I’m English and wanted the UK to stay together at the independence referendum but I’m struggling to see why anyone would disagree with what’s said in that interview. If I was Scottish, I’d want done with this absolute shit show too!
My position would be for Scotland to remain in the union in ideal circumstances, but 8 years on from the UK voting to "take back control", the sheer apathy from voters in the UK as to who that control is handed to and how politicians are elected to office, makes me realise the ideal circumstances will never happen. I honestly do not understand why electoral and constitutional reform aren't even remotely part of the discussion. All we get is hot topic wedge issues to divide and distract, without actually questioning *how* legislative and executive power works in Westminster.
There are 12 NUTS 1 regions in the UK, from which MEPs were voted into European Parliament when we were in the EU. 4 of those 12 regions have devolved parliaments/assemblies. Greater London, Scotland, Wales, and (ostensibly) Northern Ireland. The remaining 8 regions in what I call provincial England, have no such devolved assembly and no representation on a national level other than in FPTP Westminster general elections. The democratic deficit lies principally in provincial England, where FPTP locks the country in the political inertia of tactically voting for the lesser of two evils so that no dynamic new parties or voices in politics can arise. England becomes a monolith, dwarfing the other constituent countries. Imagine if the rest of England had devolved assemblies and regional parties that split the vote, and allowed parties from the other constituent countries to form dynamic and responsive coalitions with smaller parties established on a more regional level within England.
Redressing the democratic deficit in England, to the benefit of the English as much as anyone else, could save the union. But apparently the English (not least the Brexiteers who were so vocal about "taking back control") just don't care.
So, to hell with the union, to hell with Westminster, and FPTP. Long unfit for purpose.
Yeah. It's not just a matter of regional assemblies though, we don't necessarily need to go that far. Even reforming the constitution of, and electoral process for, Westminster could improve things, but that's also been off the table and undiscussed for the last 13 years.
As an English man who has lived in Scotland for the past 10 years, the entire system is corrupted labour, con’s and SNP! I hate to say it but independence at this point will do no good but we need a completely new government. My wife is a teachers and under SNP standards have fell across the board, we don’t have people in government who have the skills to run organisations never mind country’s.
We need a new system. First past the post has created this bullshit nonsense where we lurch between two opposing sides and nobody actually deals with issues. Environment? Gender? Education? Immigration? Europe? Etc. Etc. Whatever key issues I vote on, I still have to choose from shit show to the left or right. How does that help the country? Then put clowns in on both sides and you have this election and the last decade.
Whole thing is a bad fucking joke.
Attacking the person (spelling, punctuation etc) essentially saying their views are invalid as they are not smart enough to share opinions, instead of contradicting his points, is far less likely to convince them or anyone else.
While the two main parties inspire little confidence the SNP have been a car crash for the last few years. So with little enthusiasm I will vote Labour this time.
Same here. English but very sympathetic. Been up north many a time and absolutely love the Scots and Scotland. Welcoming people in a beautiful land. Free Scotland!
Scotland, Wales, northern Ireland.
The English regions.... Northern England, the Midlands, Southeast and Southwest England all given more autonomy from Westminster.
EU was always pushing for more autonomy in member states. The clowns want to be fully controlling the money so there is no chance someone else can prove themselves and create something without them dipping into it.
The problem is the double standard. What the guy said about "those down South" may well be true, but it's just as true of the Sturgeons, so to brush that aside suggests someone who's judging two groups by different definitions of "deception and fraud" so as to arrive at an outcome that is ideologically convenient for them.
How unfortunate for Sky that this was live.
You can be certain that wouldn't make it past editing if it was a recorded segment!
I would hate to be doing my shopping, turn around, and be asked for my political views live on TV! I consider myself reasonably intelligent and articulate and yet there’s a big chance I would make a fool of myself.
I remember saying when this was first posted here that if it wasn't live a lot of what these people say would have been cut.
This same clip is now floating around on youtube, but it must be a version that aired later, as a lot of what the old guy with the cap says about the media targetting the SNP and not addressing the issues in Westminster, as been completely cut out.
Fraud with political donations damages a party by having less money to spend on campaigning.
Fraud with public funds hurts the country.
I'd take the former over the latter. Looks like we may have had the former up here? Still needs to go to court. Plus that one guy who tride to charge the country for his massive non-work-related international data bill.
The tories meanwhile are neck deep in the latter. Absolutely riddled, not to mention Liz Truss crashing the pound (not technically illegal, but done against all sane financial advice and for the benefit of the rich)
Matheson should be charged. So should Murrell. Let the truth come out in the courts.
But Matheson has paid it back, which (legally) shows remorse.
Mone hasn't paid it back, hasn't shown remorse and is only being investigated because she's not part of the gang and can be sacrificed to save the others.
The level of Tory corruption could buy every Scot a camper van and time off work to enjoy a two week tour around our beautiful country.
Absolutely! Charge them and remove any that have been ignoring conflict of interest laws from office. Bar them from standing. If it were somehow possible to take back the money from the companies that engaged in this then I'd support that.
Give *that* to the NHS rather than the money that we were giving to the EU. The EU actually was well worth it. Instead, through these shitty "conflict of interest" contracts, paracetamol was costing the NHS several times to cost it should have.
Absolutely! Charge them and remove any that have been ignoring conflict of interest laws from office. Bar them from standing. If it were somehow possible to take back the money from the companies that engaged in this then I'd support that.
Give *that* to the NHS rather than the money that we were giving to the EU. The EU actually was well worth it.
The more money you spend on a campaign the more likely you are to get elected amongst other things.
If they over spent they got an unfair advantage, which in the right circumstances calls into question the legitimacy of the election (likely not in this case though).
Stop downplaying the crime of the ones you like and then insisting Tories bad cos crime…
Also: What do you think the SNP did?
