Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Thursday, 26th November 2009

Extra £100k for constitution talks branded 'outrageous' by MSP

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 03 May 2008
THE Scottish Government came under renewed attack over its National Conversation today after it revealed nearly £100,000 of extra funding was going into the project.
Lothians Labour MSP George Foulkes said it was "outrageous" so much public money was being used for what he described as "party political propaganda".

But the independent groups receiving the bulk of the new funding insisted they were promoting i
mpartial discussion.

The Government had already disclosed the £48,000 cost of setting up the project.

But in a written parliamentary answer to Mr Foulkes, Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon revealed National Conversation events had so far cost £10,300 and around £87,000 was being given to Young Scot and the Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations to promote the conversation among young people and the third sector.

Mr Foulkes said: "If the SNP want to promote a separate Scotland, they should pay for it and not expect the taxpayer to foot the bill, especially at a time when they are squeezing public services."

But the Government claimed the National Conversation was proving a success and there was now general acceptance among all the main political parties that some form of constitutional change is needed.

Young Scot, which will receive up to £50,000 over two years, said it was organising a national survey of young people and setting up ten local "investigation teams" of young volunteers to explore the issue at local level.

And SCVO – which is receiving £37,000 – said it was planning a website and organising meetings across the country to encourage the voluntary sector to debate the constitutional question.





Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 03 May 2008 10:20 AM
  • Source: Edinburgh Evening News
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Scottish Executive
 
1

 Ayrshire Scot™,

03/05/2008 10:58:24
Meanwhile George FOulkes claims £45,000 in expenses for over-night accomodation, to stay in a house he owns, after purchasding another two houses with no mortgage.

2

Highland Mighty,

03/05/2008 11:41:29
Less than 0.001% of Scotland has actually participated in the Nationalist Conversation meanwhile funding to voluntary organisations is cut to pay for this abject failure to be prolonged.

When will Salmond get it into his head that with support for independence at an all-time low, he should be concentrating on issues that actually matter!

1. And how like a nationalist to try and divert attention away from this use of tax money to pay for an SNP campiagn by slinging mud.
3

 Ayrshire Scot™,

03/05/2008 11:46:56
2. What an odd post Highland. The National conversation web site has attracted some 350,000 hots from 60,000 unique users. Where you draw 0.001% is a mystery.

You will also have noted the STUC getting involved in the independence/ referendum debate, and indeed the Labour leader of Glasgow and a former Labour First Minister. It seems the national conversation is going very well.

I do not divert - Lord George complains about £100,000 of public money being spent on a consultation - I merely point out his hypocrisy in claiming £45,000 of public money for the "expense" of staying at his own house overnight.

Do you like the latest poll today by the way?
-----------------------
The Scottish National Party is marking the first anniversary of its election to power today, as it hits 45% in an opinion poll - its highest-ever rating and a stunning 14 points ahead of Labour.

4

,

03/05/2008 11:58:54
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
5

Edward,

03/05/2008 12:03:04
George Foulkes is a complete and utter buffoon!
Should stick to what he knows best, what ever that is.
The fact of the matter is that the National conversation started by the Scottish Government is about ALL aspects of Scotlands future, it covers the status quo, additional powers as well as Independence. Its about full inclusion of the people of Scotland in discussing their future EVERYONE can and does participate.
Now compare with the Labour's (who are NOT the government in Scotland) Commission/Review/Working Party (Commission if your Wendy Alexander, Review if your Gordon Brown). Which will NOT be open to all, Which will ONLY discuss a LIMITED option and is subject to what Westminster will allow. Who exactly is paying for that?? Something that Foulkes doesnt explain
6

Edward,

03/05/2008 12:08:27
#2 Highland Mighty
Still peddling your misinformed rubbish
The support for Independence is growing. People of Scotland are begining to realise that they have been conned by successive UK government and are realising that Labour just do not have their interests at heart. The only thing Labour are interested in is themselkves and their self preservation.
Truts your not hanging your hat on the Telegraph/YouGove poll, which had support for Independence given as THREE different percentages!
(It asked a question on Independence THREE times and got THREE different percentages from 28%, 25% and 19% - not exactly flawless, especially as the sampling was from a predominant Labour/Libedem polling and did not reflect a true cross section of Scotland)
7

,

03/05/2008 12:19:19
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
8

me150,

03/05/2008 12:38:55
Misinformed rubbish.

