Author Topic: The SDLP  (Read 54369 times)

Fear Bun Na Sceilpe

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1551
    • View Profile
Re: The SDLP
« Reply #855 on: November 21, 2020, 05:15:04 PM »
Read that SF ďeconomicĒ document.

I was accused of second guessing itís content. Wouldnít have been difficult. He a re-presentation of a greatest hits of earlier documents. An environmental twist thrown in.

I was correct about the pensions. This runs to the heart of the fraud in this document. Itís is based upon selective quoting from earlier research. Itís is concluded that Scottish citizens keep their accrued UK pension rights and Edinburgh foot the bill. The first bit of that suits the SF narrative but the second doesnít. So the first but finds itís way into the document but the second doesnít.

But there are other issues. No doubt the reduced economic activity in border areas but can we jump to the conclusion that that is because of the border. Were these areas poorer that other areas before the border? Are there historic issues in many of these areas due to land quality, distance from major/historic conurbations, road and infrastructure?

They reference benefits of local decision making. Doesnít specify how these play out but surely this is about the form of devolution rather than where power is devolved from?

Where is the analysis of how much of NIís historic economic woes are related to The Troubles and the inhibition it places on investment?

The troubles and impact on investment

The references to Hubner and Fitzgerald are again selective.

There are references to the impact of the various forms of Brexit on East-west trade between GB and NI but where is the analysis of the east-west trade between RoI and GB?

On the green agenda itís is completely unclear what the advantage of UI is on delivering a green agenda. What element of the competition for private sector investment is hampered by the border? There already is a single electricity market and NI gets additional financial support to that sector that are not included in the subvention stats.

Itís not an honest document

You're not an honest poster.

Are you still persisting with your "I'm not a stoop" facade?

I have shown you the lie on pensions. What are your thoughts? Do you think it was good of SF to spin that lie or bad to spin that lie?

I'm afraid you've done no such thing. The one lie you have showed us is your "I'm not a stoop" facade.

Out of interest. Where you from. What age are you

Angelo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3001
    • View Profile
Re: The SDLP
« Reply #856 on: November 21, 2020, 05:38:08 PM »
Read that SF ďeconomicĒ document.

I was accused of second guessing itís content. Wouldnít have been difficult. He a re-presentation of a greatest hits of earlier documents. An environmental twist thrown in.

I was correct about the pensions. This runs to the heart of the fraud in this document. Itís is based upon selective quoting from earlier research. Itís is concluded that Scottish citizens keep their accrued UK pension rights and Edinburgh foot the bill. The first bit of that suits the SF narrative but the second doesnít. So the first but finds itís way into the document but the second doesnít.

But there are other issues. No doubt the reduced economic activity in border areas but can we jump to the conclusion that that is because of the border. Were these areas poorer that other areas before the border? Are there historic issues in many of these areas due to land quality, distance from major/historic conurbations, road and infrastructure?

They reference benefits of local decision making. Doesnít specify how these play out but surely this is about the form of devolution rather than where power is devolved from?

Where is the analysis of how much of NIís historic economic woes are related to The Troubles and the inhibition it places on investment?

The troubles and impact on investment

The references to Hubner and Fitzgerald are again selective.

There are references to the impact of the various forms of Brexit on East-west trade between GB and NI but where is the analysis of the east-west trade between RoI and GB?

On the green agenda itís is completely unclear what the advantage of UI is on delivering a green agenda. What element of the competition for private sector investment is hampered by the border? There already is a single electricity market and NI gets additional financial support to that sector that are not included in the subvention stats.

Itís not an honest document

You're not an honest poster.

Are you still persisting with your "I'm not a stoop" facade?

I have shown you the lie on pensions. What are your thoughts? Do you think it was good of SF to spin that lie or bad to spin that lie?

I'm afraid you've done no such thing. The one lie you have showed us is your "I'm not a stoop" facade.

Out of interest. Where you from. What age are you

Not really any of your business is it?

