 pm

   Had Corbyn not won I suspect that many Labour activists In the North would have created a new party on the model of the SNP.
   McCluskey and other Unionists were not going to have another period of Red Tories. In polling prior to the General Election there was significant support for the SNP in ENGLAND! There is a significant appetite throughout England for wholesale reform of the Westminster system. Corbyn is the only hope in the Labour Party for those who want to see real reform and real reversal of Tory policies.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS