Jump to content

Will Westminster MP's sanction the Vow


Alex MacLeod

Recommended Posts

Oddquine,  thank goodness for your industrious approach to things. This way with all your gen to back me up  I can keep Charles under control although, to be quite frank,I still don't know what his point is.

 

Quebec, Charles. is over 2,000 miles from the  Vancouver area where I live. And Manitoba is also about half that distance from me also.

 

And, as I explained in my post,when the RBS issues their fiduciary issue in Scottish RBS banknotes, they save themselves the cost of buying B.of E notes to serve the same purpose.

 One thing is certain, when I used to get in to Telford Street for six pence when I was about 13 or 14  I shudder to think of what it would cost a wee boy to get in now. And that was always standing for me not sitting.Yep, pards, the times they keep a'changin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really don't know what the fuss is about.  The UK Government's position merely reflects the difficulties foreign banks face when staff are confronted with notes they have never seen before from banks they have never heard of.  Time is wasted both for the bank (and other customers in the queue) as well as the person trying to exchange the notes.  In addition, a plethora of different notes is hardly conducive to anti-fraud measures.

 

Before the Government gave this advice the Committee of Scottish Bankers readily accepted that Scottish notes were frequently not accepted by banks abroad and advised the public to use credit/debit/ATM cards to access cash when abroad.  This, therefore is a piece of sensible, pragmatic advice which appears to be in everyone's interest.  If the banks which actually issue the notes are happy with the Government's advice then it really is rather pointless for anyone else to jump up and down about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really don't know what the fuss is about.  The UK Government's position merely reflects the difficulties foreign banks face when staff are confronted with notes they have never seen before from banks they have never heard of.  Time is wasted both for the bank (and other customers in the queue) as well as the person trying to exchange the notes.  In addition, a plethora of different notes is hardly conducive to anti-fraud measures.

 

Before the Government gave this advice the Committee of Scottish Bankers readily accepted that Scottish notes were frequently not accepted by banks abroad and advised the public to use credit/debit/ATM cards to access cash when abroad.  This, therefore is a piece of sensible, pragmatic advice which appears to be in everyone's interest.  If the banks which actually issue the notes are happy with the Government's advice then it really is rather pointless for anyone else to jump up and down about it.

 

Don't think anyone was jumping up and down, except maybe the bloke in Germany who couldn't get his notes changed.  I was more interested in the fact that it appeared to be specific advice not issued until after the NO vote which theoretically made us "Better Together", rather than leaving it to the various financial institutions to make their own decisions as to what they will or won't accept, as had been the case.

 

Having said that, the bloke maybe did what I always used to do on my rare forays over the border......changed all his notes for Scottish ones just to see what would happen when he tried to spend/change them. A lot of shops in England, on my trips over the border in the 80s, lost my custom due to their refusal to accept what they called "Mickey Mouse" money.

 

The Committee of Scottish Bankers can accept what they like......doesn't mean the people carrying Scottish, NI notes(1 for 1 value, backed by assets) on holiday have to like them being refused (though I wonder if the restrictions apply to all non-English notes which circulate in, and may be carried outside, the British Isles, or just the Scottish ones)....not if we are all British and all of us outside England happily accept English notes. :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oddquine,  thank goodness for your industrious approach to things. This way with all your gen to back me up  I can keep Charles under control although, to be quite frank,I still don't know what his point is.

 

Quebec, Charles. is over 2,000 miles from the  Vancouver area where I live. And Manitoba is also about half that distance from me also.

 

And, as I explained in my post,when the RBS issues their fiduciary issue in Scottish RBS banknotes, they save themselves the cost of buying B.of E notes to serve the same purpose.

 One thing is certain, when I used to get in to Telford Street for six pence when I was about 13 or 14  I shudder to think of what it would cost a wee boy to get in now. And that was always standing for me not sitting.Yep, pards, the times they keep a'changin.

And both are provinces of Canada in a federal union arrangement.......and not previously independent sovereign countries in a Treaty of Union, Scarlet! :smile:

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really don't know what the fuss is about.  

 

If the banks which actually issue the notes are happy with the Government's advice then it really is rather pointless for anyone else to jump up and down about it.

Careful DD... you are in danger of challenging the insatiable desire of the Nats to attempt to exploit a grievance against whatever the current euphemism is for "the English". (Or now that the Referendum is over, maybe they feel they don't even need such euphemisms any more.) Give them another Holyrood majority in 2016 and making such a challenge might well become a criminal offence :laugh:

 

I just wonder what the reaction of a worker in a Loch Ness tourist spot might be if offered a Euro note issued by the Bank of Lower Saxe-Coburg or similar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I really don't know what the fuss is about.  The UK Government's position merely reflects the difficulties foreign banks face when staff are confronted with notes they have never seen before from banks they have never heard of.  Time is wasted both for the bank (and other customers in the queue) as well as the person trying to exchange the notes.  In addition, a plethora of different notes is hardly conducive to anti-fraud measures.

 

Before the Government gave this advice the Committee of Scottish Bankers readily accepted that Scottish notes were frequently not accepted by banks abroad and advised the public to use credit/debit/ATM cards to access cash when abroad.  This, therefore is a piece of sensible, pragmatic advice which appears to be in everyone's interest.  If the banks which actually issue the notes are happy with the Government's advice then it really is rather pointless for anyone else to jump up and down about it.

 

Don't think anyone was jumping up and down, except maybe the bloke in Germany who couldn't get his notes changed.  I was more interested in the fact that it appeared to be specific advice not issued until after the NO vote which theoretically made us "Better Together", rather than leaving it to the various financial institutions to make their own decisions as to what they will or won't accept, as had been the case.

 

Having said that, the bloke maybe did what I always used to do on my rare forays over the border......changed all his notes for Scottish ones just to see what would happen when he tried to spend/change them. A lot of shops in England, on my trips over the border in the 80s, lost my custom due to their refusal to accept what they called "Mickey Mouse" money.

 

The Committee of Scottish Bankers can accept what they like......doesn't mean the people carrying Scottish, NI notes(1 for 1 value, backed by assets) on holiday have to like them being refused (though I wonder if the restrictions apply to all non-English notes which circulate in, and may be carried outside, the British Isles, or just the Scottish ones)....not if we are all British and all of us outside England happily accept English notes. :wink:

 

I wasn't aware there were any English notes.  The notes issued in England are UK notes issued by the "Bank of England" which is the UK's central bank.  English commercial banks are not afforded the same privilege as the Scottish and Irish banks and I fail to see why businesses in England and Wales should feel in any way obliged to accept notes that are only issued elsewhere.

 

Businesses in England and Wales or abroad who refuse Scottish notes may lose a tiny bit of custom from a very small number of folk who refuse to pay by any other means, but in losing that custom they are only losing their profit margin.  If they accept, in good faith, a forged note purporting to be a Scottish or Irish note they lose the full value of the transaction.  It is often small businesses operating at the margin who are confronted with the dilemma of taking the notes or not and who stand to lose a little if they don't accept the note or potentially lose a lot if the note turns out to be a forgery.  It is therefore perfectly reasonable for them to refuse these notes.  If they are providing us with a service then surely the least we can do is afford them the courtesy of paying them in a manner which they are comfortable with.  Actually, I have found that most places are perfectly happy or even delighted to take Scottish notes, so by all means offer a Scottish note but if it is refused, use some other payment without making a fuss!. 

 

As for deliberately ensuring you just have Scottish notes when you go to England in order to play political games with folk who are just trying to make a living....  words fail me!  At least you said that's what you used to do.  I sincerely hope that means you now have a bit more respect for other folk rather than you never cross the border these days.

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

I just wonder what the reaction of a worker in a Loch Ness tourist spot might be if offered a Euro note issued by the Bank of Lower Saxe-Coburg or similar.

 

I think it would be feck off and it would be words to the same effect if a worker in a Lake Constance tourist spot was offered a Scottish or Bank of England note :laugh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

As for deliberately ensuring you just have Scottish notes when you go to England in order to play political games with folk who are just trying to make a living....  words fail me!  At least you said that's what you used to do.  I sincerely hope that means you now have a bit more respect for other folk rather than you never cross the border these days.

 

Again we get an insight into these people's insatiable need to feel aggrieved and to attempt to spread this sense of grievance into the community at large. Presumably once they provoke incidents like this, they then send the information to the Reverend Whinge Over Skintland to put up on his website - whereupon anti-Scottish bias on the part of the English automatically becomes an Indisputable Nationalist Fact.

It was therefore quite predictable that Oddquine would attempt to portray the situation regarding Scottish notes as some kind of deliberate post-Referendum conspiracy. What she fails to recognise, though, is that, unlike themselves, not everyone allows their every thought and deed to be governed by the notion of Separation. I mean, does Oddquine really believe that those responsible for maintaining a workable international financial regime give one brass Swinney, Eck or Bawbee about what a nucleus of greeting Jocks who can't accept that they lost on September 18th might think?

Quite frankly these grievance purveyors are nothing more than a national embarrassment who almost make you feel ashamed to be Scottish. Given their unrelenting campaign to portray an entire nation as a bunch of whingeing, discontented and Anglophobic Jocks, is there any surprise that, in the minds of people in England and elsewhere, the reputation of Scots and Scotland has taken a hammering of late?

Is it any surprise that wind-up merchants like Kate Hopkins are grabbing this self-created national caricature and, with phrases like "sweaty Jocks", are mobilising a lot of English people against the Scots?

The SNP and their satellites have done huge damage to the international credibility of the Scots and a huge disservice to the Scotland whose interests they claim to promote by portraying a lot of very decent people as part of some bitter and twisted awkward squad.

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OMG Charles, sometimes I feel a wee bit sorry for you since some of your posts lately seem to be ranter -driven and  bitter and twisted rather than calm and flexible. What kind of  bee do you have in your bonnet this time? Bumble it must be 'cos there aint no HUMBLE there at all. Recently, ever post reflects the pain of every sting your special brand of bumble has afflicted you with. Remember the fine words addressed to one S. Pimple when  he fired an ex employee for not dong the work to which he was assigned  and paid to do, (accompanied by a few choice words)  and he was told by this younger person that "you get more with honey than with vinegar." To which a frothing Pimple croaked in reply ..." There's the door over there . Shut it on the way out."

 

As for your caustic views on Oddquine,  I am very sorry to tell you that, in comparison with yours, her views are eminently logical , cogent and TRUTHFUl and never occasion shock and awe in me.

When she does her research she doesn't need a whisky bottle  or a hot water bottle at her bedside because her lucid and fair mind grabs the facts as they are spoken and transfers them accurately onto paper. And what she digs up is amazing stuff. Amazing, Sir , Amazing.

 

Just as I have explained why,   financial benefit accrues to the Scottish banks by maintaining a Fiduciary issue but there is also no doubt in my mind that part of the reason that they do this is also to continue a Scottish presence in the banking markets of the world and reminding all and sundry that Scottish banks were, to the best of my knowledge, first on the banking scene here in Britain a long time ago and always have , in the past, been successful, often revered for their canniness and common sense etc.,  and a powerful influence and helper to the business world here and abroad..

 

Even if the RBS is now a disgraceful shadow of the honest, integrity-afflicted  and down to earth  former RBS Institution they still have immense power and wealth at their finger tips. Their contacts are still the very Wealthy (e.g. the Queen and her Mama, the Marquis of Bath,  The  Duke of Westminster, blah, blah) - and all these clients have their accounts at Drummonds branch at the top of Whitehall at Trafalgar Square and their influence in the financial structure of Britain and abroad cannot be downplayed.