LCohen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1641
    • View Profile
Re: The SDLP
« Reply #857 on: November 21, 2020, 05:44:36 PM »
Anybody share Angelaís concern as to whether or not a supporter is the SDLP?

Or indeed does anybody share is absolute conviction that I am in fact an SDLP supporter?

Anybody think it is grown up thing to keep coming back to?


Again for absolute clarity I have voted first/only choice for SDLP in the past. A grand total of twice

LCohen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1641
    • View Profile
Re: The SDLP
« Reply #858 on: November 21, 2020, 05:48:25 PM »
Read that SF ďeconomicĒ document.

I was accused of second guessing itís content. Wouldnít have been difficult. He a re-presentation of a greatest hits of earlier documents. An environmental twist thrown in.

I was correct about the pensions. This runs to the heart of the fraud in this document. Itís is based upon selective quoting from earlier research. Itís is concluded that Scottish citizens keep their accrued UK pension rights and Edinburgh foot the bill. The first bit of that suits the SF narrative but the second doesnít. So the first but finds itís way into the document but the second doesnít.

But there are other issues. No doubt the reduced economic activity in border areas but can we jump to the conclusion that that is because of the border. Were these areas poorer that other areas before the border? Are there historic issues in many of these areas due to land quality, distance from major/historic conurbations, road and infrastructure?

They reference benefits of local decision making. Doesnít specify how these play out but surely this is about the form of devolution rather than where power is devolved from?

Where is the analysis of how much of NIís historic economic woes are related to The Troubles and the inhibition it places on investment?

The troubles and impact on investment

The references to Hubner and Fitzgerald are again selective.

There are references to the impact of the various forms of Brexit on East-west trade between GB and NI but where is the analysis of the east-west trade between RoI and GB?

On the green agenda itís is completely unclear what the advantage of UI is on delivering a green agenda. What element of the competition for private sector investment is hampered by the border? There already is a single electricity market and NI gets additional financial support to that sector that are not included in the subvention stats.

Itís not an honest document

You're not an honest poster.

Are you still persisting with your "I'm not a stoop" facade?

I have shown you the lie on pensions. What are your thoughts? Do you think it was good of SF to spin that lie or bad to spin that lie?

I'm afraid you've done no such thing. The one lie you have showed us is your "I'm not a stoop" facade.

So when SF left out the bit about Scotland footing the pensions bill how was that not a lie?

Rossfan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17080
  • Ballaghaderreen CO ROSCOMMON
    • View Profile
    • Roscommon County Board official website
Re: The SDLP
« Reply #859 on: November 21, 2020, 05:51:32 PM »
I don't mind who you vote for but in Angeloworld being a "Stoop" is up there with "Freestater" "West Brit" "Quisling" as a term of abuse.

PS you probably vote Alliance and might even be on of "them" :o
Still Connacht Champions

Fear Bun Na Sceilpe

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1551
    • View Profile
Re: The SDLP
« Reply #860 on: November 21, 2020, 06:23:25 PM »
Read that SF ďeconomicĒ document.

I was accused of second guessing itís content. Wouldnít have been difficult. He a re-presentation of a greatest hits of earlier documents. An environmental twist thrown in.

I was correct about the pensions. This runs to the heart of the fraud in this document. Itís is based upon selective quoting from earlier research. Itís is concluded that Scottish citizens keep their accrued UK pension rights and Edinburgh foot the bill. The first bit of that suits the SF narrative but the second doesnít. So the first but finds itís way into the document but the second doesnít.

But there are other issues. No doubt the reduced economic activity in border areas but can we jump to the conclusion that that is because of the border. Were these areas poorer that other areas before the border? Are there historic issues in many of these areas due to land quality, distance from major/historic conurbations, road and infrastructure?

They reference benefits of local decision making. Doesnít specify how these play out but surely this is about the form of devolution rather than where power is devolved from?

Where is the analysis of how much of NIís historic economic woes are related to The Troubles and the inhibition it places on investment?