SNP are full of illinformed rubbish.

I have no idea who gives them the ideas but they are going to cost this country dearly. They have embarked on a route of popular politics and are winning the hearts of, well let's be honest, too many gullable voters. There are 2 outcomes to this...

1. They continue with this and bankrupt Scotland
2. They realise the folly of their ways and do some pretty major U-turns and actually become effective at governing. The cost of this is lost popularity and seriouslt P***** off followers. All except the blinkered independence loonies of course.
9

Alfred E. Neuman,

03/05/2008 12:41:52
The SNP are showing themselves to be arrogant, selfish, s**t-stirrers with their blinkers on. What a disgraceful disdain for other peoples' money.

Labour's mantra was "the money's there, so let's waste it." If we need more we can raise taxes. They did that over and over, spening the money ob boon-doggle projects amongst select commubnities where there frineds were.

The SNP are exactly the same. "The money is there, so let's waste it." If we need more we can cut other services to divert funds into what our friends want.

This is good news however, hopefully we can get back to sensible government after a few more painful years of being taken for a ride by jumped up gesture politicians.
10

 Ayrshire Scot™,

03/05/2008 12:45:22
9. Alfie - what do you make of today's poll?

The Scottish National Party is marking the first anniversary of its election to power today, as it hits 45% in an opinion poll - its highest-ever rating and a stunning 14 points ahead of Labour.
11

Alfred E. Neuman,

03/05/2008 12:50:07
10 Ayrshire Scot

I think they are swimming in a sea of crap. 14 pts above Labour?

The fact Labour are second should tell you everything you need to know about the state of politics in Scotland.

By the way, I don't doubt the SNP could offer better government than Labour if they drop independence. But you are an immature cult worshipper.

What do you think about the story? What do you think about the SNP wasting people's money on the pursuit of policiy they do not want or need?
12

Highland Mighty,

03/05/2008 13:07:02
3. Still in denial?

How many individuals have actually POSTED to this 'National Conversation' and not just viewed it?

Clue: The answer is 0.001% of the population (less still if you discount the ex-pat nats). It's a failure and only the most fanatical nats refuse to see that.

10. If that's one of those wild TNS polls ("41% in favour of independence" when every other poll has it between 19-25%?) then it's not worth the paper it was fabricated on.

Professional and recognised polls have the SNP not 14% ahead of Labour but merely 5% and falling at 1% a month.
13

Alfred E. Neuman,

03/05/2008 13:10:33
12 Highland Mighty

You don't just need to discount hits from ex-pat nats. The site will be visited by opposition politician's assistants researchers, Scotland's media to report on etc.

The actual people who give a flyer are fewer than the miserable amount they attracted.
14

Highland Mighty,

03/05/2008 13:11:21
10. Again to remind you that support for independence is now at the lowest ever at 19% for multi-option and 25% for a simple Yes/No.

This is a SPECTACULAR COLLAPSE in support considering it was 44% plus just two years ago!

Of all the polls, TNS and TNS alone is showing "soaring support" for both the SNP and its raison d'etre. All the others show far lower support.

Why do you think that is?
15

steve 1511,

aberdeen 03/05/2008 13:13:23
the buffoon foulkes,will follow wendy the bung,and broon the liar, into oblivion and beyond as they are swept aside by the snp
16

Highland Mighty,

03/05/2008 13:13:50
13. I've posted several times on it back when I thought it might be something worthwhile.

How wrong I was!
17

Alfred E. Neuman,

03/05/2008 13:24:52
16 HM

I don't think what Ayrshire Scot means to quote irrelevant polls as a cheap and dumb way of ducking the real issue of each and every story.

Having re-read his posts I think the point he is trying to make is that because support for the SNP is at around 40% in the best polls, he means that this £150k of public money is only 40% of the total amount, he wants to say that 60% can from private donations from the SNP.

