#1 Nicola Sturgeon/Scottish National Party

[Bev]

SCOTS could be asked to vote in another, quick-fire referendum on independence if new powers promised to Scotland are not delivered, Nicola Sturgeon warned yesterday at the launch of her bid to become SNP leader and First Minister.

At an event in Glasgow, Ms Sturgeon said she would play a frontline role in ensuring pre-referendum pledges from the three pro-Union party leaders of “home rule and something close to federalism” *became a *reality.

The Deputy First Minister, who is expected to remain the sole candidate for the party leadership, said her immediate focus will be on “playing an *active role” in the Smith Commission, which has been established to hammer out a deal between Scotland’s political parties on more devolution by the end of November.



The 44-year-old, who has been Mr Salmond’s deputy for the past decade, is expected to become the first woman to hold the office of First Minister of Scotland. She said her guiding ethos would be a “social democratic one” with a pledge to foster a vibrant business community and “recharge” efforts to tackle inequality and poverty.

But the prospect of another referendum prompted concerns from other parties who say the SNP must “move on”.

Transport minister Keith Brown is expected to announce his candidacy for the deputy leadership – Ms Sturgeon’s current role – in Edinburgh this morning, as is the MP Stewart Hosie, the SNP’s Treasury spokesman at Westminster.


The SNP leadership, including Mr Salmond and Ms Sturgeon, have both previously suggested that referendums only happen “once in a generation”.

Yesterday Ms Sturgeon said: “If I’m elected to be leader of the party, my focus will not be planning for another referendum, my focus will be working with others to deliver the substantial powers that were promised to the people of Scotland in the closing stages of the *referendum.”

These must be capable of “making a real difference” to people’s lives, including powers to create jobs, ensure proper fiscal accountability, protect public services and deliver “fair” social security. “It must be a package that maximises devolution in substance, not just in rhetoric,” she warned.

However, the prospect of another vote on the constitution will be determined by the “circumstances of the day”, she added. If the UK parties “renege” on their promise of substantial new powers for Holyrood or a future European referendum sees Scotland taken out the EU “against its will”, this could mean another vote on the *constitution.

“You may have circumstances in which the people of Scotland will be demanding the right to choose a different future for Scotland,” she said.

Labour, the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats have published separate plans for more powers for Holyrood and pledged that a deal will be reached by the end of November, after a timetable was set out by former prime minister Gordon Brown before the *referendum.

The UK parties could ensure the prospect of another referendum is thwarted by delivering in full on their promises of more powers, observers said.

“My focus right now is on *respecting the outcome of the referendum and moving forward to ensure the implementation of what I think is the will of the people in that respect,” Ms Sturgeon added.

“If those promises are not delivered, I think the UK parties will encounter a very angry reaction indeed from the public.”


She declined to say if the commitment to another independence referendum would be in the party’s manifesto for the 2016 election which the party hopes to “win and win well”.

The Deputy First Minister said it would be dictated by circumstances and “the mood of the public” and added: “We will only have another referendum if a party is elected on a platform of offering – in a manifesto – a referendum. It will be driven by what the people of Scotland want.”

Polls at the weekend suggested the party is set for another victory at Holyrood in 2016 and could even seize another *majority. SNP membership has more than doubled since the referendum defeat to top 60,000. More than 35,000 people have joined up since last Thursday.

Scottish Conservative deputy leader Jackson Carlaw said: “This confirms that a vote for the SNP in 2016 is a vote for another independence referendum – that is not what the majority in Scotland want. People have moved on; the SNP must too.”

Liberal Democrat leader Willie Rennie said the SNP’s plans were changing “hour by hour”.

He said: “The referendum vote demonstrated the will of the Scottish people to build a stronger Scotland and it will be for all political parties to match those expectations.”

Labour’s Drew Smith urged Ms Sturgeon to “learn the lessons” of the referendum.

He added: “That must mean being prepared to accept that Scotland remaining within the United Kingdom is the settled will of the Scottish people.”

source scotsman.com

I hope they do honour the promises they made, if only to save us from yet another endless and futile round of trying to point out to non-Brits that the SNP is not a nationalist party.

[Bev]

Nicola Sturgeon has admitted she is facing a “particular challenge” if she becomes SNP leader from thousands of new party members demanding another independence referendum.

The Deputy First Minister insisted she has no plans for another vote soon but said it could be an issue she has to deal with for the “next couple of years” if, as expected, she succeeds Alex Salmond as party leader and First Minister.

SNP membership has more than doubled from 25,000 to 68,200 since the referendum, with the unprecedented surge coming from Yes campaigners wanting to continue the fight for independence and an influx from the hard Left.

They are expected to demand the promise of another referendum be included in the party’s 2016 Holyrood election manifesto but, with opinion polls showing most Scots do not want a rerun, this would hurt the SNP’s chances of re-election.

