UK General Discussion

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Pardon my ignorance, but how, exactly then, would the British government disallow its currency from being used in Scotland?  Would a law simply get passed that restricts the use of the Pound to the countries still in the union?  How would that be enforced?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Media oversimplification. There would be no way of preventing a hypothetical independent Scotland from using the pound as its currency. But the SNP have argued (and planned for, etc) that there will be a proper currency union between hypothetical independent Scotland and hypothetical R-UK. That would depend on the agreement of both hypothetical governments.

[afleitch]

Media oversimplification. There would be no way of preventing a hypothetical independent Scotland from using the pound as its currency. But the SNP have argued (and planned for, etc) that there will be a proper currency union between hypothetical independent Scotland and hypothetical R-UK. That would depend on the agreement of both hypothetical governments.

Scotland could tie it's currency to whatever it wants to. Hypothetically the government is simply offering a deal to work with the rest of the UK for a transition, particularly when dealing with debt which legally we could simply walk away from. What won't be discussed in public of course is that such a mutual arrangement is good for the economic stability of the UK, particularly if a 10th of it's economy is wrenched out overnight

In other news;

http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/yes-does-not-mean-yes.23438016

'The planned Independence Day of March 24, 2016, will not happen, leaving the current set-up as the "default option", unless negotiations between Edinburgh and London are completed satisfactorily, according to one of Prime Minister David Cameron's most senior colleagues.

The controversial view - dismissed by Alex Salmond as breathtaking, irresponsible and contemptuous of the democratic process in Scotland - came as the three main Westminster parties formed a united front to rule out the First Minister's centrepiece proposal for a currency union between an independent Scotland and the rest of the UK.'

Which is beautifully disturbing.

[MaxQue]

I fail to see how annoying Scots is supposed to be a good strategy against them leaving.

[afleitch]

I fail to see how annoying Scots is supposed to be a good strategy against them leaving.

I demand frequent visits by top Tories to Scotland in the weeks leading up to the vote

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Scotland could tie it's currency to whatever it wants to. Hypothetically the government is simply offering a deal to work with the rest of the UK for a transition, particularly when dealing with debt which legally we could simply walk away from.

Do you seriously think that Scotland would be granted independence without some arrangement on debt being made? Now, I suppose it would be possible that it might have to head to the Permanent Court of Arbitration or some other similar body to determine the split of debt if Scotland and the UKENI were unable to agree how to do it, but that Scotland would get a clean slate on debt in preposterous in the extreme.

[YL]

Some recent polls, all online except ICM:

ICM 7-9 Feb: Lab 38 Con 34 UKIP 11 Lib Dem 10
Opinium 11-14 Feb: Lab 37 Con 28 UKIP 17 Lib Dem 8
ComRes 12/13 Feb: Lab 37 Con 32 UKIP 15 Lib Dem 9
Populus 12/13 Feb: Lab 38 Con 32 UKIP 14 Lib Dem 9
YouGov 13/14 Feb: Lab 39 Con 32 UKIP 12 Lib Dem 9

Populus used to give much lower UKIP scores than most other polls, because they weight by party ID and were using weights from 2010 which had low numbers identifying with UKIP.  They've recently changed their weights, but I'm still a bit sceptical of their weighting methodology. That's not to say that I think the others are perfect, either.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Now, which company is most likely to be making up its numbers? You know, like how the Americans do.

[You kip if you want to...]

Anyone else think that the only consequence of a LibLab coalition after the election will be for Labour to find themselves in the exact same situation as the Libs did after the last election? The base screaming "how could you crawl into bed with THEM!?" before any PM had even been sworn in.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Any such deal would be conditional on approval from if not the Labour base then lots of people who claim to speak for it. Labour Party rules are firm on this matter, and in the Labour Party, the rules matter...

[Lurker]

Any such deal would be conditional on approval from if not the Labour base then lots of people who claim to speak for it. Labour Party rules are firm on this matter, and in the Labour Party, the rules matter...

Who are those people? And what exactly do the rules say about coalition governments?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

All such decisions must go to a Special Conference. Which means Trade Union block votes (i.e. TU delegates cast weighted votes on behalf of their entire membership).

[Silent Hunter]

When was the last Special Conference?

[Lurker]

All such decisions must go to a Special Conference. Which means Trade Union block votes (i.e. TU delegates cast weighted votes on behalf of their entire membership).