I've no doubt if anyone looks they'll find this to be the case. No-one is so stupid as to fund bias and blatantly party political events against the wishes of the majority using money that was taken off them to provide healthcare, policing etc. That would get right up people's noses, even the SNP aren't that stupid. I've no doubt they topped up this boon-doogle project with the lions share.
18

Edward,

03/05/2008 13:47:39
#17 AM2
Was wondering when you were going to show up
The poll by YouGov was flawed
It was not a straight forward poll
It actually gave THREE figures for those in support of Independence, using a method of asking the same question differnt ways until you get the answer you want
It was not as straight as you make out, but then again there is nothing straight forward about all your guff!
19

Edward,

03/05/2008 13:50:41
From the poll:
If there were a referendum on whether to retain the present Scottish Parliament and
Executive in more or less their present form or to establish Scotland as a completely
separate state outside the United Kingdom but inside the European Union, how would you
vote?
In favour of a completely separate state outside the UK 25%
20

Edward,

03/05/2008 13:52:47
From the poll:
Which of these two views about the experience of the SNP Executive in Scotland so far
comes closer to your own view?
The experience so far suggests that Scotland is perfectly capable of governing itself and no longer
needs to remain part of the UK: it ought in due course to become formally independent 29%
21

Voldemort,

Edinburgh 03/05/2008 13:53:45
It always makes me laugh when a Labour politician makes accusations of wasting money !?! hahahaha ...

It's a bit like Stalin calling Mother Theresa a murderer ....

22

Edward,

03/05/2008 13:55:07
From the poll:
Taking everything into account do you approve or disapprove of the Scottish Executive’s
record to date?
Approve 52%
23

Edward,

03/05/2008 13:56:00
Which of the following do you think would make the best Scottish First Minister?
Alex Salmond 43%
Wendy Alexander 11%
24

Edward,

03/05/2008 13:56:30
Are you satisfied or dissatisfied with Alex Salmond as Scottish First Minister?
Satisfied 53%
25

Alfred E. Neuman,

03/05/2008 14:04:13
23 Voldenmort

You vote SNP so naturally you're an idiot, but I'm begining to realise I need offer you more than that honest appraisal if you are to get any insight into your own stupidity and change for the better.

Where to start ... ? ... the analogy, okay, let's start there. Mother Theresa hasn't ever committed murder. A more suitable one would be Stalin V [Insert person who has only killed once or twice].

Secondly, the point of the analogy is worthless and irrelevant, the real issue is not the wastage of money, it is that the SNP is using public funds to pursue a narrow minority agenda only supported by it's own hardcore grass roots.

So if you want to discredit Labour, may I suggest you go on the Union's influence on Labour policy. They have direct access and in fact are even allowed to dictate policy to Labour in some instances.

The National Conversation is just a watered down version of this crime against democracy. Go on that next time.

You are an idiot though, but I'm feeling charitable today, so I have hopes for you.
26

Edward,

03/05/2008 14:04:15
#19 AM2
You really are a piece of work
You conveniently forget that the SNP is the governing party as it has the modt members, its as simpla as that
In any other democracy parliament would accept this fact
But in Scotland we have time serving Labour politicians that dont like this so they use democracy against the people by manipulating and getting waht they want. It may have been voted by 76 votes to 46, but you should actually look at who voted for this and why its not poulkar with the popualtion ie the voter
Labour are making fools of them selves in doing this
Yur quotes which supposedly come from the National conversation forums are laughable and really do pale against the comments that are usually found on the comments left in the Daily Telegraph!
27

Edward,

03/05/2008 14:05:29
#19 AM2
Face facts, th National Conversation is more democratic and all encompassing , where as the so called Labour commission is nothing but a talking shop of Labour cronies and has been unionists
28

Gtj,

Dundee 03/05/2008 14:09:04
It amazes me that some people still don’t get.

Right I will put it simple as I can.

It was said that the SNP would never get into power – THEY DID.

It was said that the Council tax would not be frozen – IT WAS.

They say Local income Tax will not happen – IT WILL.

And they cling to fading hopes that Independence won’t happen – IT MOST CERTAINLY WILL.


Posting on these threads week in week out with pathetic dribble aint gonna change a thing. Spend some more time with the kids. Life is not forever, but Independence is.

Just another thought. The Conservatives will win the next UK General Election. At that point it will be more favourable for England to be Independent of Scotland.

Don’t live in the past live for the future.