 

So, to suggest that the uneducated (not their fault of course) and  the uncouth and untutored masses don't know the difference between an English pound and a Scottish pound then life must still go on Charley Lad. The independent Scotsmen of our time have every right to their delusions of grandeur --just as every deluded journalist should be allowed to  express himself even if that on the odd occasion  allows for a conflict of the facts, an unwillingness to accept the factoids presented in Technicolor to him or her and an inability to listen very carefully to truths that speak for themselves. 

 

Now where's mah wee drammie of Toddie--probably cold by now fer goodness sake. OCH------!

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

not really wanting to dip my toe too far into the water here but having been to Portugal, Spain, Italy and France as well as both Scotland and England in the last two or three years I did not seem to have any problem with the various "Euro" countries accepting my euro coins which clearly show different countries of issue or my euro notes which - although designed to look exactly alike - are distinguishable to a specific country of origin (and in later series even to a specific city of origin) by the first letter of the serial number.

 

I have also not had any problem with Scottish or English merchants accepting the "pound" issued by the Bank of England or by Scottish banks. Only thing I did take slight issue with on my travels - and this was actually in a shopping mall in Canada - was a currency kiosk displaying two rates for the British pound ... one for "British" pound showing a union jack flag on the rates board and a separate one for "Scotland" under the saltire banner. Both rates were different with the Scottish pound being about 20% less than the "UK" pound. That I did not like and decided to make some mischief at the kiosk with the definitions of "UK", "Great Britain" and some discussion of "sterling" thrown in! It was a 3rd party business running the kiosk not a bank and the clerk was as thick as mince so it wasn't really much fun! 

 

As far as accepting or not accepting the Scottish Pound, despite my mischief above, I wont get overly upset if a small retailer in England decides not to accept it. The forgery risk and explanation is sensible to me and if its all I have on me then I will shop elsewhere. The merchant has the right not to accept my money and I have the right to choose another merchant. Having said that, it should be noted that Clydesdale Bank notes issued in 2010 won an award from the International Currency association as the best new banknotes issued that year and the criteria includes not only look, feel, durability and features for blind or partially sighted people but also security ..... so perhaps the forgery excuse is just a smoke screen. either way, I am not going to get upset about being refused the use of a Scottish note unless it is by a public or government funded institution, a national retailer who accepts it in Scotland but not England, or another bank etc., and I have to be fair and say that has never happened to me yet.  

 

On another note .... US currency is the most counterfeited in the world and in many places here in Ontario (and I am sure Scarlet will say its the same in Vancouver) US notes are accepted as legal tender. Shops and bars will stick up a handwritten sign showing the conversion rate (skewed in their favour of course) and the US traveller can whip out their dollars and pay as if they were still in the US. Its a judgement call for these businesses and most seem to think the risk of inadvertently accepting a few counterfeit bills is worth it compared to the possible lost trade. I have also been able to spend Canadian dollars in border areas of New York state and Michigan and also in Florida (many older people from Canada spend the winter there so a lot of businesses accept our plastic money).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Genuine question for those better read on the pertinent issues. Why has the BoE never become the Bank of Britain/UK and just have British/UK bank notes?

Good question.  Before the Union, the Bank of England were bankers to the English Government and continued to act as bankers to the Government after the union.  At that point (and up to the point it was nationalised in 1946) it was privately owned by stockholders and presumably it was entirely a matter for the Board of the bank whether they kept the original name or changed it to reflect the changed political circumstances.  Changing the name on the nationalisation of the bank was presumably an option but I guess that the name was so entrenched and the role as the UK's central bank so well recognised that there was simply little point changing.  I imagine also that the Bank of England is named in such a massive amount of legislation etc that changing its name would be a massive and expensive exercise.

