Should ENGLAND have its own government
-
David Johnson
- Posts: 7844
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Croftie
No need to dig Karl Marx up. We already have well known Marxists such as Red Ed Miliband and that well known Trotskyite, John Major talking about windfall taxes on the energy companies.
THese Marxists get everywhere don't they?
THese Marxists get everywhere don't they?
Re: Von Boy
In 2011-12
The average tax generated per person in the UK was ?9000.
The average tax generated per person in Scotland was ?10700
Source:
Government Expenditure and Revenue Statistics.
No need to thank us.x
The average tax generated per person in the UK was ?9000.
The average tax generated per person in Scotland was ?10700
Source:
Government Expenditure and Revenue Statistics.
No need to thank us.x
Re: Should ENGLAND have its own government
in answer to the original post
YES PLEASE!!!!
YES PLEASE!!!!
-
max_tranmere
- Posts: 4734
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: Should ENGLAND have its own government
The Scots, despite what they say, play a very big part in who the Westminster Government is. Apparently the Conservatives would have been the Westminster government from 2005-2010 had it not've been for amount of seats returning Labour MP's in Scotland at the 2005 Election. Labour was returned as the government for the UK for that 5 year period and we got Tony Blair for the first 2 years and that other guy for 3 years. If England had it's own Government you would likely have very long periods of the Tories and there would be little chance of Labour being anything other than the Opposition.
-
David Johnson
- Posts: 7844
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Max
Ya being a bit selective with the data here Max.
1. I think the Labour party would have had an overall majority, but only just in 2005 if you took Scotland out of the equation.
2. The Tories would have been nowhere near in 97 and 2001 even if you took Scotland out of the equation.
3. THe Tories haven't won an election in overall terms for 23 years by the time the 2015 election rolls round and the disaster in the drop in living standards for the majority of the population would suggest that Call Me Dave isn't going to change Tory fortunes, particularly when Nige "Keep em out, stop employment legislation etc. etc. Farage is going to weaken the Cameron vote.
1. I think the Labour party would have had an overall majority, but only just in 2005 if you took Scotland out of the equation.
2. The Tories would have been nowhere near in 97 and 2001 even if you took Scotland out of the equation.
3. THe Tories haven't won an election in overall terms for 23 years by the time the 2015 election rolls round and the disaster in the drop in living standards for the majority of the population would suggest that Call Me Dave isn't going to change Tory fortunes, particularly when Nige "Keep em out, stop employment legislation etc. etc. Farage is going to weaken the Cameron vote.
-
max_tranmere
- Posts: 4734
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
David
Hi David.
"1. I think the Labour party would have had an overall majority, but only just in 2005 if you took Scotland out of the equation."
That is what I said.
---
"2. The Tories would have been nowhere near in 97 and 2001 even if you took Scotland out of the equation.
Some have claimed Cameron and most other (probably all other) senior Tories would like Scotland out of the equation, in spite of what Cameron says publicly, because it would mean more of a chance of them regularly winning in Westminster. I agree there was no way they could have won the 1997 and 2001 elections as they were hated by everyone. They got the worst result for any ruling party in 1997 since the Great Reform Act of, I think it was, 1830. From 1997 they had the fewest numbers of MP's they've had since 1906. I remember hearing these stats at the time. In my last post on this thread I said: there would be little chance of Labour being anything other than the Opposition (without Scotland). I'll revise that and say their chances of being anything other than the Opposition is greater without Scotland. Certainly the case with the 2005-2010 parliament.
---
"3. THe Tories haven't won an election in overall terms for 23 years by the time the 2015 election rolls round and the disaster in the drop in living standards for the majority of the population would suggest that Call Me Dave isn't going to change Tory fortunes, particularly when Nige "Keep em out, stop employment legislation etc. etc. Farage is going to weaken the Cameron vote."
I think the Conservative party were the most successful political party on earth for about 100 years, I think I'm right in saying they were never in Opposition for more than one term at a time and were often in power for 3 terms in one go. This was until they were blown to pieces in 1997. I remember John Major saying some years later, about his decision to stay on as leader after being challenged in the mid-90's for the leadership: "I will probably wonder until the end of my days whether that was the right decision." He said this when Blair was PM and when he was able to be open about his real feelings on things.
"1. I think the Labour party would have had an overall majority, but only just in 2005 if you took Scotland out of the equation."
That is what I said.
---
"2. The Tories would have been nowhere near in 97 and 2001 even if you took Scotland out of the equation.
Some have claimed Cameron and most other (probably all other) senior Tories would like Scotland out of the equation, in spite of what Cameron says publicly, because it would mean more of a chance of them regularly winning in Westminster. I agree there was no way they could have won the 1997 and 2001 elections as they were hated by everyone. They got the worst result for any ruling party in 1997 since the Great Reform Act of, I think it was, 1830. From 1997 they had the fewest numbers of MP's they've had since 1906. I remember hearing these stats at the time. In my last post on this thread I said: there would be little chance of Labour being anything other than the Opposition (without Scotland). I'll revise that and say their chances of being anything other than the Opposition is greater without Scotland. Certainly the case with the 2005-2010 parliament.
---
"3. THe Tories haven't won an election in overall terms for 23 years by the time the 2015 election rolls round and the disaster in the drop in living standards for the majority of the population would suggest that Call Me Dave isn't going to change Tory fortunes, particularly when Nige "Keep em out, stop employment legislation etc. etc. Farage is going to weaken the Cameron vote."
I think the Conservative party were the most successful political party on earth for about 100 years, I think I'm right in saying they were never in Opposition for more than one term at a time and were often in power for 3 terms in one go. This was until they were blown to pieces in 1997. I remember John Major saying some years later, about his decision to stay on as leader after being challenged in the mid-90's for the leadership: "I will probably wonder until the end of my days whether that was the right decision." He said this when Blair was PM and when he was able to be open about his real feelings on things.
-
David Johnson
- Posts: 7844
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Max
Err no, Max, this is what you said
"the Conservatives would have been the Westminster government from 2005-2010 had it not've been for amount of seats returning Labour MP's in Scotland at the 2005 Election"
What I said is that the Tories WOULD NOT have been the Westminster government in 2005 if you took the Scottish Labour MPs out of the equation.
"the Conservatives would have been the Westminster government from 2005-2010 had it not've been for amount of seats returning Labour MP's in Scotland at the 2005 Election"
What I said is that the Tories WOULD NOT have been the Westminster government in 2005 if you took the Scottish Labour MPs out of the equation.