29

Alfred E. Neuman,

03/05/2008 14:11:37
29 Edward

You vote SNP so naturally you're an idiot, but as above this honest appraisal alone is not enough if you are to gain any insight into your own stupidity.

Go back and read Am2's posts, you will see he has provided the information on how many representatives of the people voted on the commission.

When a majority of the people's representatives vote for an item in this Country's recognised parliament it is ipso facto democratic.

When a miniroty without consulatation with the people's representitives creat an item without that support it is ipso facto autocratic.

It sever cases of autocratic decision making by government without parliamentary approval it becomes a technical resignation of government.

The SNP are cutting corners more and more by the week, sign changing, changing the meaning of legally recognised words, and this Natioanl Conversation. I'm sure they'll cut a big enough corner one day and we'll see the first technical resignation of government. I've never seen such disgusting autocracy. (Okay, I have - ten years of Labour and Union apes)
30

Alfred E. Neuman,

03/05/2008 14:17:46
30 Gtj

You vote SNP so naturally you're an idiot, I appreciate this honest appraisal isn't enough by itself to give you the insight you need to realise your own stupidity, so I'll give you 5 mins.

They (the SNP) said they'd be "free" by 93 - the weren't.

They (the SNP) said thee'd be free by 97 - they weren't

Going on your logic ( *shakes head* ) when they say they will be free by 2010 - they most certainly won't.

Any scientific observation can only conclude that talk is cheap and that politicians do not treat the electorate to honest and balanced views. Both the SNP and Labour filed disgusting disingenious politicians and that is an independent issue to Scotland's constitution.
31

Tynietiger,

03/05/2008 14:41:30
Another waste of taxpayers money by George Foulkes who is obsessed about scoring cheap points against SNP rather than raising genuine Constituant's concerns.

The National Conversation is open to all and considers all the constitutional options unlike Wendy's Constitutional Committee which refuses to consider Independence for Scotland. Now that is playing party politica at taxpayers expenses.
32

,

03/05/2008 14:42:20
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
33

 Ayrshire Scot™,

03/05/2008 14:51:01
16. HM - great to see that even Unionists like you are getting involved in the National conversation!

19. I didn't realise all the comments were pre-approved on the National Conversation site. Racist tripe like those posts you reference should be removed from it.
34

The Tin Man,

Over the Rainbow 03/05/2008 14:54:00
#33 Tynietiger

Why, exactly, is the funding for this so-called conversation not coming from donations to the SNP?
35

Alfred E. Neuman,

03/05/2008 14:54:24
34 A proud doonhammer

I was celebrating Labour's demise as well, my dislike for them extends well beyond my disdain for the SNP. My only real concern with the SNP is this one-eyed and irrational fixation with independence.

The national conversation has a rigid and fixed starting point for debate which in it's opening sentence dictates to one and all that the conculsions have been fixed. So I refute your claims at openess by providing that quote.

"The question is not whether we should assume more powers in Edinburgh, but what powers and within what timescale," he [Alex Salmond] said.

The SNP are irrational by stariting with a pre-conceived outcome and working backwards.

The commission offers more success by starting where we are and working forwards.

One main complaint of the Union is that it was for too long Londoncentric, a valid complaint and one held by many in Norther England/Ireland, Wales and Scotland.

The commission has wisely chosen to exclude those who believe fervently in independence because they would only seek to s**t-stir and wreck any process of meaningful discussion. Their minds are closed.
36

,

03/05/2008 15:05:31
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
37

Alfred E. Neuman,

03/05/2008 15:16:03
38 A proud doonhammer

You really are an idiot, that said...

Many problems have arisen with regions of the United Kingdom through widespread and historical Londoncentricity. It can be demonstrated that this centralised government with a few selfish politicians making incorrect and bias decisions. Devolution seeks to prevent that from happenign again.

Broadly speaking devolution has improved this situation, and if it weren't for Labour returning all that cash to Westminster, would have more.

The only sane starting point is from where you are. It follows that there should be a debate on what powers Scotland needs to avoid a repeat of the late 80s/early 90s.

The commission does not pre-clude independence per se, there may be a set of circumstances where full independence can only address those concerns. That however is entirely unlikely, as what would they be?