Peter Murrell was charged with embezzelment, not overspending on a campaign.
Do you know what embezzelment means? That means spending money on yourself rather than what it's indended for. That would do more harm for the SNP, unless you think the vehicle he was accused of bying with party funds was in some way beneficial to the election?
The crimes of the Tories and Labour have been far, FAR, worse. The insane abandonment of conflict of interest laws (handing out contracts to friends and family), breaking Covid laws, cash for honours, and the illegal invasion of Iraq (a war crime - war of aggression).
You think some dodgy book keeping and buying a car is wose than that? You think it's comparable?
I mean, of course you don't. You don't even understand what Peter Murrell did in the first place. \*sigh\* I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you.
>Do you know what embezzelment means? That means spending money on yourself rather than what it's indended for.
Its clear you don't know what it means. To help you out, below is an actual definition as opposed to one you made up:
*Embezzlement refers to a form of white-collar crime in which a person or entity intentionally misappropriates the assets entrusted to them. In this type of fraud, the embezzler attains the assets lawfully and has the right to possess them, but the assets are then used for unintended purposes.*
*So, its possible that Murrell is being charged because he has misappropriated funds, i.e. spent funds raised for an Independence campaign on general SNP campaigning. It doesn't mean that he is being charged with spending anything on himself. The reality is that we don't know what he has been charged for.*
*Or it might be that he is completely innocent, as he has only been charged, not found guilty. A person is charged on suspicion of a crime*
Yeah... You really have no clue. The electoral commission is in charge of overseeing how much funds are spent during a political campaign. Other parties have been fined several times for overspending, such as the tories.
Embezzelment means stealing funds that are in their care.
If it was just a campaign overspend, they wouldn't have had the murder tent outside the house. They wouldn't have seized the plush £110,000 motorhome from his mum's house. Embezzelment is a crime. Campaign overspend is illegal, but not criminal.
That's about as simply as I can explain it. I'm sure you'll learn absolutely nothing.
Ok, so do you think it will be your definition of Embezzlement or the legal definition that will be considered in court?
The definition I posted previously was from Investopedia, but here is an alternative from a Scottish legal firm [https://www.gfmlaw.co.uk/embezzlement-and-the-law/](https://www.gfmlaw.co.uk/embezzlement-and-the-law/)
The prosecution require to prove:-
1. The accused held another persons money or property, with that person’s permission.
2. The accused had a duty to account to the owner for what he did with the money or property.
3. The accused took the money/ property for his own **or did something with it that he did not have authority for.**
4. **The accused’s actions were in bad faith or were dishonest**
Take the bolded section above "or did something with it that he did not have authority for". Murrel can be tried for embezzlement if he did something with funds in his care, that exceeded his authority, even if he did not take that money for himself.
The most worrying thing about you (and many other people), is that you don't seem to understand that a police investigation does not mean a crime has been committed, it means that the police have a **suspicion** that a crime **may** have been committed.
You have already decided that he is guilty which displays your own prejudices, because neither you or I have any knowledge of the evidence, or the detail of the charges. If the charges are that he took money for himself, then there will need to be more than evidence that a camper-van was purchased and parked in his mothers driveway, the prosecution will need to demonstrate that he purchased it for his own use. If someone has pictures of him in it on his hols with the missus, then he is screwed. If he used money that was raised for independence campaigning and 'entrusted' to him and used it to buy a camper-van for regular SNP election campaigning, then there might still be an embezzlement case to answer. You seem to have forgotten that it was an Indy campaigner who brought this case, specifically because the money that was supposed to be for Independence campaigning was already spent.
So, either you have some inside information, in which case you posting your opinion here would probably be a crime, or you know as much about the evidence in this case as all of the rest of us, which is nothing.
You mentioned political donations so I commented on that.
Then commented on your seeming to excuse one crime for another, which you’re still doing.
Never mind me my brain isn’t as big as yours I apologise.
I do not and still cannot understand their stance that Scotland would be worse off if they had independence. If that was the case. Why do they care? On the flip of the coin, they are therefore subsidising Scotland. Does it not make sense to cut ties with someone who costs you more than they give? This is the Conservatives here, they sell off anything that doesn’t generate revenue for them, so why haven’t they done so, and even Labour, because Scotland is more profitable and they know it!
How far down the nationalist rabbit warren do you have to go to believe a Scottish journalist would go into a Scottish supermarket and be surprised to encounter SNP voters?
Yeah it’s gotta go to court for sure. But you do realise the procurator won’t charge without a case, especially in such a high profile case. There has to be evidence to go to a jury. We’re still not sure what if anything will happen to Nicola. She may be completely innocent but she slept in the same bed supposedly and signed off the accounts. This isn’t some accounting error. It’s using money donated for one purpose for something completely different. It’s fraud which why I was scratching my head at the dude in the bonnet. Freeeeeedoooommmm to commit our own fraud.
It’s funny how you’re seemingly allowed to go “BUT THE CORRUPTION IN SCOTLAND!” but the moment someone points to far more serious cases of corruption in England it becomes a “I never said such and such!” The strawman comes full circle
He never said that
At least in Scotland the voters would have the power to remove politicians, and not just cross our fingers and hope English voters do it as we need to do it now
The exact opposite is true.
We were able to remove Margaret Ferrier.
We are unable to remove Michael Matheson.
Westminster is better than Holyrood in that regard.
It is, but none of the major parties besides the conservatives and unionists supported the introduction of the same bill in Scotland https://www.parliament.scot/bills-and-laws/proposals-for-bills/proposed-removal-from-office-and-recall-scottish-parliament-bill
It is still looking probable, as it got it's right to be introduced, but it doesn't exist just now. And there is reason that even Labour don't want to be associated so much with said bill, and why the Tories are massively in favour while most other parties aren't.