In a series of interviews with the Sunday newspapers, Ms Sturgeon also said she would seek Mr Salmond’s counsel if she succeeds him as First Minister but she would not allow him to be a “back seat driver”.


She promised to put aside her mentor’s divisive approach and attempt to unite Scots on both sides of the independence debate, for example by working with the Unionist parties to deliver the devolution of more powers.

But Yes campaigners staged protests at the weekend calling for a recount of the referendum, despite the separatists losing by nearly 400,000 votes, and warning that independence was only “deferred” on September 18.

Ms Sturgeon admitted the SNP’s new members were “impatient for change” but claimed they were realistic about accepting that No had won.

Asked if she was worried about the party wanting another referendum sooner than she would like, she told the Sunday Herald: “That’s always going to be a challenge of leadership and it’s a particular challenge with such a big group of new members.”

But she said she would far rather be in that position over the next few years than have the exodus of members she believes is facing Labour. Ms Sturgeon is not expected to face a contest, meaning she would become SNP leader and First Minister when Mr Salmond steps down in November.

In a separate interview with the Sunday Times, the 44-year-old said she had tried to talk him out of resigning when he told her of his decision to go, only hours after it emerged Scots had voted to remain part of the UK.

But she said she would “unambiguously” be the leader after Mr Salmond steps down, saying she wanted to adopt a “different approach”. She added the public would inflict a “very heavy penalty” on the pro-UK parties if substantial new powers do not come to Holyrood.

Duncan Ross, a former SNP National Secretary, said the SNP may now shift to the Left and faced a challenge “to maintain a clear political identity that is not just the Yes coalition.”

“My own view is we would be crazy to go into 2016 with a referendum in our manifesto unless circumstances change dramatically,” he warned

ht tp://ww w.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11126840/Nicola-Sturgeon-admits-second-referendum-challenge-from-new-SNP-members.html

[Zander]

You got the date you wanted, you got the question you wanted, you got the 16 year olds to vote, like you wanted. You had your chance and YOU LOST! You turned a blind eye to threats and violence against "No" campaigners. Every person who voted "No" must vote against the SNP in the next election to stop this happening again. Scotland will get the extra powers it was promised but that still won't be enough for the scum, republican element that infests our land. They hate the idea of being British and will keep causing division until the SNP are silenced.

[NewsFeed]

The new SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon has vowed to prop up a Labour government in 2015, according to the Daily Mail.

Sturgeon, who is due to replace former leader Alex Salmond as First Minister next week after a vote in Holyrood, will tell delegates at the SNP’s annual conference in Perth that SNP MPs will not to a deal with the Conservatives if they fail to win an overall majority at Westminster next year.

With a hung parliament a plausible outcome of the next General Election Ms Sturgeon has joined the list of leaders saying their party could hold the balance of power in 2015.

She will say: "The SNP will never put the Tories into Government" adding that the Labour Party "will fall back on the same desperate mantras as before" and tell voters that only Labour will keep the Conservatives out of Downing Street.

She will say this is "the biggest con trick in Scottish politics" and voters "must not fall for it again".

Currently Labour have 40 MPs in Scotland, a key reason why the national party cannot support a move for English-only votes in Westminster. The Liberal Democrats have 11, the SNP six and the Conservatives have one.

SNP membership has tripled since the independence referendum in September and the party has moved ahead of Labour in voting intentions for the General Election as well as Holyrood polls. It stands on 34 per cent, with Labour on 32 per cent, the Conservatives on 18 per cent, Lib Dems facing a wipe out on five, behind UKIP on six.

In the seats which the Lib Dems stand to lose, it is the Conservatives who were in second place in 2010, not the SNP or Labour. In fact, out of the eleven seats, only one has the SNP in second place.

It therefore seems implausible that voting Labour could leave Scotland with a Conservative government in Westminster any more than voting SNP would.

Former Leader Alex Salmond has also made sure delegates are aware that the referendum result of the NO to independence will not alter the direction of the party.

He told conference that Scotland had "risen to the challenge" of Independence.

"The people will not disappear back into the political shadows and the nation will not face into the dark," he said. "This country has changed and changed utterly."

"This is the change which will carry us forward - forward to independence," he said to rousing applause.

The leader of Plaid Cymru was also present in Perth, telling the audience that they had "started a democratic revolution" as voters in Wales became more enthused about their own independence from Westminster, she said.

read full article at source: http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-L...prop-up-Labour

[NewsFeed]

The new leader of Scotland’s National Party, spearheading the country’s independence from the UK, repeats ambition to make Scotland an independent country under her watch, suggesting she may call another independence referendum.

Speaking on Saturday on the second day of the SNP national conference in the city of Perth, Nicola Sturgeon, who’s taken over from Alex Salmond as the party’ chief and is waiting to become Scotland’s first female First Minister, has described Scotland first September 18 referendum on self-determination, which was defeated at the ballot box, as “unwon”.