Military? I cannot see the UK not defending Scotlands shores.

Medicines? A pill that kills an Englishman would kill a Scotsman so that's pointless. Scotland provides more medicines to its citizens than England under devolution.

It's just irrational, you want full powers, because you do, monkey see monkey do.
38

Suomi,

Salo,Finland 03/05/2008 15:23:01
I recall George Foulkes frequentely being interviewed on TV when he was a labour MP for an Ayreshire constituency.At that time I did not agree with what he had to say about Scotlands place in the modern world,and got the impression that he was not remotely interested in my views.Of course,as an elected politician he had the advantage since he had frequent access to the media,in order to distribute his views.It is not the fact that we differ, that concerns me,it is that he would want to prevent,those who differ from him, having an opportunity to express their views on a public forum.In other words deny his opponents the luxery that he enjoyed for years.

The national conversation is to be welcomed since it allows consultation with everyone,irrespective of their views.It is refreshing to see some real democracy for a change.It provides an opprtunity for those of us that do not have access to the media to express our views.
39

Alfred E. Neuman,

03/05/2008 15:29:30
40

You really are an idiot.

"an opprtunity for those of us that do not have access to the media to express our views"

Media is the plural of mediums, short hand for mediums of communication.

If you are expressing your views you have access to the media, ipso facto.

The national conversation is an debate held withint existing media so naturally excludes anyone from that debate who did not have access to the media before.

What "new" medium of communication has this national conversation brought into existance that wasn't there before?

If access to the media is the problem, this 100k could have better spent on providing public spaces for free hire by groups of people, access to internet at libraires and so on.

What the fork are you on about? This is a cheap con trick to make idiots feel like they are part of something, when clearly they are no more involed than they were.
40

Alfred E. Neuman,

03/05/2008 15:34:22
40

What you really mean is...

I have always had access to the media, the majority freely outweighed my minority views, but at last the government is taking control of aspects of the media to suppress true and free debate in the majority who would override me.

That is the standard SNP line. Shameful.
41

Queen D,

Glasgow 03/05/2008 15:39:39
Anyone know what the wee "review " is costing??

Alfred , you really need some manners.
Calling someone an idiot from the safety of your keyboard is cowardice, not to mention stupidly rude.
Learn , young man, that those who resort to name calling lose the argument big time.
I appreciate that you are lonely , since you seem to spend a great deal of your time on these boards insulting other posters and their intelligence in a desperate bid for a response.
Well you have had plenty attention . like a demanding child.
Happy?
42

,

03/05/2008 15:43:26
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
43

,

03/05/2008 15:46:04
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
44

Alfred E. Neuman,

03/05/2008 15:47:11
43 Queen D

You accuse me of calling (some) people idiots as criminal, I offer a defence of veritas.
45

Alfred E. Neuman,

03/05/2008 15:49:33
45 A prood downhammer

You really are an idiot.

Can you explain the benefit in devolving the power to review medicines to me?

I'd be fascinated to know the benefits to Scotland.
46

,

03/05/2008 15:50:04
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
47

,

03/05/2008 15:50:27
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
48

,

03/05/2008 15:53:41
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
49

Alfred E. Neuman,

03/05/2008 16:01:06
50 Prood downhammer

I'll take that as a no. You want full powers to review medicines but you don't know why, can't explain it and don't know what/if it would have any benefits.

Monkey see, monkey do.
50

,

03/05/2008 16:14:26
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
51

Alfred E. Neuman,

03/05/2008 16:24:36
52 A prood doonhammer

Scotland from within the United Kingdom has served its citizens well with medicines. If isn't broken don't fix it.

Can you tell me why full powers to review medicines would improve Scotland? The burden of proof rests with you I'm afraid.

We both know you can't. You just like to shout about Independence because your daddy hated the English and the apple doesn't fall far from the tree.
52

,

03/05/2008 16:41:41
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
53

 Ayrshire Scot™,

03/05/2008 17:33:46
47. Alfred - review of medicines is already held in Scotland. That is exactly why 11 drugs for various, serious conditions are currently available in Scotland that are not available in England. That would be a benefit.