By-elections are expensive, outside of the Tories who manage fine, any election is expensive due to a lack of donations and funding. That's not a defence of not removing an MP who does things like Matheson, but a reality. We live in effectively a 2 party country, hence why many of the parties which would struggle to afford by-elections and general elections abstained or were vocally against it. Labour was extremely against it in Westminster before it was pushed through.
Although, if I was to be petty, I would use the arguments you use against independence referenda here too. If the argument that Brexit is not significant enough for Scotland to get to vote again, then I don't really see why it should be the case that a by-election should happen if another MP can just be dropped in from the party. The people voted in the last election for that party, so it should stick that way. At most they only have to wait 4 years to change them.
There's a good argument that in Holyrood we vote for the party not the person so Matheson should be replaced by the SNP without a by election following a recall petition. Or just not replaced at all, which is my preference.
Whatever the case is there's zero way to get rid of Matheson, and we got rid of Ferrier.
Remember it's this we're talking about
>At least in Scotland the voters would have the power to remove politicians, and not just cross our fingers and hope English voters do it as we need to do it now
Margret Ferrier is a perfect of example of a politician being removed by the people she represents. This happened whilst Scotland is part of the union. Mistake made, mistake fixed without independence.
and what do wank over? rishi or starmer? where does that get you? where does that get the rest of scotland? everyone always seems to just argue and miss the point. this union IS corrupt. have we done anything about it? no. can we do anything about it without our independence? no. the promise of a new labour government is not a solution either. how long has this went on? decades upon decades. centuries? probably. is it getting better? no.
so why is this union so attractive to you?
Ahh another freak. Makes sense.
https://news.sky.com/story/amp/charlie-elphicke-naughty-tory-mp-jailed-for-sex-assaults-considering-supermarket-shelf-stacking-to-pay-back-court-costs-12601891
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot).
Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://news.sky.com/story/charlie-elphicke-naughty-tory-mp-jailed-for-sex-assaults-considering-supermarket-shelf-stacking-to-pay-back-court-costs-12601891](https://news.sky.com/story/charlie-elphicke-naughty-tory-mp-jailed-for-sex-assaults-considering-supermarket-shelf-stacking-to-pay-back-court-costs-12601891)**
*****
^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
except we have decided what we want to do, we want to be part of the union.
You cant keep talking about wanting self determination if you ignore it when we determine to do something you dont personally like.
we voted to stay and things got worse. It'll have been a decade this September. I think that's a fair shot at allowing the unionists to have a go at showing they care about Scotland and the union, don't you? But lets see what labour do shall we, if they fuck it then it should be game over.
Wasn’t part of voting to be in a union due to being threatened there was no guarantee to be in the EU. A lot of people think fair enough at the time.
EU vote comes along and 63% of us vote to stay in, you know considering it was all part of the union and that and then we were dragged out anyway. An EU vote btw that happened due to lies just like ours was.
What groundbreaking information have the SNP given us since then?
Yes & No are pretty much decided. The undecideds, what information have the SNP given which might turn their vote around?
To be honest in this case the SNP haven't had to do anything. A lot has happened and changed since 2014. Leaving the EU, covid, housing crisis, cost of living crisis etc. All these have shown Westminster highly lacking.
Now if we're being honest, in the last year or so the SNP have had a rough time and I'm not denying that. Nor am I denying that their handling of the last 10 years has been far from perfect.
With all things in the balance I would still argue that Scottish independence was still a contested issue and worth another referendum.
Except the numbers haven't moved. Despite what you describe as a perfect storm the numbers haven't moved.
The SNP have exhausted every resource they have, all the patience people have and overspent trying to get it over the line and they've failed.
And now the indy fans are frantic because they recognise that the best advert for independence, the tories, are getting booted out and people are seeing the SNP for the grifting sham that they are.
But the numbers have moved. Since the 2014 referendum the numbers per polling have changed. Repeatedly.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_on_Scottish_independence
There isn't a large enough interest though. The numbers haven't changed.
If you want to say the yes side are being genuine in accepting the answer then maybe if they'd shut their faces for 10 years and then started asking now, instead of demanding it a year later then it might hold some water.
I honestly find it staggering that people still try running with this line of reasoning (unless u/RuaIn1441 is being completely disingenuous). We're a decade on from the referendum and the Union has seen us worse off than 2014 in almost every respect.
This old bollocks again. If you think things haven't fundamentally changed since 2014 to the point that another referendum isn't worth doing I don't know what to tell you. Why even have a general election, we had one a few years ago after all...
How are things looking on the vote share front?
(And you can’t include the Greens either after Meep Gordon confirming last night that the party goes with the flow and latches onto who is in power)
It’s not 50/50
The needle hasn’t shifted.
That’s why it’s a pointless exercise. Those driving for independence haven’t bothered their arses to talk to the people that they actually need to. The undecideds.
They just started shouting louder
How many polls do unionists want, seems to change all the time. One if it's a referendum, more if it's a you gov poll pointing for indy.
Will we have more referendums and take the average of them too?
We decided 10 years ago. We aren't independent at the moment, how was the result ignored?
Democracy doesn't happen once, its an ongoing process. Promises were made for "near federalism" and "Devo-max" , yet we have one of the weakest national parliaments in the world. We're entitled to reconsider when those promises didn't materialise.
I distinctly remember the caveat "once in a lifetime, unless something major changes, such as Brexit". Back then, I very naively assumed, Brexit could not possibly happen because it is glaringly obvious how damaging that would be...
He didn't speak as eloquently as I would like but he ain't wrong. Scotland has been ignored for too long and they'll likely bring up Nicola Sturgeon as part of their anti-SNP plan in the election.
