The Student Room Group

Should we suspend Scottish devolution?

Scroll to see replies

Reply 20
Original post by L i b
Christ, we have enough problems trying to take on the administration of a small number of fairly simple welfare benefits that were devolved by the 2016 Scotland Act.

Haven't all the fairly simple ones been delivered? Plus a couple of others which are new rather than taking on the admin.
Original post by anarchism101
Not at all, an independent Scotland's chances of EU accession would be pretty good, indeed I suspect - if independence happened soon - Scotland would become an EU member before any of the WB6.

How?
Original post by QE2
"It is unacceptable and naive for a state to leave a larger organisation of nations with a central governing body, in favour of independence and sovereignty and think they can be successful on their own. " - scream all the Brexiteers and Leave voters.

Inaccurate as ever
Original post by Quady
No they don't?

Or at least I dont as a Yes/Leave voter in the referendums.

Plus 1
Original post by Quady
Power back to Westminister, but administered The Scotland Office in St Andrew's House in Edinburgh?

Like NHS Scotland has never been run from Westminister.

Similarly Scotlands legal and judiciary system.

Well it's the only way to stop neverendums, it will never end unless we either let you go independent or sack off the devolution which gives the SNP its power. So the fair way is to be open and honest (a stranger to most politicians) and say, Scotland decides on its future in or out the UK, first, and the rest of the UK does not get a say! However if Scotland decide to stay in the UK the consequences of the SNP dishonestly I'm recent years is the end of the recent Scottish devoted powers and a further referendum where the rest of the UK decide if Scotland keeps Holyrood at all or is treated the same as England.

So money where you mouth is, what's it to be. In a stay in UK vote, let's see how the rest of the UK feel about Scotland getting more public money than they do or let Scotland sail free and save the rest of the UK money.

P.s the fact they do have greater social policies and safety nets, I believe is the reason that Scotland voted remain in 2016, My view.
(edited 3 years ago)
Reply 25
Original post by Burton Bridge
Well it's the only way to stop neverendums, it will never end unless we either let you go independent or sack off the devolution which gives the SNP its power. So the fair way is to be open and honest (a stranger to most politicians) and say, Scotland decides on its future in or out the UK, first, and the rest of the UK does not get a say! However if Scotland decide to stay in the UK the consequences of the SNP dishonestly I'm recent years is the end of the recent Scottish devoted powers and a further referendum where the rest of the UK decide if Scotland keeps Holyrood at all or is treated the same as England.

So money where you mouth is, what's it to be. In a stay in UK vote, let's see how the rest of the UK feel about Scotland getting more public money than they do or let Scotland sail free and save the rest of the UK money.

P.s the fact they do have greater social policies and safety nets, I believe is the reason that Scotland voted remain in 2016, My view.

So administered from Westminster too then or not?

Just wondered if you thought Westminster would be ready for that, like are there enough folk versed in Scots law living around London and how would knowledge transfer about NHS Scotland work?

The rest of the UK can have a referendum to leave the Union, nothing stopping that at the minute if the populus wanted.

My view is Scotland voted remain as it had little EU immigration and its population close historic ties to Ireland/N Ireland.
Reply 26
Original post by Burton Bridge
Inaccurate as ever

Usually I just dismiss people whom I disagree with, but your post was so thoughtfully argued and well presented that I have no option but to admit defeat.
:hat2:
Original post by Quady
So administered from Westminster too then or not?

Just wondered if you thought Westminster would be ready for that, like are there enough folk versed in Scots law living around London and how would knowledge transfer about NHS Scotland work?

The rest of the UK can have a referendum to leave the Union, nothing stopping that at the minute if the populus wanted.

My view is Scotland voted remain as it had little EU immigration and its population close historic ties to Ireland/N Ireland.

Your not so confident you would win an independence referendum then?

Yes Westminster would cope fine gaining the power back it gave away in the 90's.

Well , I still think the EU referendum was basically a question, are you happy with the status quo or not? Those which the status quo isn't that bad they voted remain, those which have suffered by the status quo voted leave... in general. I think this is more accurate rarther than any genuine euroscepticism or passion for the European union.
Reply 28
Original post by Quady
My view is Scotland voted remain as it had little EU immigration

Careful now. You're not allowed to admit that people voted Leave because of immigration.
Original post by QE2
Usually I just dismiss people whom I disagree with, but your post was so thoughtfully argued and well presented that I have no option but to admit defeat.
:hat2:

Brilliant

Original post by QE2
Careful now. You're not allowed to admit that people voted Leave because of immigration.