 

The notes issued by the Bank of England are UK notes and not English notes.  It is understandable that they should be thought of as English due to the continuation of the bank's original name prominent on the notes together with the fact that several banks in Scotland and Northern Ireland can issue their own.  It might make a lot of sense to stop the other 7 banks issuing notes so that we only had UK notes, although if that were to happen I would like to see reference to the notes being UK currency as prominent as the "Bank of England" is on the current notes. 

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see you have had a reduction in gasoline prices in the U K  but they are still not as low by far as the  price here in Canada which is about $1 per liter compared to about $1.75 which would be your price converted to Canadian dollars.

 

Long may it continue ..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

And the Command Paper as a result of the VOW has arrived. Woohoo!

 

Of course it means squat until it gets through the Westminster process, and if we are being brutally honest...it is as near as dammit "federalism","devo-max" or "home rule" as per the VOW as I am as near as dammit Charles Bannerman!

 

For those who can be bothered ploughing through 134 pages of not a lot but verbiage disguising the not a lot (I'm still struggling to make sense of it) it is here 

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/397079/Scotland_EnduringSettlement_acc.pdf

 

Did have a snigger at the Enduring Settlement bit, though.........the settlement will be as enduring as Westminster  promises, agreements, manifestos and vows, which is usually until Westminster can crumple them up and throw them in the bucket labelled "we won, so we can ignore this now". 

 

But at least the original thread question has been answered.......Westminster MPs will not sanction the VOW......... because the VOW as described by Gordie Broon, and not denied by any of the Unionist party leaders is not what is contained in anything which has emanated from the Smith Commission and will be entering the UK Parliamentary system for sanction...or at least the application of the Westminster wrecking ball system.

 

But then, did anyone with a modicum of intelligence think it was ever going to happen as promised, once the result was NO?  Really? Honestly?

 

For those who can't be bothered reading it.     Wings (who else) describes it perfectly........here........

http://wingsoverscotland.com/a-bag-full-of-nothing/

 


 

 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, Oddquine, is this the "Chickens Coming Home to Roost" scenario, then, for those who opted for the safety net of the "Westminster Attachment at The Hip" protocol?

 

Goodenness Garryacious. What a surprise!

 

Lol! Like that... "Chickens Coming Home to Roost", scenario,  Scarlet..may well nick it and claim it as my own!  

 

To be fair, as a start, while the feartie No voters.....those who used to come into the YES Shop and say, I would love independence, but I don't think we are ready for it yet...... gain confidence in our ability to manage our own money and make a difference, it might work in the short term, once we see what we are actually going to get out of it once it has been through the Westminster wringer. Though I haven't finished reading it, I'm not clear yet if it continues the inability to alter individual tax rates, which is the case with the Scotland Act 2012, which comes in this year, and which hamstrings the taxation options available to the Scottish Government.because what Government is going to increase/decrease one rate  of tax if that means they have to increase/decrease all rates of tax by the same rate?  

 

However.......Scameron seems to think that that is our lot......all we are ever going to get....and in return, it appears he is going to have a two tier Union, with the whole UK paying for England's Parliament and parliamentarians in the Union Parliament buildings, while those of us with devolved parliaments have to fund our own, on top of helping to fund Westminster.......and the Scots (and only the Scots, despite both Welsh and NI MPs having devolved legislatures and voting on English only legislation as well) are to become second class citizens of the Union.

 

For those who don't know what "devo-max", "home rule" or "as near as dammit federalism" means.....believe me, it doesn't mean 70% of our income still heading down to the Westminster Treasury and 85% of the decisions on welfare spending being made in Westminster......that is "devo-as much as we think we can get away with".