“The friends know this it will be won,” said the 44-year-old lawyer. “Scotland will become an independent country,” Sturgeon added.

Sturgeon said she would continue the fight for Scotland’s independence in her speech at the party’s annual conference on Saturday as well.

The brains behind Scotland’s first botched independence referendum said the Scots have lost faith in London-based parties.

“Power over Scotland no longer rests in the corridors of Westminster, it rests with Scottish people and that is where it will stay,” she said.

Polls show the SNP is surging in polls against the Labour, partners with Tories (conservatives) in the British coalition government and that’s made the party a kingmaker in the upcoming general elections.

Sturgeon urged the Scottish voters not to vote Labour in May 2015 elections to take down the Conservatives as well.

“That is the biggest con trick in Scottish politics and we must not fall for it again,” she said. “Scotland did vote Labour at the last general election, but we still ended up with the Tories.”

Salmond’s deputy for years, Sturgeon is expected to win the Scottish parliament vote to take over the country’s politics in the new capacity as Scotland First Minister.

Source

Related Posts

Did you like this information? Then please consider making a donation or subscribing to our Newsletter.

read full article at source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/TheEu...3/jOZNMO8WZj0/

[john-connor]

Glasgow Uni building diversity with new names
Glasgow University names to reflect more than just dead white men. Picture: John Devlin
Glasgow University names to reflect more than just dead white men. Picture: John Devlin

MARC HORNE
09:26Monday 02 March 2015

Glasgow University is to rename buildings on its campus after women and people from ethnic minorities after campaigners complained they only honoured “dead white men”.

First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has given her support to the controversial move and could even find herself celebrated at her alma mater.

The move means buildings that are dedicated to legendary innovators such as James Watt and Adam Smith could be renamed in favour of women’s rights activists and black *academics.

The changes have been championed by the University’s Student Representative Council (SRC), which claims the existing building names reinforce sexism and inequality.

However, the switch has sparked a campus backlash, with other undergraduates branding it offensive, patronising and unnecessarily politically correct.

The SNP leader has called on other seats of learning to follow Glasgow’s lead.

Ms Sturgeon, who graduated from the university with a law degree in 1993, described the initiative as “hugely important”, adding: “Women have done great things and fantastic things, but you struggle to find the evidence of that. If the university’s looking to do that, that’s fantastic and I hope others would follow her example.” http://www.scotsman.com/news/educati...ames-1-3705717

[Bev]

Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland’s First Minister, has accused the Scottish Secretary of “dirty tricks” over the leak of the confidential memo which suggested she wanted David Cameron to remain as Prime Minister.

She was responding to the admission by Alistair Carmichael, that the memo of her conversation with the French Ambassador had been leaked from his office, saying he should “question his whole approach to politics”.

Mr Carmichael, a Liberal Democrat, had denied that the leak was an embarrassment to the Government, saying: "this is the middle of an election campaign, these things happen".

"These things happen:" Alistair Carmichael's response to the leak of the confidential memo

In response, Mrs Sturgeon said: "I think Alistair Carmichael really needs to question his whole approach to politics if he thinks dirty tricks and smear campaigns are just how things are done in elections.

"I take a very different view. I think elections should be a battle of positive ideas and that's how I'll continue to campaign."

Mr Carmichael has asked Sir Jeremy Heywood, the Cabinet Secretary, to carry out an inquiry into the leak of the memo.

The SNP vehemently deny that Mrs Surgeon said she would prefer Mr Cameron to remain Prime Minister, but the party has been less outspoken over the suggestion in the memo that she told Ambassador Sylvie Bermann she did not see Ed Miliband, the Labour Leader, as “prime minister material.”

Mrs Sturgeon said questions remained over how The Telegraph came to have access to the memo.

She said: “The questions are: who wrote this memo, how did it come to contain such an inaccuracy, but most importantly of all how did it very conveniently fall into the hands of the Daily Telegraph? I want answers to these questions and I want them as quickly as possible."


Scotland’s First Minister was speaking during a campaign visit in East Dunbartonshire, where she chatted with pensioners at a care home as she set out the SNP’s plans to protect benefits for the elderly and raise pensions.

She said she was aware that she had become a more high profile figure since last week, when she was widely seen as having performed the best of the leaders taking part in a pre-election debate.



"We're challenging the old boys' network and we're challenging that cosy consensus of Labour, the Liberals and the Tories who want more austerity cuts,” Mrs Sturgeon added.

"So, I guess it's not surprising there are people in the Westminster establishment who don't like that message and who want to fight back against it, but I'll continue to take our positive message to the doorsteps, the streets, the communities of Scotland, because I believe it's the right one."

ht tp://w ww.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/11518007/Nicola-Sturgeon-claims-dirty-tricks-over-leaked-memo.html

Does Labour's election chief know something we don't about Nicola Sturgeon's leaked memo?