This is inaccurate as ever, also :u:
Reply 30
Original post by Burton Bridge
Brilliant
This is inaccurate as ever, also :u:

Did you get the "My Big Book of Debating" for Christmas?
Original post by QE2
Did you get the "My Big Book of Debating" for Christmas?

Careful now. You’ll get reported for insults!
Original post by imlikeahermit
Careful now. You’ll get reported for insults!

Careful! You might get in trouble for off topic inflammatory comments.

If you want to stop getting into bother for breaking forum rules, maybe stop breaking forum rules.... like posting off topic inflammatory posts like this.
Original post by Burton Bridge
Careful! You might get in trouble for off topic inflammatory comments.

If you want to stop getting into bother for breaking forum rules, maybe stop breaking forum rules.... like posting off topic inflammatory posts like this.

Precious, aren’t you? :cry:

For what it’s worth most of your on topic comments are inflammatory, so how you don’t receive warnings for them is more the point. You constantly bait other users, constantly throw around terms such as ‘bigot’ and generally lambast anyone who doesn’t agree with you, as you’ve exemplified in this thread. Once a poster doesn’t agree with you, they’re suddenly on your blacklist, no matter their opinion.
(edited 3 years ago)
Original post by imlikeahermit
Precious, aren’t you? :cry:

For what it’s worth most of your on topic comments are inflammatory, so how you don’t receive warnings for them is more the point. You constantly bait other users, constantly throw around terms such as ‘bigot’ and generally lambast anyone who doesn’t agree with you, as you’ve exemplified in this thread. Once a poster doesn’t agree with you, they’re suddenly on your blacklist, no matter their opinion.

This is utter fantasy, there wasn't any conflict in this thread from #30 backwards... maybe a sarcastic/ lpassive aggression in #27 which I ignored, untill you two started.

On the contrary I've spent the last two weeks arguing agaist tribalism in politics. Logical arguments and disagreements are healthy and as I say its perfectly possible to agree vehemently with someone on one topic and passionately agree with them on a different one.

I almost never lambasted anyone, unless they are blatantly trolling I challenge their views. Unfortunately separation of the two blurs sometimes, I agreed with you and even QE2 in the past, just you have to make a correct point first, I cannot agree with factually incorrect statements like

"It is unacceptable and naive for a state to leave a larger organisation of nations with a central governing body, in favour of independence and sovereignty and think they can be successful on their own. " - scream all the Brexiteers and Leave voters.

This just not true as I and another leave voter confirm.

Please add me to your ignore list, it's better than following me around insulting me for making points your are misunderstanding.
(edited 3 years ago)
Reply 35
Original post by imlikeahermit
Careful now. You’ll get reported for insults!

I'm regularly pulled up for being "patronising" :rolleyes:. But there do seem to be a couple of posters who have very itchy report fingers, judging by which posts are reported.
Reply 36
Original post by Burton Bridge
Careful! You might get in trouble for off topic inflammatory comments.
If you want to stop getting into bother for breaking forum rules, maybe stop breaking forum rules.... like posting off topic inflammatory posts like this.

Oh, it would be lovely if you had done this deliberately, but knowing you, it's got to be a
*sspprrooinnggg!!*
Reply 37
Original post by imlikeahermit
For what it’s worth most of your on topic comments are inflammatory, so how you don’t receive warnings for them is more the point. You constantly bait other users, constantly throw around terms such as ‘bigot’ and generally lambast anyone who doesn’t agree with you, as you’ve exemplified in this thread.

The mods can't monitor every thread. They mostly respond to reports.
Hmm...

Once a poster doesn’t agree with you, they’re suddenly on your blacklist, no matter their opinion.

Racist!
Reply 38
Original post by Burton Bridge
I cannot agree with factually incorrect statements like

"It is unacceptable and naive for a state to leave a larger organisation of nations with a central governing body, in favour of independence and sovereignty and think they can be successful on their own. " - scream all the Brexiteers and Leave voters.

This just not true as I and another leave voter confirm.

Do you understand the concept of hyperbole for effect?
Anywho, if we remove the "all", do you still claim the principle is "factually inaccurate"?

"It is unacceptable and naive for a state to leave a larger organisation of nations with a central governing body, in favour of independence and sovereignty and think they can be successful on their own." - scream some Brexiteers and Leave voters.

Do you deny that there is hypocrisy in the two positions of "Must leave political union" and "Must not leave political union",
Original post by QE2
Oh, it would be lovely if you had done this deliberately, but knowing you, it's got to be a
*sspprrooinnggg!!*

Lol you know what, I thought that as i posted it :biggrin:

Anything on the on topic point or are we continuing the off topic attacking of me?

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending