So it's a NO.. so what happens now?

VimFuego

ICBM said:

kuro said:

It's a puzzle to a lot of us why Scots MPs get to vote on purely English issues.

Because it benefits the Labour Party, so they intentionally never fixed it after devolution. What really puzzles me is that the Tories and Lib Dems - neither of whom it benefits, particularly the Tories - have not taken the opportunity to fix it in the last four years, when they could have done even against the wishes of the same Scots MPs! Hopefully they will now, before there's any chance of Labour getting in again and it being 'forgotten' about.

problem is, we're only some 8 months from a general election, and 3 of those months will be taken up with electioneering so that gives the government precious little time to do anything, let alone undertake constitutional reform.

ICBM

VimFuego said:

problem is, we're only some 8 months from a general election, and some 3 of those months will be taken up with electioneering so that gives the government precious little time to do anything, let alone undertake constitutional reform.

They can easily do that one if they want to. They pushed through the fixed term parliament change in a matter of weeks if I remember rightly.

Fretwired said:

I think Big Dave Cameron woke up this morning and got a get out of jail card - I might have to eat humble pie if it transpired he's played some clever long game [some how I doubt it]. He can now see a way of removing Ukip and giving Labour and the Lib Dems a bad time while forging an unlikely alliance with the SNP. Salmond can campaign as a Scottish only party and Cameron can campaign as an English only party whilst Labour and the Lib Dems will need to keep as much of the status quo as possible to protect their seats in Scotland.

Salmond can do a deal with Cameron for full home rule in Scotland and say goodbye to Scottish MPs at Westminster and the Barnett formula whilst Cameron delivers an English only parliament [Wales and NI get more powers]. Labour become split, the Lib Dems become irrelevant and Ukip are left behind. Dave wins a big majority in 2015 as Scots vote for the SNP and English voters go Tory. Cameron and Salmond agree said deal and the world changes. No more Tories in Scotland [their party can rebrand and row their own boat] and Salmond can boast he rid Scotland of the Tory party ...

Dave was quick out of the blocks this morning …

I doubt it was planned, but one thing Cameron is good at is reacting to events. If that all comes to pass I would not be totally surprised.

digitalscream

Fretwired said:

I think Big Dave Cameron woke up this morning and got a get out of jail card - I might have to eat humble pie if it transpired he's played some clever long game [some how I doubt it]. He can now see a way of removing Ukip and giving Labour and the Lib Dems a bad time while forging an unlikely alliance with the SNP. Salmond can campaign as a Scottish only party and Cameron can campaign as an English only party whilst Labour and the Lib Dems will need to keep as much of the status quo as possible to protect their seats in Scotland.

Salmond can do a deal with Cameron for full home rule in Scotland and say goodbye to Scottish MPs at Westminster and the Barnett formula whilst Cameron delivers an English only parliament [Wales and NI get more powers]. Labour become split, the Lib Dems become irrelevant and Ukip are left behind. Dave wins a big majority in 2015 as Scots vote for the SNP and English voters go Tory. Cameron and Salmond agree said deal and the world changes. No more Tories in Scotland [their party can rebrand and row their own boat] and Salmond can boast he rid Scotland of the Tory party ...

Dave was quick out of the blocks this morning ...

I don't think he was playing the long game - at least, not from the beginning. I think it became pretty obvious about 6 months ago where it was all going, and it all hinged on the result going right.

The only sticking point with your second paragraph is that for it to happen Salmond needs to realise he has to play nice and accept most of what he wants rather than all of what he wants. I know his rhetoric over the last couple of years was just that; now we'll see if he's willing to back down a bit on points he always promised he'd stand firm on, in order to get the best overall solution for everybody.

If he can do that, and they can all make quick headway, then it'll probably be a landslide for the Tories next year down here.

ICBM

digitalscream said:

The only sticking point with your second paragraph is that for it to happen Salmond needs to realise he has to play nice and accept most of what he wants rather than all of what he wants. I know his rhetoric over the last couple of years was just that; now we'll see if he's willing to back down a bit on points he always promised he'd stand firm on, in order to get the best overall solution for everybody.

Above all, and despite his rhetoric, Salmond is a pragmatist. That's why he's been so successful - I'm sure he privately even counts this result as a qualified success.

Fretwired

ICBM said:

digitalscream said:

The only sticking point with your second paragraph is that for it to happen Salmond needs to realise he has to play nice and accept most of what he wants rather than all of what he wants. I know his rhetoric over the last couple of years was just that; now we'll see if he's willing to back down a bit on points he always promised he'd stand firm on, in order to get the best overall solution for everybody.

Above all, and despite his rhetoric, Salmond is a pragmatist. That's why he's been so successful - I'm sure he privately even counts this result as a qualified success.

Spot on .. it was always win/win for Salmond. This will be good news for the SNP if Dave delivers all he promises.

Fretwired

VimFuego said:

ICBM said:

kuro said:

It's a puzzle to a lot of us why Scots MPs get to vote on purely English issues.

Because it benefits the Labour Party, so they intentionally never fixed it after devolution. What really puzzles me is that the Tories and Lib Dems - neither of whom it benefits, particularly the Tories - have not taken the opportunity to fix it in the last four years, when they could have done even against the wishes of the same Scots MPs! Hopefully they will now, before there's any chance of Labour getting in again and it being 'forgotten' about.

problem is, we're only some 8 months from a general election, and 3 of those months will be taken up with electioneering so that gives the government precious little time to do anything, let alone undertake constitutional reform.

Dave will promise the earth to win the next election. As you rightly say nothing will happen before the election but this gives Dave a platform on the back of a surge in English nationalism. Vote Tory and get an English parliament and an EU referendum. Miliband has said he doesn't want either. He may have to change his mind.

digitalscream

Fretwired said:

Spot on .. it was always win/win for Salmond. This will be good news for the SNP if Dave delivers all he promises.

To be fair, it's not necessarily whether Cameron delivers on his promises - it's whether they can agree the details that the headlines rely on between them, on a timetable that gives both Cameron and Salmond enough political capital to work with before the election.

Fretwired

digitalscream said:

Fretwired said:

Spot on .. it was always win/win for Salmond. This will be good news for the SNP if Dave delivers all he promises.

To be fair, it's not necessarily whether Cameron delivers on his promises - it's whether they can agree the details that the headlines rely on between them, on a timetable that gives both Cameron and Salmond enough political capital to work with before the election.

Nothing will happen before the general election. In fact if Salmond plays his cards right he could be on course for much of what he was after had the devolution vote been yes. Dave may even agree to shift Trident by 2020. Both men smell a chance to grab power.

digitalscream

Fretwired said:

Nothing will happen before the general election. In fact if Salmond plays his cards right he could be on course for much of what he was after had the devolution vote been yes. Dave may even agree to shift Trident by 2020. Both men smell a chance to grab power.

I suspect both will be keen to get something implemented in time to influence the election, even if it's something relatively small and symbolic. I can't see it being too hard for them both to get what they want out of this - effectively, they're both riding high at the moment, even though Salmond didn't get the result he wanted, and they're going to have to try to maintain the momentum.

hungrymark

Phil_aka_Pip said:

The NO vote only shows that the Three Wise Monkeys of Westminster, Gordon Brown, and Alistair Darling between them told the best lies. It must have been the best quality BS to con a Scots majority.

Because the Scots aren't capable of working things out for themselves and have to rely solely on what they are told, which they will invariably swallow with no application of critical thought? Come on Phil...

hungrymark

I think it was a terrific statement for British democracy. Allowing a region a chance to decide on its own future at the expense of potentially personal loss, with a high turnout and a reasonably significant majority decision. Good stuff all round, makes me pleased to live in this country.

ewal

ICBM said:

musicegbdf said:

I actually accept there has to be "regional" rather than "national" variations for the well being of all. If I in London have to subsidise a community in the Outer Hebrides or the Falkland Isles , that is fine by me, but it must be equitable.

Absolutely. Fairness is essential, which is why the Barnett Formula must go - I would welcome Cameron breaking the ridiculous promise on that. Spending should be based on current need, not figures from the 1970s.

I am sure most Scots with any sense of natural justice would agree, as most do about the West Lothian question.