Besides, who sounds eloquent when randomly approached on the street, it's hard to express your point without time to articulate your thoughts.
If a nuclear bomb just went off, the world was going to be wiped out, and there was room for one person in your bunker, I’d stand outside and be reduced to dust with that guy than join you in safety.
Well, I mean you're not wrong but do you really want to go down that route and start talking about what other party leaders have done? Fact of the matter is that once we get independence, the fragile alliance that is the SNP will rapidly fragment and we will hopefully end up with a coalition government that properly represents the people, continues a progressive and socially/ environmentally aware agenda, and governs for all, not the few.
Edit: a tautology.
I voted for independence and fuck me imagine what nicola sturgeon and her husband would have stolen if we had. Never been as let down with a politician.
I just wish people would be realistic. Scottish independence will likely never happen. You've voted no once already 10 years ago. The latest poll says 55% no. Do you want to lose another referendum?
Clearly, the majority of Scots don't think like this subreddit or like the two interviewees here.
Putting all that aside, the PM has to greenlight a referendum. No PM wants their legacy to be breaking up the union. For that reason alone, it will never happen.
So just face it. You're stuck on this sinking ship with the rest of us.
>The latest poll says 55% no.
The latest poll, from [today](https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/labour-strengthens-position-scotland-ipsos-poll-shows-close-race), has Yes at 51% and No at 49%.
as the only other reply to your post said, The latest poll, from [today](https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/labour-strengthens-position-scotland-ipsos-poll-shows-close-race), has Yes at 51% and No at 49%
As I said to the other person who replied. The 51% poll is irrelevant because there won't be another referendum.
No PM wants to be remembered for breaking up the union.
The stance of both Labour and Conservative for years now has been, you had your referendum and you said no. And that's what they will trot out whenever this subject is brought up.
Read my original comment again...
I said "Putting all that aside, the PM has to greenlight a referendum" and they won't because NO ONE wants their legacy to be the breaking of the union.
As I said to someone else. How many referendums do you want?
imagine being accosted by that walloper when you've popped into the supermarket
Lol, sky were expecting the elderly to be supportive of the two westminster clowns, disappointing for him I guess.
Not at all, they love finding the absolute moonhowlers
Is a moon howler same as a person who goes on TV and blatantly lies?
Well said, that man.
This interview really seems to have upset some people
I’m English and wanted the UK to stay together at the independence referendum but I’m struggling to see why anyone would disagree with what’s said in that interview. If I was Scottish, I’d want done with this absolute shit show too!
My position would be for Scotland to remain in the union in ideal circumstances, but 8 years on from the UK voting to "take back control", the sheer apathy from voters in the UK as to who that control is handed to and how politicians are elected to office, makes me realise the ideal circumstances will never happen. I honestly do not understand why electoral and constitutional reform aren't even remotely part of the discussion. All we get is hot topic wedge issues to divide and distract, without actually questioning *how* legislative and executive power works in Westminster. There are 12 NUTS 1 regions in the UK, from which MEPs were voted into European Parliament when we were in the EU. 4 of those 12 regions have devolved parliaments/assemblies. Greater London, Scotland, Wales, and (ostensibly) Northern Ireland. The remaining 8 regions in what I call provincial England, have no such devolved assembly and no representation on a national level other than in FPTP Westminster general elections. The democratic deficit lies principally in provincial England, where FPTP locks the country in the political inertia of tactically voting for the lesser of two evils so that no dynamic new parties or voices in politics can arise. England becomes a monolith, dwarfing the other constituent countries. Imagine if the rest of England had devolved assemblies and regional parties that split the vote, and allowed parties from the other constituent countries to form dynamic and responsive coalitions with smaller parties established on a more regional level within England. Redressing the democratic deficit in England, to the benefit of the English as much as anyone else, could save the union. But apparently the English (not least the Brexiteers who were so vocal about "taking back control") just don't care. So, to hell with the union, to hell with Westminster, and FPTP. Long unfit for purpose.
The English voted on regional assemblies and completely rejected them.
Yeah. It's not just a matter of regional assemblies though, we don't necessarily need to go that far. Even reforming the constitution of, and electoral process for, Westminster could improve things, but that's also been off the table and undiscussed for the last 13 years.
Wasn't that just the north east? They never bothered asking the rest of the country after that.
As an English man who has lived in Scotland for the past 10 years, the entire system is corrupted labour, con’s and SNP! I hate to say it but independence at this point will do no good but we need a completely new government. My wife is a teachers and under SNP standards have fell across the board, we don’t have people in government who have the skills to run organisations never mind country’s.
We need a new system. First past the post has created this bullshit nonsense where we lurch between two opposing sides and nobody actually deals with issues. Environment? Gender? Education? Immigration? Europe? Etc. Etc. Whatever key issues I vote on, I still have to choose from shit show to the left or right. How does that help the country? Then put clowns in on both sides and you have this election and the last decade. Whole thing is a bad fucking joke.
[удалено]
Attacking the person (spelling, punctuation etc) essentially saying their views are invalid as they are not smart enough to share opinions, instead of contradicting his points, is far less likely to convince them or anyone else.
While the two main parties inspire little confidence the SNP have been a car crash for the last few years. So with little enthusiasm I will vote Labour this time.
Same here. English but very sympathetic. Been up north many a time and absolutely love the Scots and Scotland. Welcoming people in a beautiful land. Free Scotland!
Scotland, Wales, northern Ireland. The English regions.... Northern England, the Midlands, Southeast and Southwest England all given more autonomy from Westminster.
And London
Rest of England Logic: Votes Tories to Westminster. Blames Westminster for doing Tory things and not them for voting them in.
EU was always pushing for more autonomy in member states. The clowns want to be fully controlling the money so there is no chance someone else can prove themselves and create something without them dipping into it.