Douglas Alexander deleted a series of tweets he posted attacking the SNP leader over her apparent claim that she would prefer David Cameron to remain as Prime Minister and her description of Ed Miliband as not "PM material".

Ms Sturgeon has categorically denied she made the comments, reported to have been told to the French Ambassador in a meeting on February 26.Get Flash Player The origin of the leaked memo, written by a civil servant following a conversation with consul general Pierre-Alain Coffinier, has been confirmed as the Scotland Office.

Jeremy Heywood has initiated an inquiry into how a civil service account of a private meeting between Nicola Sturgeon and the French ambassador was obtained by The Telegraph Jeremy Heywood has initiated an inquiry into how a civil service account of a private meeting between Nicola Sturgeon and the French ambassador was obtained by The Telegraph.

There is still a lot of mystery surrounding the story - if it is "100 per cent not true" as Ms Sturgeon claims, why would anyone fabricate the memo?

So does Mr Alexander, who is also Labour's shadow Foreign Secretary, know something about it that he isn't telling us about?

The comments, if true, would be hugely damaging to the SNP leader and would significantly boost Labour's chances of winning the election and Mr Alexander's own battle to defend his Paisley and Renfrewshire South seat.

That's why he was happy to tweet about the story when it broke on Friday night. But yesterday he deleted all three tweets linking to the Daily Telegraph story on the leaked memo.

Did he get in touch with his fellow Labour MPs to ask them to do as he did and delete their own Sturgeon-bashing tweets?

ht tp://ww w.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/generalelection/why-did-labour-election-chief-delete-tweets-slamming-nicola-sturgeon-over-her-leaked-memo-comments-10157871.html

[bonnie blue cap]

She looks like a man.

[NewsFeed]

During a flying visit to see Tony Blair in Downing Street, Bill Clinton once remarked that he’d happily exchange the constitutional powers granted to an American president for those available to a British prime minister with a majority in the 650-seat House of Commons.

And that’s really the point of next month’s UK general election, in which the current Conservative prime minister, David Cameron, and his Labour challenger, Ed Miliband, are battling for the top job: this year, those powers are diminished more than they have been for a century.

When the Founding Fathers met in Philadelphia in 1787, they were determined to prevent a tyranny like George III’s, and so separated out the legislative, judicial and executive branches of government to keep each other in check.

That didn’t happen in Britain, where reforming governments wrestled royal prerogatives away from the monarch, and kept most to themselves.

Thus, in a parliamentary system where the leader of the party with most elected members of parliament (MPs) gets to become prime minister, a Commons majority allows the cabinet to do “anything except change a man into a woman”, as the old Victorian joke goes.

That’s the theory. But in practice, the options facing Britain’s political leaders when the votes are counted on May 7 will be more difficult than they have been for decades – and mostly for reasons American voters will easily recognise.

Collapse of the two-party system

Public mistrust of government is high in Britain, and deference to the political elite has also collapsed as economic woes erode living standards. Amid all that, voters are deserting the Conservatives and Labour, Britain’s two main parties of the right and left since the 1920s, in droves.

In the 1951 election, Labour and the Conservatives – or Tories – shared 96% of the vote. By 2010 they could only manage 66% between them.

At the last election in 2010, Cameron – the first Tory leader since the 1960s to be educated at Eton college and Oxford University, an upper-class combination somewhat comparable to the Ivy League – successfully ousted Labour after 13 years of Blair and then Gordon Brown, but his 306 seats to Labour’s 258 left him 20 short of an outright majority.

The Conservative leader was forced into the first peacetime coalition since the Great Depression, his partners the middle-of-the-road Liberal Democrats who had staged a revival since near-extinction in the 50s and had won 57 seats. A coalition of some kind – or a minority government, rule by a party that does not have a majority of MPs – seems likely again this year.

Contrary to predictions, the 2010 coalition has survived its full five-year term, partly thanks to the Fixed Term Parliament Act, which Cameron and his deputy, the Lib Dem leader, Nick Clegg, passed to stop each other walking out on the deal and triggering an early election at a self-serving moment.

They also had hopes of passing constitutional reform, but fell out over scrapping Britain’s first-past-the-post voting system – also used in the US – with a European-style system of proportional representation, and replacing the House of Lords, still chosen by a mixture of appointment and inheritance, with an elected, regionally based Senate.

Hereditary lords, heirs to medieval warriors, can still vote on legislation in a 21st century democracy? Constitutional reform must be a slow process in Britain, you may well think.

Correct. But pressure for change from below is coming fast – and from two previously unlikely directions. And this is where the 2015 UK general election becomes seriously tricky.

Nationalism in Scotland – and England too

As the British empire was gradually dissolved after the second world war and its industrial base attacked by younger, nimbler economies, the cohesion of the British state weakened.