Having Scottish power to authorise drugs used by the NSH in Scotland makes sense - as the health profile, prevlance of some conditions is markedly different here - this impacts the likely benefit profile for drugs in Scotland, inlcuding prophylactic prescrition.

54

 Ayrshire Scot™,

03/05/2008 17:37:43
47. ALfred

Tarceva - for treatment of lung cancer

Herceptin - for treatment of breast cancer

Exjade - for treating severe anaemias

Macugen - for treatment of macular degeneration

Aricept, Exelon and Reminyl - for Alzheimers

are a few of the drugs approved for use in Scotland not available in England, because of specific cost/ benefit or prevalence analysis of the drugs benefits for use in Scotland.

I think for those who are treated with these drugs they would say this is a massive benefit of having such decisions made in Scotland.
55

Alfred E. Neuman,

03/05/2008 18:02:57
55/56 Ayrshire Scot

You are an idiot that like to talk crap.

I made that point myself, ableit in less than 100 words. Scotland gets a better delivery of medicines to its citizens than England under devolution.

But approval and testing of those medicines is a reserved matter.

Like downhammer you are a clueless half-wit. But accidently you have admitted Scotland can produce successes relative to England under devolution.

Medicines is a reserved matter you nonse. The fact you publicly support Scotlands succeses at odds with your independence stance.

Now, can anyone tell me. What benefit is there to devolving powers of medicine to the Scottish government? The sonsensus seems to be none, but yet you still ask for it, why? Well, monkey see monkey do.
56

 Ayrshire Scot™,

03/05/2008 18:12:05
57. Oh dear, ALfied makes a fool of himself yet again/

Testing of drugs is done by the EU and permission to sell drugs in the EU is given the EU regulatory commission - it is not a reserved area of UK activity.

Sadly Alfie you seem to know almost nothing about this subject. Begone.
57

 Ayrshire Scot™,

03/05/2008 18:13:44
57. PS - ALfied - approval for the NSH to use frugs in Scotland is given by the Scottish Medicines Consortium, part of NHS scotland. So no part of drug policy in Scotland is reserved - approval for market is given by the EU, and the SMC decides which drugs are used in Scotland.

0/10 for Alfie the dunce. Begone.
58

,

03/05/2008 18:15:01
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
59

 Ayrshire Scot™,

03/05/2008 18:21:11
57. ALfie, can you explain why, if medicines is not already devolved, several rejetced drugs by NICE (your ENglish authority that you imagine has power over Scottish drug policy) are being used in Scotland, including the cancer drugs Velcade, Alimta and Gliadel?

60

,

03/05/2008 19:02:02
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
61

 Ayrshire Scot™,

03/05/2008 19:04:05
62. I think he did. Pity, he was such an expert on drug regulation and approval for use.
62

Scotish Exile,

03/05/2008 19:18:58
Mr Fookes, why should the tax payer fund your extravagent lifestyle, you drunken bufoon??
63

Alfred E. Neuman,

03/05/2008 19:24:04
Ayrshire Scot

Your anger betrays your position, we both know you are lost.

Medicines is a reserved matter. The reasons these are not approved in England is not a medical matter, sadly a political matter - we must let some people die as a result of nature rather than fight it, because it would bankrupt us to do otherwise.

You make a budgetary point, England choose to let these people die - ungentlemanly i agree, Scotland choose to let these people live, albeit at the expense of other services, but an independent and noble position none the less.

Your anger really does betray you.
64

 Ayrshire Scot™,

03/05/2008 19:31:53
65. ALfred

sadly you are making little sense. You said that approval for use of medicines was reserved - I have pointed out that it is not, as a Scottish agency approves drugs for use in the NHS here - the Scottish Medicines Consortium. The SMC have approved drugs for use in Scotland that are not approved in England. Would youc are to explain how this is "reserved"? You are, as usual, looking very foolish. Keep it up.
65

Alfred E. Neuman,

03/05/2008 19:51:49
66 Ayrshire Scot

Sadly, you understand less you claim to. Normally I would call you an idiot at this point, but you seem engaged and that's positive.

The organisations you refer to are political/financial, the reserved power of medicines is approval.

"Approval" is a word with mulitple meanings, it probably blows your mind, I know, but politics is complicated sometimes.