The troubles and impact on investment

The references to Hubner and Fitzgerald are again selective.

There are references to the impact of the various forms of Brexit on East-west trade between GB and NI but where is the analysis of the east-west trade between RoI and GB?

On the green agenda itís is completely unclear what the advantage of UI is on delivering a green agenda. What element of the competition for private sector investment is hampered by the border? There already is a single electricity market and NI gets additional financial support to that sector that are not included in the subvention stats.

Itís not an honest document

You're not an honest poster.

Are you still persisting with your "I'm not a stoop" facade?

I have shown you the lie on pensions. What are your thoughts? Do you think it was good of SF to spin that lie or bad to spin that lie?

I'm afraid you've done no such thing. The one lie you have showed us is your "I'm not a stoop" facade.

Out of interest. Where you from. What age are you

Not really any of your business is it?

Naw but the stoop thingy is embarrassing for you. You must be a 17 year old stuck in the 1970s

LCohen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1641
    • View Profile
Re: The SDLP
« Reply #861 on: November 21, 2020, 08:56:24 PM »
I don't mind who you vote for but in Angeloworld being a "Stoop" is up there with "Freestater" "West Brit" "Quisling" as a term of abuse.

PS you probably vote Alliance and might even be on of "them" :o

I thought the Alliance thing was fairly obvious to all apart from the hard of thinking. Poor old Angelo. He is hard to define. Plain thick? Misfiring comedian? Troll trying to generate site traffic? Who knows

Armamike

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1713
    • View Profile
Re: The SDLP
« Reply #862 on: November 21, 2020, 10:17:08 PM »
I don't mind who you vote for but in Angeloworld being a "Stoop" is up there with "Freestater" "West Brit" "Quisling" as a term of abuse.

PS you probably vote Alliance and might even be on of "them" :o

When the name calling starts it usually means the argument's lost!
From doubters to believers.

Angelo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3001
    • View Profile
Re: The SDLP
« Reply #863 on: November 22, 2020, 11:49:33 AM »
I don't mind who you vote for but in Angeloworld being a "Stoop" is up there with "Freestater" "West Brit" "Quisling" as a term of abuse.

PS you probably vote Alliance and might even be on of "them" :o

And you tick the box beside three of those.

It's not a term of abuse, it just encapsulates your complete and utter cowardice.

LCohen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1641
    • View Profile
Re: The SDLP
« Reply #864 on: November 22, 2020, 10:47:38 PM »
I don't mind who you vote for but in Angeloworld being a "Stoop" is up there with "Freestater" "West Brit" "Quisling" as a term of abuse.

PS you probably vote Alliance and might even be on of "them" :o

And you tick the box beside three of those.

It's not a term of abuse, it just encapsulates your complete and utter cowardice.

When are you going to overcome your own cowardice and answer the questions putto you across a number of threads?

(PS good work on maintaining the official SF/DUP position on scrutiny)

Franko

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2327
    • View Profile
Re: The SDLP
« Reply #865 on: November 23, 2020, 07:55:45 AM »
Given that people will have paid their way into the British Exchequer for their whole working lives up until the point of separation, how can it be argued that the British Government would not bear liability for this?

You are assessing one side of the issue. And assessing it correctly

The beneficiary of the pensions have accrued their rights and that will to be met.

The question is who has the responsibility to meet it.

To state the obvious NI is currently a constituent part of the UK of GB & NI. In a UI scenario it would cease to be. In leaving it would take the ongoing position with it. The UK of GB & NI would cease to be and would cease to be responsible for NI. There would have to be a divorce settlement to establish where the lines would be drawn but there are precedents. When ROI was set up it took on these liabilities in RoI. As UK leaves the EU it takes the pensions liability with it. In the Scottish independence referendum it was established that Scots would retain their UK pension rights but at the expense of the would-be Scottish exchequer.

Not sure about this.  Lets deal with your precendents.