Scotland

There was an impulse towards supra-nationalism in the shape of membership in the European Union, where countries that had fought each other for centuries – notably France and Germany – agreed to cooperate in the new world of superpower blocs. Britain joined late, in 1973, but some English people – perhaps steeped in Britain’s maritime, free-trade and imperial traditions – felt wary or hostile towards the EU.

At the same time, long-smothered regional nationalism was reviving on Britain’s Celtic fringes. In divided Ireland, it was violent; in Scotland, political, emboldened by newly discovered North Sea oil; in Wales, initially, cultural, based around the preservation of the Welsh language.

That was in the 70s. Forty years on, these rival strands are much stronger, and testing the concept of “Britishness” to destruction.

The Scottish national party has barely paused for breath since losing last September’s referendum on independence for Scotland – immediately declaring itself the moral victor and demanding greater powers for Edinburgh.

Since the referendum result – 55% no, 45% yes – disaffected working-class Labour voters have flocked to the SNP. Polls suggest the Scottish nationalists, now led by Scotland’s new first minister, the formidable Nicola Sturgeon, will slaughter Labour north of the border, winning dozens of Scotland’s 59 seats and perhaps holding the balance of power in London. If she finds herself in that position, Sturgeon promises to block Cameron and prop up a minority Miliband administration.

Britain’s Tory newspapers are busy denouncing Sturgeon as “the most dangerous woman” in the country. Cameron – whose Tories have only one seat in Scotland – warns of a Scottish veto from the people who want to break up Britain. Miliband is embarrassed.

Meanwhile, in England, the populist anti-European right, in the form of the UK independence party (Ukip), has evolved under the skilful leadership of Nigel Farage from a ragbag collection of misfits, eccentrics and renegades into a real party. It is one whose proven ability to win protest votes at four-yearly elections to the 28-nation European parliame

----- snip -----


read full article at source: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...-david-cameron

[NewsFeed]

UK general election:

The SNP (Scottish National Party), under feisty new leader Nicola Sturgeon, is scaring the daylights out of Labour and Conservatives with the prospect of a strong squad of MPs marching south headed by fearsome former leader and political bruiser Alex Salmond.

Cameron or Miliband for prime minister – warmongering toff or socialist nonentity? And with whose coalition help? That’s the bleak choice for British voters.

Since the Yes/No independence referendum last September the SNP has enjoyed such a huge surge in support that the main Westminster parties are terrified that Scottish MPs could wield disproportionate influence in the likely event of a hung parliament, especially as Nicola has vowed to “lock Cameron out of Number 10” if she gets the chance.

For many Scots the dream of cutting free from the machinations of the UK parliament and its dead-hand bureaucracy didn’t end with the ‘no’ decision. The idea remains intoxicating and they’ll make a second bid in due course. It all sounds heroic but how could anyone, on cool reflection, bring themselves to hate the UK and still love the EU? Why move heaven and earth to escape the snake-pit of Westminster only to throw themselves – and everyone else north of the border – into the nest of vipers in Brussels? Because that’s the SNP proposition.

The SNP’s infatuation with the failing and widely mistrusted EU project is unconvincing. David Torrance writing in Think Scotland asks: “Why, precisely, was it wrong to have a central bank in London making major decisions about the Scottish economy, but right for another central bank based in Brussels (eventually to be Frankfurt) to do precisely that? And how, exactly, would an independent Scotland exert more influence within the EU than the much larger United Kingdom?”

When the SNP talk about independence it’s as phony as when the Tories and Labour talk about our so-called independent nuclear deterrent, Trident. Mr Cameron says: “I profoundly believe we should maintain our independent nuclear deterrent…” He’s convinced we need “a full replacement for Trident”. Michael Fallon, his defence minister, has just reminded everyone about “the 60 year consensus that has existed among governments of all colours in favour of an operationally independent nuclear deterrent”, while Labour “remains committed to a minimum, credible, independent nuclear capability, delivered through a Continuous At-Sea Deterrent”.

Note the extravagant use of the word “independent”. Eight or nine states around the world have functional nukes and the means to deliver them, not least Israel. They all manufacture and maintain their own. They all have complete control over their use. All, that is, except Britain. Our Trident missiles are manufactured by Lockheed Martin in the US and serviced by the US Navy. So if Britain doesn’t go along with America’s crazed foreign policy and play ball with the White House’s nasty allies, what happens to our “independent” nuclear deterrence… having spent countless £billions of British taxpayers’ money acquiring it?

The 2006 White Paper says there is no good case for making a substantial additional investment in our nuclear deterrent purely to insure against the highly unlikely occasion of a deep and lasting breakdown in relations with the US. “We therefore believe that it makes sense to continue to procure elements of the system from the US.” Not only don’t we have an independent nuke, we don’t have an independent foreign policy either.

Nevertheless, it is claimed that if a British Prime Minister wants to press the nuclear button, the US cannot stop the launch of missiles or prevent them from delivering British nuclear warheads to the target. But it is widely believed that to target Trident accurately, the launching submarine needs access to US systems at the time of launch.