The problem is the double standard. What the guy said about "those down South" may well be true, but it's just as true of the Sturgeons, so to brush that aside suggests someone who's judging two groups by different definitions of "deception and fraud" so as to arrive at an outcome that is ideologically convenient for them.
It's nothing but deception and fraud up here as well though
How unfortunate for Sky that this was live. You can be certain that wouldn't make it past editing if it was a recorded segment! 
Brilliant, he got roasted.
Auld dear is a hero.
Recorded from inside a tree by the sounds of it
I'm on my phone right now and could hear fuckall. Saved this so I can watch it when I get back from work.
Almost like half the country wants independence.
hehehehe thats preety funny
I would hate to be doing my shopping, turn around, and be asked for my political views live on TV! I consider myself reasonably intelligent and articulate and yet there’s a big chance I would make a fool of myself.
Found Rishi Sunak's Reddit account.
Same. They may not be allowed to swear on TV but that not my problem.
Both well spoken individuals.
Brilliant lol.
I don’t get the whole Sky News were angry or disappointed angle that the nationalists are going with. They asked questions, got answers and moved on.
They were expecting to give Rishi a free Sky subscription
It’s what he’s wanted since he was wee
'Sky News journalist gets OBLITERATED and SAVAGELY MURDERED by Scottish pensioners'
More of this please
It's a fantastic recording of someone walking about on the decks of a pirate ship, what did the guys in the interview say?
Haha, good man, not what the presenter was expecting. He is dead right too
Why wasn’t it what the presenter was expecting? It’s a predictable rant.
Can’t hear what they say because someone is breathing so damn loud, stomping around, and moving around in creaking furniture
Heard it perfectly fine. Never heard any breathing either
Listen harder. But FYI I have PPMS and struggle with breathing at times.
Just lovely.
Noo Murdoch, just wee Murdo and Senga, boomers who know! No 'stark' view, simple experience living here ffs.
He is a hollow man. Nailed it.
He went to ASDA expecting a Waitrose response.
Seems as if some Scots are finally starting to realise that the smart choice is self government. That's why most countries opt for it.
Scottish independence would be Brexit times 1 million. Never really understood the case for it.
Well said that man.
Good on them
respect the peoples vote!
The snp have been in power in Scotland since 2007 lol…
Uhuh ..and?
I remember saying when this was first posted here that if it wasn't live a lot of what these people say would have been cut. This same clip is now floating around on youtube, but it must be a version that aired later, as a lot of what the old guy with the cap says about the media targetting the SNP and not addressing the issues in Westminster, as been completely cut out.
Fraud down south? We have our own great fraud too.
Fraud with political donations damages a party by having less money to spend on campaigning. Fraud with public funds hurts the country. I'd take the former over the latter. Looks like we may have had the former up here? Still needs to go to court. Plus that one guy who tride to charge the country for his massive non-work-related international data bill. The tories meanwhile are neck deep in the latter. Absolutely riddled, not to mention Liz Truss crashing the pound (not technically illegal, but done against all sane financial advice and for the benefit of the rich)
Matheson should be charged. So should Murrell. Let the truth come out in the courts. But Matheson has paid it back, which (legally) shows remorse. Mone hasn't paid it back, hasn't shown remorse and is only being investigated because she's not part of the gang and can be sacrificed to save the others. The level of Tory corruption could buy every Scot a camper van and time off work to enjoy a two week tour around our beautiful country.
Absolutely! Charge them and remove any that have been ignoring conflict of interest laws from office. Bar them from standing. If it were somehow possible to take back the money from the companies that engaged in this then I'd support that. Give *that* to the NHS rather than the money that we were giving to the EU. The EU actually was well worth it. Instead, through these shitty "conflict of interest" contracts, paracetamol was costing the NHS several times to cost it should have.
Absolutely! Charge them and remove any that have been ignoring conflict of interest laws from office. Bar them from standing. If it were somehow possible to take back the money from the companies that engaged in this then I'd support that. Give *that* to the NHS rather than the money that we were giving to the EU. The EU actually was well worth it.
The more money you spend on a campaign the more likely you are to get elected amongst other things. If they over spent they got an unfair advantage, which in the right circumstances calls into question the legitimacy of the election (likely not in this case though). Stop downplaying the crime of the ones you like and then insisting Tories bad cos crime…
Also: What do you think the SNP did? Peter Murrell was charged with embezzelment, not overspending on a campaign. Do you know what embezzelment means? That means spending money on yourself rather than what it's indended for. That would do more harm for the SNP, unless you think the vehicle he was accused of bying with party funds was in some way beneficial to the election? The crimes of the Tories and Labour have been far, FAR, worse. The insane abandonment of conflict of interest laws (handing out contracts to friends and family), breaking Covid laws, cash for honours, and the illegal invasion of Iraq (a war crime - war of aggression). You think some dodgy book keeping and buying a car is wose than that? You think it's comparable? I mean, of course you don't. You don't even understand what Peter Murrell did in the first place. \*sigh\* I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you.
>Do you know what embezzelment means? That means spending money on yourself rather than what it's indended for. Its clear you don't know what it means. To help you out, below is an actual definition as opposed to one you made up: *Embezzlement refers to a form of white-collar crime in which a person or entity intentionally misappropriates the assets entrusted to them. In this type of fraud, the embezzler attains the assets lawfully and has the right to possess them, but the assets are then used for unintended purposes.* *So, its possible that Murrell is being charged because he has misappropriated funds, i.e. spent funds raised for an Independence campaign on general SNP campaigning. It doesn't mean that he is being charged with spending anything on himself. The reality is that we don't know what he has been charged for.* *Or it might be that he is completely innocent, as he has only been charged, not found guilty. A person is charged on suspicion of a crime*
Yeah... You really have no clue. The electoral commission is in charge of overseeing how much funds are spent during a political campaign. Other parties have been fined several times for overspending, such as the tories. Embezzelment means stealing funds that are in their care. If it was just a campaign overspend, they wouldn't have had the murder tent outside the house. They wouldn't have seized the plush £110,000 motorhome from his mum's house. Embezzelment is a crime. Campaign overspend is illegal, but not criminal. That's about as simply as I can explain it. I'm sure you'll learn absolutely nothing.