In effect these organisations aprove financialm "how mush is it worth to keep this person a live?" a sick question I know. But a necessary question to society, we are a bit more civilised north of the border and sacrifice a lot for the cost of our ill. A cultural difference which, thankfully, the Union does not discriminate against.

But you avoid the question, while you acknowledge, and rightfully so, that our devolved parliament and organisations have the capacity to make their own decisions. You are avoiding the real questions, why do we need to break up the union when devolutions cares for out ill as we wish? Why do we need to dovolve the reserved matter of medicines? When the current situation serves us well?

You really need to answer honestly and without rhetoric! Look it up, medicines is a reserved matter - and yet by your own admission it is a success withint the union for Scotland.
66

 Ayrshire Scot™,

03/05/2008 20:04:11
67. Alfred - approval to market a drug (in terms of human safety and efficacy) is done by the EU regulatory commission. Approval for use in the NHS in Scotland, based on cost/ benefit, is done by the Scottish Medicines Consortium.

Where exactly then is the reserved area of medicines in the UK you referred to which controls medicinces in Scotland?

You are remarkably ill informed and make no coherent point. In fact you are a crap talking idiot of rare magnitude. The banality of your posts is only exceeded by you empty posturing.
67

,

03/05/2008 20:12:35
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
68

 Ayrshire Scot™,

03/05/2008 20:16:52
69. Proud Doonhamer

indeed, Alfred is a drooling idiot devoid of the analytical capacity possessed by an edible periwinkle. He ignores facts, and tries to mask his embarrassment at being proved completely wrong with rather poor quality and unoriginal insults and aggression.

I fear he is having some kind of web induced breakdown - he was on the threads from 3.00am through to midnight the other day.

I merely tweak him for amusement during the commercial breaks on TV, for mild amusement and so others can appreciate the vacuous nature of unionist discourse.
69

,

03/05/2008 20:29:49
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
70

 Ayrshire Scot™,

03/05/2008 20:44:43
71. LOL. True, but it is quite funny to behold ALfred's desperate attempts to substantiate mirages and clinging on to his precarious buffers of incoherence and ignoring of fact in his battle against the terrifying onslaught of reality - the SNP doing very well in government and leading in the polls.

Reading Alfred and other unionists on here one is struck by a very palpable sense of despair and panic in their missives. Their posts are like letters written by doomed Artic explorers, later discovered, laced with desperation and depression.
71

,

03/05/2008 22:32:19
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
72

Voldemort,

Edinburgh 03/05/2008 23:56:19
27 - You should not make assumptions beyond your ken dear fellow.

Admittedly the anecdote was flippant, and was obviously so (not to all it appears!) but can you not see the point ?

I have never voted for the SNP but see them as a refreshing change from Labour cronyism. I admire the SNP and wish that there was another party without a separatist agenda that would stand and win the hearts of the Scottish people.

I would love if there were competent politicians with selfless virtues running the country for the benefit of the people, the indigenous people at that.

When you stand and call people idiots you must do your research otherwise you will be compromised and look like a fool. I think I know your agenda and I don't think you are a lefty so take some time lad and know your allies and see the big pictures before picking on yer own ....

I do not think you are an idiot, perhaps a rising star .... but for now maybe a bit quick on the mouth .... I'll be around for a battle later padwan learner but for now ... night night ...
73

John Knox furr First Meenister,

about to go to bed 04/05/2008 01:24:30
Fraudulent and corrupt EU...

Funny that your postings are so totally ignored. Are you lacking something.. you don't know how to communicate, perhaps? You might consider whether you are actually turnin people off your cause by appearing like a bam?
74

Anonym,

Somewhere 04/05/2008 05:32:19
Yes # 75 it is hilarious how you ignore Fraudulent and corrupt EU by posting comments to him/her on a newspaper's online edition comments board...

Anyway, my last comment seems not to have been posted, despite being signed in. Very annoying, especially after typing out an interesting (IMHO) comparison of the National Conversation 'consultation' with the consultation on Smoking in Public Places.

The latter was considered by civil servants and the media as being a huge success because it was to date by far the largest ever consultation held by the then Scottish Executive.

There were approximately 53,000 respondants. (And many of them were completely barking, IMHO.)

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Featured Advertising



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.