Would the US really sell a weapons system, even to a close friend, without safeguards against it being used – accurately or not – to vaporise America’s dodgy allies, or America herself? Perhaps our American readers can help us here. Whatever the truth, it is unlikely that Britain would use its nuclear weapons system without US approval. The same goes for any proposed replacement of Trident. Expecting British taxpayers to dig deep for another £100 billion, which they simply cannot afford, just to possess a shiny newer version is not only bizarre but fraudulent.

But to give the SNP their due, they wish to scrap Trident.

Trade stitch-up

We can certainly forget about independence if the TTIP comes to pass. Critics claim that the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) currently being negotiated between the EU and the United States could:

Weaken workers’ rights and put millions of jobs at risk;

Reduce environmental protection and food safety regulation;

Lead to more privatisation of public services like education and our prized National Health Service (NHS);

Give new powers to corporations to sue European governments, including the UK, in secret courts. A particularly objectionable part of the deal is the imposition of investor-to-state dispute settlement rules (ISDS) enabling foreign investors to sue the host government.

It turns out that US states are not covered by the TTIP agreement, so procurement at state level over there would not be opened up to the same extent as EU states over here. Then there are the ‘Buy American’ rules that apply to materials used in contracts inside and outside the United States and especially projects funded by the federal government. And any EU company boycotting Israel stands no chance. So it’s already looking rather one-sided.

The threat is not just to our NHS but all public service and infrastructure projects, as well as the industrial base we in the UK ought to be nourishing and defending as a priority. We surely don’t want a repeat of the offshore wind power scandal that allows foreign corporates to enjoy a feeding frenzy around Britain’s coast while U

----- snip -----


read full article at source: http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/04...nster-parties/

[Bobby Bandanza]

On September 18, 2014, Scotland’s voters went to the polls to vote on the question: Should Scotland be independent as it was prior to 1603? In some areas 90% of the qualified voters turned out in hopes of having their say. The next day it was reported that the official result was only 45% “yes” for independence to 55% “no.” But as Hamlet might say, something is rotten in the state of Scotland with evidence indicating that the election was rigged.

Before Election Day, the informal polling was running 51% yes to 49% no. That’s your first sign of possible shenanigans. But there is lots more.

Source: American Free Press

[Bev]

Originally Posted by Bobby Bandanza

Source: American Free Press

I'm not sure where you stand on independence for Scotland or how much you know about the SNP (a lot of non-Brits think they're the Scottish equivalent of the BNP or the like) but independence under the SNP would have done nothing for the indigenous Scots.

I saw nothing to make me think this referendum was majorly rigged but even if it had been, I believe the right result for the indigenous Scottish was delivered.

[NewsFeed]

Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland's first minister and leader of the Scottish National Party (SNP), delivers a speech in Glasgow, Scotland, on March 28. After its loss at the polls last year on the issue of Scottish independence, the party has quadrupled its membership and is on the ascendant.

Political life is full of comeback stories, but few are quite as dramatic as the boomerang that Scottish nationalists have experienced over the last six months.

Last September, the Scottish National Party lost a vote on whether to break away from the United Kingdom.

Now, membership in the SNP has quadrupled, and that unexpected turn of events means that this party, dismissed as a loser last fall, could determine who becomes the next prime minister after British elections in a few weeks.

People who wanted Scotland to leave the U.K. had waited their whole life for last year's vote. Then the long, slow buildup to Scottish independence deflated with a massive whoosh as the nationalists learned that they had lost by 10 points.

Sturgeon has delighted the audiences during a series of televised debates. Here, she is seen with British Prime Minister and Conservative leader David Cameron at the first, on April 2, after which newspapers hailed her as "Queen of Scotland" and "Surgin' Sturgeon."

The morning after the referendum, Edinburgh librarian Robyn Marsack looked to the future with a sigh and a note of hope.

"There's also a feeling that something has been unleashed that can't be held back now," she said. "It's out there."

At the time, that sounded like an attempt to put a positive spin on a painful defeat. Then thousands of new members started signing up for the Scottish National Party.

"It did come as a surprise," says political scientist Tony Travers of the London School of Economics. "I don't think any of the ever-present political pundits had predicted this."

"I think the reason it happened is that, clearly having voted to stay in the United Kingdom, the people of Scotland could signal that they were still very interested in degrees of freedom and autonomy, if not quite independence," he says.

For decades, the U.K. was dominated by two big parties: Labour and Conservatives. That's still true, but neither is expected to break 50 percent in next month's election. That leaves an opening for a small party to be kingmaker. And right now, the SNP is out-performing all the other small parties.

Demonstrators march in Glasgow, Scotland, to call for the scrapping of Britain's Trident nuclear weapons program on April 4. Opposition to Trident is a cornerstone of the SNP's platform.