Ok, so do you think it will be your definition of Embezzlement or the legal definition that will be considered in court? The definition I posted previously was from Investopedia, but here is an alternative from a Scottish legal firm [https://www.gfmlaw.co.uk/embezzlement-and-the-law/](https://www.gfmlaw.co.uk/embezzlement-and-the-law/) The prosecution require to prove:- 1. The accused held another persons money or property, with that person’s permission. 2. The accused had a duty to account to the owner for what he did with the money or property. 3. The accused took the money/ property for his own **or did something with it that he did not have authority for.** 4. **The accused’s actions were in bad faith or were dishonest** Take the bolded section above "or did something with it that he did not have authority for". Murrel can be tried for embezzlement if he did something with funds in his care, that exceeded his authority, even if he did not take that money for himself. The most worrying thing about you (and many other people), is that you don't seem to understand that a police investigation does not mean a crime has been committed, it means that the police have a **suspicion** that a crime **may** have been committed. You have already decided that he is guilty which displays your own prejudices, because neither you or I have any knowledge of the evidence, or the detail of the charges. If the charges are that he took money for himself, then there will need to be more than evidence that a camper-van was purchased and parked in his mothers driveway, the prosecution will need to demonstrate that he purchased it for his own use. If someone has pictures of him in it on his hols with the missus, then he is screwed. If he used money that was raised for independence campaigning and 'entrusted' to him and used it to buy a camper-van for regular SNP election campaigning, then there might still be an embezzlement case to answer. You seem to have forgotten that it was an Indy campaigner who brought this case, specifically because the money that was supposed to be for Independence campaigning was already spent. So, either you have some inside information, in which case you posting your opinion here would probably be a crime, or you know as much about the evidence in this case as all of the rest of us, which is nothing.
You mentioned political donations so I commented on that. Then commented on your seeming to excuse one crime for another, which you’re still doing. Never mind me my brain isn’t as big as yours I apologise.
I prefer the greens myself
Yeah but it's a drop in the ocean compared to Westminster lobbyists and procurement scandals
Are we comparing a camper van to Michelle Mone PPE Ltd?
Still completely unproven
Exactly.....
I do not and still cannot understand their stance that Scotland would be worse off if they had independence. If that was the case. Why do they care? On the flip of the coin, they are therefore subsidising Scotland. Does it not make sense to cut ties with someone who costs you more than they give? This is the Conservatives here, they sell off anything that doesn’t generate revenue for them, so why haven’t they done so, and even Labour, because Scotland is more profitable and they know it!
How far down the nationalist rabbit warren do you have to go to believe a Scottish journalist would go into a Scottish supermarket and be surprised to encounter SNP voters?
Because media in Scotland are famously receptive, accommodating and friendly towards those who support independence /s
What does that have to do with whether you’d expect to encounter them?
Emily Thornberry
Did that dude say deception and fraud in Westminster. Fair enough you may believe that. But isn’t it Nicola’s husband who’s been charged?
Still completely unproven
Yeah it’s gotta go to court for sure. But you do realise the procurator won’t charge without a case, especially in such a high profile case. There has to be evidence to go to a jury. We’re still not sure what if anything will happen to Nicola. She may be completely innocent but she slept in the same bed supposedly and signed off the accounts. This isn’t some accounting error. It’s using money donated for one purpose for something completely different. It’s fraud which why I was scratching my head at the dude in the bonnet. Freeeeeedoooommmm to commit our own fraud. 
Mate, there is a legal process that has to unfold. You’re the one jumping ahead of it.
But it’s Scottish fraud so it’s okay
A camper van compared the the missing 16 billion quid that no one can investigate, screw the nut mate
We can learn from our own mistakes. Like never buy a camper van on expenses.
Came here for this - it's the same North and South.
It’s corrupt the world over. Which makes me wonder what planet that dudes on. Scottish corruption for Scotland!
I'm in England and I'm fed up with the lies. Can we devolve from London?
Don't blame the whole of London for central governments fault please. My Mrs is a Londoner and she's lovely.
Sorry. No offence intended. 🙂
Ah yes, absolutely no corruption and fraud from those in power in Scotland.
On one side you have a motorhome. On the other side, you have multiple billions of Covid fraud. Sounds exactly the same! /s
The motorhome and the iPad bill. That's 2-1, checkmate Nats!
I never said anything defending those down south, I was pointing out corruption exists in Scotland. Which I see you agree with me.
And the man’s clear point was that we should be able to make our own mistakes as an independent country.
Margret Ferrier stepped down after the people didn’t want her to represent them. Being part of the union doesn’t stop you being able to do that.
It’s funny how you’re seemingly allowed to go “BUT THE CORRUPTION IN SCOTLAND!” but the moment someone points to far more serious cases of corruption in England it becomes a “I never said such and such!” The strawman comes full circle
He never said that At least in Scotland the voters would have the power to remove politicians, and not just cross our fingers and hope English voters do it as we need to do it now
The exact opposite is true. We were able to remove Margaret Ferrier. We are unable to remove Michael Matheson. Westminster is better than Holyrood in that regard.