1. There were no decisions on who would fund the Scottish pensions post-referendum.  Liability for this was still to be decided during a 'divorce settlement'

2. ROI did indeed inherit the war pensions liability in 1921, through an acceptance of a portion of British Gov't war debt.  This debt was assumed to be 'unpayable' and was written off but the British in 1925, in part to recompense the Irish for the failures of the boundary commission and the failures of the NI state to offer equal status to Catholics.  (In essence, the British bought the right from the post-partition govt of the free state to behave whatever way they wanted towards NI Catholics)

3. The pensions liability in GB's withdrawal from the EU is miniscule in comparison the scale of the deal, so much so that it is almost moot.

Your precedents are shaky at best.  And you are using this to dismiss the entire argument as 'fraud'.  Your response to this definitely asks more questions than it answers with regards to how 'honest' an actor you are here. 

LCohen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1641
    • View Profile
Re: The SDLP
« Reply #866 on: November 23, 2020, 11:28:08 AM »
Given that people will have paid their way into the British Exchequer for their whole working lives up until the point of separation, how can it be argued that the British Government would not bear liability for this?

You are assessing one side of the issue. And assessing it correctly

The beneficiary of the pensions have accrued their rights and that will to be met.

The question is who has the responsibility to meet it.

To state the obvious NI is currently a constituent part of the UK of GB & NI. In a UI scenario it would cease to be. In leaving it would take the ongoing position with it. The UK of GB & NI would cease to be and would cease to be responsible for NI. There would have to be a divorce settlement to establish where the lines would be drawn but there are precedents. When ROI was set up it took on these liabilities in RoI. As UK leaves the EU it takes the pensions liability with it. In the Scottish independence referendum it was established that Scots would retain their UK pension rights but at the expense of the would-be Scottish exchequer.

Not sure about this.  Lets deal with your precendents.

1. There were no decisions on who would fund the Scottish pensions post-referendum.  Liability for this was still to be decided during a 'divorce settlement'

2. ROI did indeed inherit the war pensions liability in 1921, through an acceptance of a portion of British Gov't war debt.  This debt was assumed to be 'unpayable' and was written off but the British in 1925, in part to recompense the Irish for the failures of the boundary commission and the failures of the NI state to offer equal status to Catholics.  (In essence, the British bought the right from the post-partition govt of the free state to behave whatever way they wanted towards NI Catholics)

3. The pensions liability in GB's withdrawal from the EU is miniscule in comparison the scale of the deal, so much so that it is almost moot.

Your precedents are shaky at best.  And you are using this to dismiss the entire argument as 'fraud'.  Your response to this definitely asks more questions than it answers with regards to how 'honest' an actor you are here.

I am going to ignore the ďdishonest actorĒ bit other than to say I am very happy to retract anything that is proven to incorrect or indeed no longer correct.

I think they key example is Scotland but to deal with the other 2 first.
Ireland 1922 - its still a pensions precedent. Admittedly pensions were significantly less comprehensive then. My point is that even when it is acknowledged that the new Ireland could not afford the pensions the liability still fell to Ireland. The unaffordability resulted in a later, much  wider write off.
Brexit- itís smaller as it only relates to civil servants but itís still a whopping Ä11.6bn.

Scotland is more relevant as it represents a country leaving UK and the UK regulatory framework and it applies to a broad base of civil servants and the general accrual of state pension rights. In Scotland the SNP agreed that they would take on the liability. They issued a paper, launched it, did a press conference and took questions. Absolutely clear that they would take the liability. They only thing they said was that pensions were slightly different in Scotland and some people would have to map across to the Scottish system. But that Scotland would make and fund the payments. I remember in the press conference Sturgeon taking a question on the affordability and her pointing that it would be more affordable in Scotland than the UK model assumptions because people donít live as long as Scotland. Which happens to be true and did answer the question but it was probably the first time I saw a politician make a virtue out of shorter life expectancy. Thatís why it stuck with me.