If they do as well as expected, the Scottish nationalists could pull the new government to the left. The party wants more spending on social services, and the SNP opposes Britain's nuclear weapons program, Trident.

"It's often asked of me, 'Is Trident a red line?' " party leader Nicola Sturgeon said in one recent debate, "Well here's my answer: You better believe Trident is a red line."

The audience roared. That's become typical of Sturgeon's performance in these debates. During one faceoff among seven leaders, people searched for her name more than any of the others. After the debate, the Daily Mail hailed Sturgeon as "Queen of Scotland," while the Belfast Telegraph ran the headline: "Surgin' Sturgeon." One of the most Googled questions during the debate was "Can I vote for the SNP?"

It's a development that Charlie Jeffrey, a politics professor at Scotland's University of Edinburgh, calls "very interesting."

"A party which is Scottish and which can only stand in Scotland, [people asking], yeah, can we have some of that?" he says.

"It's a strange situation, isn't it?" he says, "When the party in the campaign that lost is now on such a political high."

Sturgeon has joked that her party climbed so fast, she might be experiencing altitude sickness. But her opponents have not let voters forget that the party was founded on a belief that Scotland should be an independent country.

People often referred to last year's independence referendum as a "once-in-a-generation" vote. Now that the SNP is on a rocket trajectory, many are wondering whether another vote could come much sooner.

Sturgeon recently brushed aside such speculation.

"A vote for the SNP in this election is not a vote for another referendum," she said. "It is a vote to make Scotland's voice heard much, much more loudly."

But then she said she wouldn't entirely rule out another Scottish independence vote, either.

read full article at source: http://www.npr.org/blogs/parallels/2...campaign=world

[joefrombradford]

I never knew Jimmy Crankie had a twin.

[NewsFeed]

The SNP is on course to take every seat in Scotland at the general election, according to the latest STV News poll.

A survey on voter intention showed 54% are set to back Nicola Sturgeon's party on May 7, up two points since January.

Based on the findings of the latest poll conducted by Ipsos-MORI , the Electoral Calculus website suggests that the SNP could win all 59 Scottish seats up for grabs. Other electoral calculators project Labour and the Liberal Democrats saving one seat each.

The SNP has increased their lead over Labour to 34 points in the survey. Jim Murphy's party could face electoral wipeout north of the border, with their vote down four points to only 20%.

The Conservatives have increased their share by five points to 17% in the survey.

Support for the Liberal Democrats has increased one point to 5% and the Green Party is down two percentage points at 2%. UKIP polls at one percent with support for other parties also at one percent.

The poll found 80% of the Scottish electorate are certain to vote, five points down on the turnout at the referendum on Scottish independence last September and 16 points up on the percentage of Scots that voted in the last general election in 2010 (64%).

The majority those surveyed think SNP influence in the UK government after the election would be a ‘good thing’ for Scotland (69%) and for the UK as a whole (60%).

First Minister Nicola Sturgeon remains Scotland’s most popular politician, enjoying a +48% satisfaction rating. Scottish Greens leader Patrick Harvie (+20%) and Scottish Conservatives leader Ruth Davidson (+7%) are the only two other leaders, from Holyrood or Westminster, to enjoy positive ratings.

There may be some comfort for Labour supporters in the poll's data on tactical voting. While only 14% said Labour are their preferred party, a further 30% report that they may back Labour if they thought they had a chance of winning in their constituency, including 35% of Conservative supporters and 34% of Liberal Democrats. The equivalent figure for the Liberal Democrats is 25% compared to 17% for the SNP and 15% for the Conservatives.

via STV

SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon said: "Well these polls are great and they make wonderful reading for the SNP but they are only polls, it’s votes and ballot boxes that count and I will continue and the SNP will continue to take nothing for granted and campaign hard for every vote.

"Our message is simple – if Scotland wants its voice to be heard in Westminster more loudly than ever before and then for that voice to be used for more progressive politics like an end to austerity then the more seats the SNP wins the louder that voice will be."

Commenting on the poll result, Scottish Labour leader Jim Murphy said: "This is another bad poll for the Scottish Labour party, it’s another good poll of course for the SNP, and it’s another fantastic poll for David Cameron.

"David Cameron can’t beat the Labour party here in Scotland, so someone else has to do it f

----- snip -----


read full article at source: http://news.stv.tv/scotland-decides/...eral-election/

[NewsFeed]

A poll by Ipsos-MORI suggests that the Scottish National Party is within reach of winning all 59 Scottish seats in Westminster

The Ipsos-MORI poll suggests that Scottish voting intention continues to rise into a majority, with 54% of Scots intending to vote for the Nationals.

From STV News:

“The SNP has increased their lead over Labour to 34 points in the survey. Jim Murphy’s [Labour] party could face electoral wipeout north of the border, with their vote down four points to only 20%.

“The Conservatives have increased their share by five points to 17% in the survey.