It is, but none of the major parties besides the conservatives and unionists supported the introduction of the same bill in Scotland https://www.parliament.scot/bills-and-laws/proposals-for-bills/proposed-removal-from-office-and-recall-scottish-parliament-bill It is still looking probable, as it got it's right to be introduced, but it doesn't exist just now. And there is reason that even Labour don't want to be associated so much with said bill, and why the Tories are massively in favour while most other parties aren't. By-elections are expensive, outside of the Tories who manage fine, any election is expensive due to a lack of donations and funding. That's not a defence of not removing an MP who does things like Matheson, but a reality. We live in effectively a 2 party country, hence why many of the parties which would struggle to afford by-elections and general elections abstained or were vocally against it. Labour was extremely against it in Westminster before it was pushed through. Although, if I was to be petty, I would use the arguments you use against independence referenda here too. If the argument that Brexit is not significant enough for Scotland to get to vote again, then I don't really see why it should be the case that a by-election should happen if another MP can just be dropped in from the party. The people voted in the last election for that party, so it should stick that way. At most they only have to wait 4 years to change them.
There's a good argument that in Holyrood we vote for the party not the person so Matheson should be replaced by the SNP without a by election following a recall petition. Or just not replaced at all, which is my preference. Whatever the case is there's zero way to get rid of Matheson, and we got rid of Ferrier. Remember it's this we're talking about >At least in Scotland the voters would have the power to remove politicians, and not just cross our fingers and hope English voters do it as we need to do it now
Michael Matheson can get removed at the next election I’ll also point out it wasn’t the SNP who set up the current parliamentary system in Holyrood
But it's them that oppose a recall system
deflect, ignore, strawman.
Reddit, buzzwords, absolutely nothing original.
He literally said let us make our own mistakes. Come on.
Margret Ferrier is a perfect of example of a politician being removed by the people she represents. This happened whilst Scotland is part of the union. Mistake made, mistake fixed without independence.
British politics is the same everywhere isn't it. Horrible cesspit of attention seekers
Poor wee Nic. She’s just an innocent victim in all of this. The money was just resting in their account.
Well since she hasn't been charged with any crimes despite prolonged investigation, yes she is innocent
Got any links with proof "the money" was in their account or you just spouting pish?
Ask her husband, or Police Scotland. Champ.
So has Sturgeon been charged, Champ?
Unfortunately, not yet. But I’ve got the lube and tissues ready for the day. Champ.
and what do wank over? rishi or starmer? where does that get you? where does that get the rest of scotland? everyone always seems to just argue and miss the point. this union IS corrupt. have we done anything about it? no. can we do anything about it without our independence? no. the promise of a new labour government is not a solution either. how long has this went on? decades upon decades. centuries? probably. is it getting better? no. so why is this union so attractive to you?
I’ve told you what my kink is.
No point talking to you, blinkered
Tell me I’ve been a naughty unionist.
Ahh another freak. Makes sense. https://news.sky.com/story/amp/charlie-elphicke-naughty-tory-mp-jailed-for-sex-assaults-considering-supermarket-shelf-stacking-to-pay-back-court-costs-12601891
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://news.sky.com/story/charlie-elphicke-naughty-tory-mp-jailed-for-sex-assaults-considering-supermarket-shelf-stacking-to-pay-back-court-costs-12601891](https://news.sky.com/story/charlie-elphicke-naughty-tory-mp-jailed-for-sex-assaults-considering-supermarket-shelf-stacking-to-pay-back-court-costs-12601891)** ***** ^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
I’m one of Derek Mackay’s buddies from back in the day.
Yeah your sort are all sexual predators.
What an utterly weird obsession. Carry on, Champ.
If you pay for my OnlyFans account you can watch.
Can't say I'm surprised by a Unionist / Tory apologist trying to tout a revolting wee side hustle
I’ll do you a deal. One month free.
It’s a father Ted quote it’s not literal accusation
I think you’re getting Nicola Sturgeon and fr Ted Crilly mixed up
except we have decided what we want to do, we want to be part of the union. You cant keep talking about wanting self determination if you ignore it when we determine to do something you dont personally like.
we voted to stay and things got worse. It'll have been a decade this September. I think that's a fair shot at allowing the unionists to have a go at showing they care about Scotland and the union, don't you? But lets see what labour do shall we, if they fuck it then it should be game over.
Wasn’t part of voting to be in a union due to being threatened there was no guarantee to be in the EU. A lot of people think fair enough at the time. EU vote comes along and 63% of us vote to stay in, you know considering it was all part of the union and that and then we were dragged out anyway. An EU vote btw that happened due to lies just like ours was.
[удалено]
It’s not changed. What are you wanting? Best of 3? Best of 5?
[удалено]
What groundbreaking information have the SNP given us since then? Yes & No are pretty much decided. The undecideds, what information have the SNP given which might turn their vote around?
To be honest in this case the SNP haven't had to do anything. A lot has happened and changed since 2014. Leaving the EU, covid, housing crisis, cost of living crisis etc. All these have shown Westminster highly lacking. Now if we're being honest, in the last year or so the SNP have had a rough time and I'm not denying that. Nor am I denying that their handling of the last 10 years has been far from perfect. With all things in the balance I would still argue that Scottish independence was still a contested issue and worth another referendum.
Except the numbers haven't moved. Despite what you describe as a perfect storm the numbers haven't moved. The SNP have exhausted every resource they have, all the patience people have and overspent trying to get it over the line and they've failed. And now the indy fans are frantic because they recognise that the best advert for independence, the tories, are getting booted out and people are seeing the SNP for the grifting sham that they are.
But the numbers have moved. Since the 2014 referendum the numbers per polling have changed. Repeatedly. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_on_Scottish_independence
There isn't a large enough interest though. The numbers haven't changed. If you want to say the yes side are being genuine in accepting the answer then maybe if they'd shut their faces for 10 years and then started asking now, instead of demanding it a year later then it might hold some water.