 

If it wasn't so darned pathetic, it would be almost funny to hear them now getting their knickers in a twist because Nicola Sturgeon has said that the SNP would vote on the likes of the NHS, where changes to the NHS in England would impact on Barnett consequentials, which would cut Scottish Block Grant. You'd think, if our highly paid and subsidised MPs  had an intelligence at a level a shade above that of an amoeba, they would have remembered that the SNP always has voted on any "English only" legislation, which would impact on Scotland........which is why they voted against the English tuition fee hike in 2010. That is their job, and why I vote for them....to make Scotland's voice heard in  Westminster, standing up for Scotland's interests, given the Scottish Secretary (whose office costs are also charged to us, btw.....so we paid them to trash the Scots in the referendum), is as much use in standing up for Scotland as a one legged man would be in a bahookey -kicking contest.

 

Interesting months ahead in the 2015 GE run-up, methinks. Project Fear #2 anyone.......vote SNP let the Tories in from NuLabour.......and vote SNP let Labour in from the Tories.............me, I'll vote SNP for Scotland!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

This is the first time I have gone though all this topic.

 

I don't know Mr Bannerman, or how exactly he is really perceived by other posters, and I only know OF him through other topics to which he has posted. BUT. Just from his posts here it seems to me that he sees himself as some sort of intellectual superior to the "rest" of you.  And I think not !

 

Of course, I "may/might" be completely wrong about this, but since I will not be posting again to this subject I really don't care if this post is deleted by Scotty or any other moderator.

 

I imagine that Mr Bannerman will read this - in which case, please, sir, tone down your pontificating a wee bit, otherwise folk will become bored with anything that you post !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have the heart of Bruce, Mr Watt.........reading in one go a whole thread in which both Charles and I have posted! :ohmy:

 

I said in my post #116 (I think)

Westminster MPs will not sanction the VOW......... because the VOW as described by Gordie Broon, and not denied by any of the Unionist party leaders is not what is contained in anything which has emanated from the Smith Commission and will be entering the UK Parliamentary system for sanction...or at least the application of the Westminster wrecking ball system

 

And the UK Branch Office/Accounting Unit which is the Scottish NuLabour Party agrees with me. (Though they gloss over the fact that the UK NuLabour Party were instrumental in removing a lot of the powers we were meant to be getting!) :smile:

 

Gordie is back to be the saviour of Scottish NuLabour, as it doesn't look as if Smurphy is cutting the mustard as expected......and all over the MSM today is the promise (no hollow laughter, please!) of "more powers for Scotland" if we vote NuLabour in 2015. Really they have!  Honestly!  And they expect us to believe them this time?  Yeah..right....and that's a large winged pig I see swooping past my window giggling at our gullibility.

 

Apart from the fact that we don't actually have all the powers from the 2012 Scotland Act yet, and won't have all the powers, proposed by the Smith Commission, if they even get through Westminster, until at least 2020.......how do Smurphy and Gordie propose to get any single extra power through Westminster, between 2015 and 2020 against the predominance of English constituency MPs (of both parties), who don't even want us to get all (and in some cases any) of what is in the Smith Commission report. (Ooops.....forgot Gordie won't BE there in May to get anything he promises through Westminster.and we haven't yet been informed if Smurphy is definitely standing himself.......though I'm betting he will!)

 

Has anyone noticed, as well, that from "The NHS is only safe with a NO vote", Scottish NuLabour (and the UK Parent body) are now saying, for GE purposes " Vote for us to save the NHS and stop TTIP" ..and.....appropriate for this thread...what happened to the "£200 billion oil boom if the Scots vote NO, promises PM", as plastered all over the Hootsmon seven months before the referendum.

 

And now we are getting NuLabour saying "they are fighting against the Bedroom Tax" when they didn't even bother to turn up to vote on their own bill against it......and if they had, they would have won..as 47 MPs didn't turn up and the bill failed by 26 votes. Probably that was as a result of pairing, (which should not be allowed at all, imo), but given “Pairing is not allowed in divisions of great political importance”, it appears the only political importance of the Bedroom Tax is to give NuLabour  a wee something to rail against in General Election so they don't look quite so blatantly right-wing as the Tories. I'll bet those who are paying the Bedroom Tax, because of the lack of homes available for down-sizing would consider it a politically important issue.......but we don't get asked what should count as politically important.