“Support for the Liberal Democrats has increased one point to 5% and the Green party is down two percentage points at 2%. Ukip polls at one percent with support for other parties also at one percent.

“The poll found 80% of the Scottish electorate are certain to vote, five points down on the turnout at the referendum on Scottish independence last September and 16 points up on the percentage of Scots that voted in the last general election in 2010 (64%).

“The majority those surveyed think SNP influence in the UK after the election would be a ‘good thing’ for Scotland (69%) and for the UK as a whole (60%).

“First Minister Nicola Sturgeon remains Scotland’s most popular politician, enjoying a +48% satisfaction rating. Scottish Greens leader Patrick Harvie (+20%) and Scottish Conservatives leader Ruth Davidson (+7%) are the only two other leaders, from Holyrood or Westminster, to enjoy positive ratings.”

However, tactical voting also appears to play a role. “While only 14% said Labour are their preferred party, a further 30% report that they may back Labour if they thought they had a chance of winning in their constituency.”

This is also an excellent result for the Conservatives, as they have increased from 12% to 17% since January.

The possibility of a primarily SNP Scotland brings mixed feelings for the future of Westminster. Nicola Sturgeon has made unclear her relationships with Miliband and Cameron, and her promises of a coalition with the Conservatives seems not entirely trustworthy.

According to Jim Murphy, “David Cameron can’t beat the Labour party here in Scotland, so someone else has to do it for him. That way David Cameron gets to cling on to power because he’s the leader of the biggest party, the likelihood is David Cameron will remain Prime Minister, not because Scotland went out and voted for the Tory party but because Scotland voted against Labour for the SNP and reduced the chances of Labour forming the government.”

Nicola Sturgeon obviously will have a large influence over the coalition building period, assuming the Tories do not win a majority alone. With the ambiguity and uncertainty over the future affiliations of her party, a vote for the Scottish Nationals is a blind vote. Not only that, none of the SNP’s policies even address the big issues facing the United Kingdom at present. Voters should consider the issues that are plaguing their country today, and

----- snip -----


read full article at source: http://www.europeanguardian.com/home...r-huge-victory

[Bobby Bandanza]

I am slightly pro-SNP, but they need a masculine leader and one who is anti-Jewish. The reason is I believe Scotland should break away from Britain and I have already stated my opinion on that before.

[Bev]

Originally Posted by Bobby Bandanza

I am slightly pro-SNP, but they need a masculine leader and one who is anti-Jewish. The reason is I believe Scotland should break away from Britain and I have already stated my opinion on that before.

Nobody who cares about the indigenous people should be pro-SNP, even slightly. Admittedly, the UK Parliament isn't exclusively pro-indigenous Scots either so as far as I can see the Scots who wish to protect their heritage and culture are stuck between a rock and a hard place. If they were actually a nationalist (as we understand the word) party then it would be a different matter.

That said, I do think the SNP is correct in wanting the Barnett formula recalculated.

[joefrombradford]

Originally Posted by Bobby Bandanza

I am slightly pro-SNP, but they need a masculine leader and one who is anti-Jewish The reason is I believe Scotland should break away from Britain and I have already stated my opinion on that before.

If any member of the extremely left-wing SNP showed any indication that they were even slightly that way inclined, what do you think would happen to their membership status? What do you think this would do to their public support? Do you think Scotland would vote for an open anti-Semite?

What you are saying is totally ridiculous.

[NewsFeed]

Exclusive: Jim Sillars, who was Alex Salmond's number two, says party members will insist another referendum is 'first line' of 2016 Holyrood manifesto


The SNP will propose another independence referendum in its Scottish election manifesto, the former deputy leader has said amid fears over the party's influence on Ed Miliband after the election.

Jim Sillars told The Telegraph party members will demand a promise to hold another vote on independence is the “first line” of the SNP’s 2016 Holyrood manifesto.

He said any other move would be “astonishing” and likely trigger a backlash from the tens of thousands of new members who joined after Scots voted to stay in the Union last September.

Reacting to the comments, Nicola Sturgeon indicated the SNP could pledge a second referendum in principle in a future manifesto but said it would not necessarily trigger an immediate vote.

The SNP leader also repeatedly failed to rule out putting a pledge in next year’s manifesto after being grilled on Mr Sillars’s comments during First Minister’s Questions.


It will increase suspicion that the SNP will use its influence in Westminster after the election to break up the UK and add credence to Tory warnings over the impact of an Labour-SNP pact.

It comes as an Ipsos MORI poll indicated the SNP will win every seat in Scotland with more than half the country on course to back the Nationalists on May 7.

Speaking to this newspaper, Mr Sillars became the first major SNP figure in the campaign to declare the party will propose a rerun of the independence vote next year.

“I would anticipate that a lot of people will be looking to next year’s election, 2016 for the Scottish Parliament, to

----- snip -----


read full article at source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...ader-says.html