If this is the Union you voted for how are you able to wank on all fours cause I cannae work it out.
I honestly find it staggering that people still try running with this line of reasoning (unless u/RuaIn1441 is being completely disingenuous). We're a decade on from the referendum and the Union has seen us worse off than 2014 in almost every respect.
So he should only vote for a unionist party? 😂 You can vote for whoever you want for whatever reason you want
This old bollocks again. If you think things haven't fundamentally changed since 2014 to the point that another referendum isn't worth doing I don't know what to tell you. Why even have a general election, we had one a few years ago after all...
When it comes to Scottish independence unionists seem to think that democracy is an event rather than a process. Baffling.
How are things looking on the vote share front? (And you can’t include the Greens either after Meep Gordon confirming last night that the party goes with the flow and latches onto who is in power)
Poll released today: 51% Yes, 49% No.
Uh huh. A single poll. What’s the average?
Before 2014 we started at in the high twenties. That was deemed sufficient to put it to the public. Now it's 50 50 it shall not be talked of again.
It’s not 50/50 The needle hasn’t shifted. That’s why it’s a pointless exercise. Those driving for independence haven’t bothered their arses to talk to the people that they actually need to. The undecideds. They just started shouting louder
How many polls do unionists want, seems to change all the time. One if it's a referendum, more if it's a you gov poll pointing for indy. Will we have more referendums and take the average of them too?
Any series of polls showing a significant majority in favour of independence will do. But based on a neutral question.
We decided 10 years ago. We aren't independent at the moment, how was the result ignored? Democracy doesn't happen once, its an ongoing process. Promises were made for "near federalism" and "Devo-max" , yet we have one of the weakest national parliaments in the world. We're entitled to reconsider when those promises didn't materialise.
but you see the unionists don’t give a fuck about democracy. Back in your box!! No complaining!!
Yes you can.
I distinctly remember the caveat "once in a lifetime, unless something major changes, such as Brexit". Back then, I very naively assumed, Brexit could not possibly happen because it is glaringly obvious how damaging that would be...
What an absolute embarassment of a man, if he was in the USA he'd be wearing a red hat and rattling on about Hilary's emails
…Or he would be just getting on with his life in an independent country.
You're the embarrassment dude. Trying to compare us to those idiots, what's next, you going to call us Nazis?
>us You're willingly identifying as on the same side as that old fool?
He didn't speak as eloquently as I would like but he ain't wrong. Scotland has been ignored for too long and they'll likely bring up Nicola Sturgeon as part of their anti-SNP plan in the election. Besides, who sounds eloquent when randomly approached on the street, it's hard to express your point without time to articulate your thoughts.
If a nuclear bomb just went off, the world was going to be wiped out, and there was room for one person in your bunker, I’d stand outside and be reduced to dust with that guy than join you in safety.
Just to be clear I'd offer to let you in, if there was room. But I would be incredibly relieved when you said no.
No you wouldn’t, you’re American, you’d just shoot him and call it self defence.
It’s getting quite Trumpy.
“Lock her up! Lock her up!” Do be honest with you, I’m quite partial to chanting that myself whenever a certain former FM pops up
At least, well at least I hope, you're doing that with some sense of irony or satire
Let’s go with ‘yes’?
I think we’ll go with no actually.
Sad So sad.
Wait, so the average SNAT looks like that?
They picked the best of them.
They should have asked someone totally normal and sound in mind, like yourself Halk.
I don't let my photo get taken because it captures some of your soul
Isn't the former head of the SNP under investigation for deception and fraud? The one before that was sexual assault.
Well, I mean you're not wrong but do you really want to go down that route and start talking about what other party leaders have done? Fact of the matter is that once we get independence, the fragile alliance that is the SNP will rapidly fragment and we will hopefully end up with a coalition government that properly represents the people, continues a progressive and socially/ environmentally aware agenda, and governs for all, not the few. Edit: a tautology.
I voted for independence and fuck me imagine what nicola sturgeon and her husband would have stolen if we had. Never been as let down with a politician.
2 dithery pishy old nats in the same place. Definitely down the foot of the walk
Looks more like Chesser. Back right hand corner before you go through to the warehouse.
Certainly not Leithers. Easy way to tell is the Sky News man wouldn't have made it into the supermarket alive.
Whats with the bag rustling at the end
Wax Navid OK with the TV using his shop?
I just wish people would be realistic. Scottish independence will likely never happen. You've voted no once already 10 years ago. The latest poll says 55% no. Do you want to lose another referendum? Clearly, the majority of Scots don't think like this subreddit or like the two interviewees here. Putting all that aside, the PM has to greenlight a referendum. No PM wants their legacy to be breaking up the union. For that reason alone, it will never happen. So just face it. You're stuck on this sinking ship with the rest of us.
>The latest poll says 55% no. The latest poll, from [today](https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/labour-strengthens-position-scotland-ipsos-poll-shows-close-race), has Yes at 51% and No at 49%.
As that woman proved, even the old unionists are changing their tune.
The most recent poll of 55% was from May this year. Clearly, people like that woman are in the minority.
as the only other reply to your post said, The latest poll, from [today](https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/labour-strengthens-position-scotland-ipsos-poll-shows-close-race), has Yes at 51% and No at 49%
As I said to the other person who replied. The 51% poll is irrelevant because there won't be another referendum. No PM wants to be remembered for breaking up the union. The stance of both Labour and Conservative for years now has been, you had your referendum and you said no. And that's what they will trot out whenever this subject is brought up.
But it was relevant when it agreed with you? Fuck off.
Read my original comment again... I said "Putting all that aside, the PM has to greenlight a referendum" and they won't because NO ONE wants their legacy to be the breaking of the union. As I said to someone else. How many referendums do you want?
[удалено]
😂