 

I'm going to quote a comment made on FB, by a FB friend of a mate of mine. and I hope it goes through without falling foul of the swearie filter.........I think it says it all regarding the crap emanating from NuLabour Scottish Branch so far in the GE run-up.......

"That really is some top-class bollocks. If Faberge made bollocks, those would be delicate gold and sapphire-encrusted bollocks with fine platinum scrotal hairs. They would be bollocks fit for a prince."

Edited by Oddquine
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Crikey a female with nerves of steel. Rhymes with rowlocks Oddquine. Smile 

 

Anybody who thinks they will get exactly what they think they have been promised is...... up a creek without a paddle and with no oars , no rowlocks and , lkie Rabbie Burns going on about the wee filed mouse..whit a panic should be in their breesties.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Crikey a female with nerves of steel. Rhymes with rowlocks Oddquine. Smile 

 

Anybody who thinks they will get exactly what they think they have been promised is...... up a creek without a paddle and with no oars , no rowlocks and , lkie Rabbie Burns going on about the wee filed mouse..whit a panic should be in their breesties.

 

Ach, Scarlet, the only thing that would give us what we really, really need is independence. Failing that, the VOW as promised by Broonie and not disputed by anyone in the Better Together Campaign, as they panicked mightily at the result of one solitary Poll which gave Yes a lead, would have been a second best, because if we had  been allowed  "as near as dammit" Federalism/FFA/Home Rule, I suspect that might well have put Independence off until after my demise, at least.

 

Sure the poor effort produced by the Smith Commission doesn't approach the promises made to save their skins (or our tax resources for the Treasury and white elephant Trident's parking spot)...but we didn't ever expect it would, because Westminster has form in that respect......think Kilbrandon and Calman. Some of us aren't daft! :wink:

 

What is so bliddy hypocritical is NuLabour in Scotland and the UK hailing the Smith Commission Proposals as "Home Rule". Millibland has "promised" that the "Home Rule bill for Scotland" would be introduced in the first 100 days of a Labour Government in Westminster..and Smurphy, on 22nd January on the Radio said  the extra powers had been delivered and we now had home rule...and now, Smurphy, fighting for a Westminster seat in May (afaik) is doing one of his now famous 180 degree U-Turns and promising VOW#2 which is more powers than Home Rule, as defined by Broonie et al in VOW#1, according to him. To me, more powers than the Home Rule etc which was promised IS Independence, nothing less! 

 

Now maybe I am too inclined to believe that people mean what they say, or should, particularly when it is not just a forum post stating opinions, or a White Paper giving possible options/scenarios, but statements designed to produce a specific outcome..like the VOW#1 announcement, in fact, which was designed and timed, to produce a last minute swing back to NO by the Devo-Maxers who did not have their favoured option on the referendum paper. Smurphy and his NuLabour ex-Better Together Election Team know fine well, despite their "going along with Head Office rhetoric" in the MSM,  that Smith is nothing like Home Rule, because they themselves had made darn sure it wasn't, and it is dawning on them that 45% of us, at least aren't happy with their lies, which doesn't bode too well for 41 NuLabour seats in Westminster in May....so they are hoping that we are all as thick as they think we are.

 

I fervently hope we are not.

 

Edited to add that seemingly the Smurph has been out and about today......promising the voters in Edinburgh that Scottish Labour will give the Scottish Parliament the final say over Benefits...but then it is easy peasy to promise what you know you will have no right to deliver........though, to be fair, I'd not even believe Millibland if he came up to Edinburgh to say it, as they seem to forget too easily that everything they promise, not just to Scotland but in the UK,  has to get past the 650 members of the Commons and the 775 members of the Lords before it is anything more than a wish list to "buy" votes. (and he was also in Aberdeen at an oil and gas summit "urging action to support jobs". Wonder what he promised them?)