Ah, I see why that could be problematic in case of a hung parliament.

Though presumably they would still bite that bullet if the alternatives were a minority government or continued Cameron-Clegg coalition?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Though presumably they would still bite that bullet if the alternatives were a minority government or continued Cameron-Clegg coalition?

A minority government might be preferred if it was a strong minority (i.e. more Labour seats than those for the combined outgoing Government Parties). But I think it's fairly unlikely that the leadership would try taking things so far as a provisional coalition deal unless the LibDems are seen to be suitably chastened.

[MaxQue]

When was the last Special Conference?

A search is showing than one will happen on March 1st, so in two weeks.
It seems to be about the lick between unions and the party and seems to want to abolish the very system of block voting Al described.
Probably he can talk more about it than me.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

That's to do with constituency selections, leadership elections and so on (where the block vote was abolished back in the 90s: the proposal now is to remove the three-tier electoral college in leadership elections) not with Conference rules. Unless there's a separate hidden section to the Collins report thing.* The media describe the TU section of the electoral college as a 'block vote' because they don't understand what the term means.

But, anyway, I only brought up the TU delegates as an example: there would also be delegates from the CLP's and some of them (particularly the more left-wing ones and the right-wing ones from traditional strongholds) would be even more adamant on the issue.

All of this is one reason why - given the numbers - there was never any chance of a Lab/Lib coalition after the 2010 elections.

_{*And who would put that past him?}

[MaxQue]

So, Milibrand wants a "one member, one vote" system for leadership election, or another hybrid system?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

So, Milibrand wants a "one member, one vote" system for leadership election, or another hybrid system?

He wants OMOV for leadership elections... but for members of affiliates who register their support (exactly how that's supposed to work isn't entirely clear, but it's not a bad idea in principle) and random members of the public who register as 'supporters' as well as for party members. Compared to the way the system works at the moment, the people losing clout will actually be the PLP who will lose their direct vote in leadership elections for the first time ever. They'll still control the nominations process though.

[You kip if you want to...]

I just think I don't like the thought of the Libs strolling back into cabinet despite (probably) losing 10-15% of the vote from last time.

[Blair]

I just think I don't like the thought of the Libs strolling back into cabinet despite (probably) losing 10-15% of the vote from last time.

That's the problem with the Lib Dems-they may get hardly any votes on the national scale but they know how to play the system meaning I'm certain they'll keep 30+ seats since they can pool their resources, leaders,money into seats compared to Labour and Con who have to contest about 400 odd seats.

But yeah I think labour should only accept a coalition with the Lib Dems if Clegg resigns, even then I'd favour a minority

[ingemann]

As there is plenty of countries using American Dollar or Euro without being "allowed" to do so by USA or EU, I don't see how UK can ban them for using it.

That's just plainly misleading persons. But, not surprising coming from Cameron.

Yes, but, on the other hand, those are generally speaking third-world countries lacking a credible currency of their own (e.g. Zimbabwe). I don't think the Scots desire to emulate that example. No, what they have been proposing is a currency union, which is quite different to unofficially using foreign currency.

Yeah, it's more about setting out how clearly unstable an independent Scottish economy would be.

You know the oil in Scottish territorial waters will belong to Scotland, there are no question about it. Scotland may wish a continued monetary union for practical reasons, but they don't need it, the oil alone will enable them to have their own valuta. Of course for UK on the other hand a continued monetary union will be a benefit as it will mean that Scottish oil will still hold up the pound's value.

[MaxQue]

Well, they took the Canadian playbook for independance referendum. The scare campaign, no matter if the elements they try to scare people with are true or false.

[You kip if you want to...]

28% of people say they they want Ed for PM according to YouGov, it's the highest rating he's ever had. He's still 9 behind Cam who's at 37%. Clegg's at 6%

Undecideds on this question are at their lowest since just after Ed became leader in 2010. People starting to firm up on their voting intentions as the election gets closer?

[politicus]

28% of people say they they want Ed for PM according to YouGov, it's the highest rating he's ever had. He's still 9 behind Cam who's at 37%. Clegg's at 6%

Undecideds on this question are at their lowest since just after Ed became leader in 2010. People starting to firm up on their voting intentions as the election gets closer?

So 6% of the British voters are insane?