Via Politics Home we are advised that Dav il Cam is to challenge the idea of 'devo-max' where the question of Scottish independence is concerned because 'it would affect the whole of the UK'.
And this is news? I suppose, to the 'talking heads' amongst the MSM, it is, but for those of us with a brain it was obvious that granting 'devo-max' to Scotland would also have entailed granting the same to England, Wales and Northern Ireland. In so doing it would also have taken away virtually all the powers that politicians possess, ones they have gradually usurped from the people over time, thus rendering them powerless. It would also further call into question why 600, let alone 650, MPs are required and just what would we be paying them for.
To have granted 'devo-max' would have been to grant the beginnings of direct democracy - and that is the last thing Dav il Cam and his fellow sycophant politicians want! These bastard politicians are control freaks and like the EU, control over our own lives is the last thing they will grant us.
Once again, just saying.........
Change of URL
13 years ago
3 comments:
Except that the Scottish Parliament has not given us more control over our own lives since its inception. In fact, it's even more of a nannying, hectoring, authoritarian, bullshit legislature than Westminster and the EU put together.
Salmond has a mandate for an independence referendum, not something else. Thus, that's what the referendum should be on. If he wants a second referendum on so called "devo-max", then that's fine. Another thing: if "devo-max" is to be on the menu, then why not "devo-min" too? If the powers of the Scottish Parliament are up for debate, then why is more power or the status quo the only two options?
So far, we've had minimum alcohol prices, taxpayer funded goodies for everyone (except taxpayers), and we're only ever one ban away from utopia. Now the Scottish Parliament wants control over taxes, speed limits, drink drive limits and air-gun ownership. Now, hands up who thinks the taxes will go down, and the speed limits go up?
More control over our lives? Yeah right.
DH: Whilst politicians tinker with the present system of democracy and retaining central control, people never will have control of their lives.
It is no good people sitting on the sidelines complaining when the introduction of direct democracy and referism would give them just that.
If people remain content to be constrained by the dogs of government and act like sheep, then I'm afraid I have no sympathy for them.
I'm all for direct democracy and referism. It's just that I see no prospect of it ever happening in this country. It would require the active support of our political class, and that really would be turkeys voting for Christmas.
The Swiss constitution, with its support for popular initiative was introduced in 1874, and updated in 1999 with only minor changes. Like the US constitution, it's not something that could conceivably be written today, with legions of human rights lawyers, globalists, third sector parasites, and "social entrepreneurs" sitting around the table.
Call me a cynic.
Post a Comment