 

Edited again to add an aside on Jim the Smurph's three cities in one day tour on his motorised Irn Bru crate.......according to someone who was there at the Oil and Gas Summit, rather than urging action to support jobs, it appears he left after 30 minutes of sitting silently. So at least he didn't go in there mouthing off promises he couldn't keep.)

Edited by Oddquine
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the first time I have gone though all this topic.

 

I don't know Mr Bannerman, or how exactly he is really perceived by other posters, and I only know OF him through other topics to which he has posted. BUT. Just from his posts here it seems to me that he sees himself as some sort of intellectual superior to the "rest" of you.  And I think not !

 

Of course, I "may/might" be completely wrong about this, but since I will not be posting again to this subject I really don't care if this post is deleted by Scotty or any other moderator.

 

I imagine that Mr Bannerman will read this - in which case, please, sir, tone down your pontificating a wee bit, otherwise folk will become bored with anything that you post !

Ach well Jock, since one of my missions in life has been to wind up Nats, can I stick another red, white and blue star into my Palace of Westminster Brownie Points Book? :smile:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Er, well,  I think it would be wise only to comment on the pound versus the B o E note thing. Really what I know about Scottish politics and the English thing is very little indeed. 

 

In Canada, U.S. dollars  may be regarded as legal tender by Americans but the average Canadian is so glad to get them that the question as to whether they are legal tender in Canada would never enter their head. But they would have to exchange them at the bank at the going rate of exchange so it might be a smart move on their part to check the rates carefully before rushing into a large transaction because the rate has changed drastically over the past two months. 

 

So what could they do  if faced with the dilemma of turning down a Yank at the counter on this issue and maybe lose the business? Well, I suppose the best thing would be to suggest that the Yank drops by the bank and changes them there into Canadian Dollars and, if it is close by,  then just go with him as a PR exercise which I think would go down very well indeed with the visitor;  just making sure that if the shopkeeper next door has the same product on display then stand in front of the window so

Yankee Doodle can't see in as they pass it. Offer the explanation that he /she will get a better rate at the bank.

 Or get up to speed on the buying and selling rates daily and take the U.S. currency at the counter maybe adding on 10% for worry and stress. :crazy:

 

If we were to take Canadian notes into America to spend then they would be accepted I am sure without comment but the rate of exchange would not be advantageous to the Northerner so no one in their right mind is likely to think that it would be a good thing to contemplate. 

The other thing  nowadays for Canadian businesses to review carefully is that the Canadian Dollar has been greatly affected by the drop in the oil price and, to buy a U .S. Dollar today just to go into America, we would have to pay $1.285 Canadian for one $U.S. to go into his pocket whereas the rate recently was slightly better than par. So the Canadian dollar has now been devalued somewhat.

It's good for me when I cash My DSS pension in pounds at the bank, though,  because the rate of exchange has been rising in my favour. Today it is $1.86 Can per one pound whereas a month ago it was only  $1.75 Can.

 

I see that the upward move has now slowed down  which probably means that oil is stabilizing in price and could start to go back up. Petrol is again rising from  $1 to $1.11 per litre (5 pounds per gallon) at the pumps last night here in Vancouver. Mind you that COULD easily simply be that greed has again overcome caution in the minds of the supplier of gas to the Shell/Esso station or just by the owner of the station. I check the gas pump prices locally here in the "Ridge" daily as follows:

http://www.vancouvergasprices.com/Maple_Ridge/index.aspx

 

Me? I rarely if ever carry notes in my pocket anymore so either Amex or Visa, both of which are as  much  the equivalent of legal tender anywhere in the world, and negotiable with far less hassle it appears, are always my preferred choice.

Or, if I am coming to Scotland, I wear a body belt packed with pounds for spending in Inverness on the off chance that Canadian (or even U.S. ) dollars would create a hassle when offered.

 

 Cheers  S.P.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. : Terms of Use : Guidelines : Privacy Policy