And a very straightforward way of dealing with Barnett, West Lothian, etc would've been a Yes vote yesterday... Ho, hum... back to being labelled subsidy junkies and the like by the tory press...

Phil_aka_Pip

hungrymark said:

Phil_aka_Pip said:

The NO vote only shows that the Three Wise Monkeys of Westminster, Gordon Brown, and Alistair Darling between them told the best lies. It must have been the best quality BS to con a Scots majority.

Because the Scots aren't capable of working things out for themselves and have to rely solely on what they are told, which they will invariably swallow with no application of critical thought? Come on Phil...

It happens elsewhere in the UK (although I grant you sometimes its not a result of good BS by the winners, more down to a lack of credible alternative, which is why we had so many Tory governments in a row from 1979 onwards). I was both surprised and disappointed with the result, I thought the Scots knew better than to believe the Westminster BS. It must have been high quality BS, OR the Scots decided that Salmond hadn't got the currency thing right. I suspect a bit of both, tbh. Salmond didn't convince me, even though I very much wanted him to be right.

Fretwired

ewal said:

ICBM said:

musicegbdf said:

I actually accept there has to be "regional" rather than "national" variations for the well being of all. If I in London have to subsidise a community in the Outer Hebrides or the Falkland Isles , that is fine by me, but it must be equitable.

Absolutely. Fairness is essential, which is why the Barnett Formula must go - I would welcome Cameron breaking the ridiculous promise on that. Spending should be based on current need, not figures from the 1970s.

I am sure most Scots with any sense of natural justice would agree, as most do about the West Lothian question.

And a very straightforward way of dealing with Barnett, West Lothian, etc would've been a Yes vote yesterday... Ho, hum... back to being labelled subsidy junkies and the like by the tory press...

Too many unanswered questions about currency, defence, EU membership made 55% of people vote no. Home rule could give Scotland pretty much independence with the exception of defence and foreign affairs whilst retaining the best parts of being in the union - stable currency, defence, EU membership etc. Make it fair for all and everybody wins.

frankus

My issue with UKIP is there funding is probably from U.S neo-cons, pushing a libertarian agenda for big business.

chillidoggy

It's a "No"?

FFS, now we have to look forward to all the platitudes, Salmond crowing that it was what he really warned all along, and the government arriving on the Scottish border with barrow loads of cash.

Pass me a bucket.

Fretwired

frankus said:

My issue with UKIP is there funding is probably from U.S neo-cons, pushing a libertarian agenda for big business.

You're probably right. Wasn't Farage a City banker at one time?

ICBM

chillidoggy said:

FFS, now we have to look forward to all the platitudes, Salmond crowing that it was what he really warned all along, and the government arriving on the Scottish border with barrow loads of cash.

Salmond won't dare do that even if it is. He's far too astute - it would undermine his credibility. Much easier to blame it on scaremongering and false promises by the Westminster parties - the first of which is partly true and the second may yet be, although I hope not.

The cash (ie Barnett Formula) is going to mysteriously disappear now too, I expect - the UK parties can't afford the backlash from England.

Fretwired

chillidoggy said:

It's a "No"?

FFS, now we have to look forward to all the platitudes, Salmond crowing that it was what he really warned all along, and the government arriving on the Scottish border with barrow loads of cash.

Pass me a bucket.

That might be Miliband's plan but Cameron has other ideas and Clegg's on the fence. Let's be positive .. some good may come of this courtesy of the Scots.

deano

The interesting thing - for me - about the referendum is how it has highlighted the anti-Scottish feeling held by a sizeable number of English people.

Let's be frank, David Cameron doesn't have to appeal to Scotland in any way. He doesn't need their votes and he would be mad to try to get any. However, pandering to the anti-Scottish resentments of the English will probably get him a good number of votes; not pandering to them may well cause some angry voters to go over to UKIP.

Furthermore it puts Labour and the Liberals in quite an unenviable position. To win Scottish seats means they must pander to the Scottish, which will annoy the anti-Scottish English voters! Go after the anti-Scottish and they risk losing Scottish seats.

The run up to the next general election will be interesting, but I'm glad I will be watching it unfold as an Englishman and not a Scot.