Sturgeon To Make Manifesto Offer To The North

The SNP is attempting to persuade voters in England it can be trusted with public spending if it wins a large block in Westminster.

By Faisal Islam, Political Editor

The SNP will offer to help the North of England "rebalance Britain" as it makes manifesto pledges about public spending south of the border for the first time, Sky News has learnt.

Nicola Sturgeon's party will promise to be "natural allies" of MPs in the North with pledges of increased spending on infrastructure – specifically high-speed rail.

There will also be promises over infrastructure spending in Wales, and a commitment on UK-wide health spending.

It comes as David Cameron warned a deal between the SNP and Labour, which would put Ed Miliband in power, was a "frightening proposition".

The party, which is tipped to win as many as 52 seats at the General Election making it a significant force in the House of Commons, will present its eagerly awaited manifesto today.

It will say: "While a strong London is good for the UK, also having a strong Cardiff, Newcastle and Leeds is even better."

Senior SNP sources said: "The north of England would be another big winner from SNP success in Scotland."

They added that a "strong team of SNP MPs" in Westminster would help "rebalance the UK - both politically and economically - from the chronic over-dominance of the City of London, which has harmed the overall UK economy and left regions of England neglected".

The SNP's ambitions for the rest of the UK outside Scotland, might provide more fuel for the Conservatives.

The Tories have made the possibility of a Labour government supported by the SNP a central plank of their campaign for a majority with a number of attack adverts, including a new one on Sunday depicting Mr Miliband as Ms Sturgeon's puppet.


http://news.sky.com/story/1467977/sturgeon-to-make-manifesto-offer-to-the-north
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Interesting and as it happens Doncaster is technically still Scottish  

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2760467/Doncaster-technically-Scotland-signed-900-years-ago-never-formally-given-back.html

aye and yer can keep wee miss Krankey...all to y'sens

we once built a wall to keep you lot out....

Why does she need to convince voters in England of anything?

Because the silly moo wants people to vote for a labour/SNP coalition....

so SHE can make milipede dance the highland jig...

darknessss wrote:Because the silly moo wants people to vote for a labour/SNP coalition....

so SHE can make milipede dance the highland jig...

Oh I see. I wonder what the Scots who vote SNP will think of that. They won't want to be associated with any deals with Labour will they? That would mean associating with England too much.

korban dallas wrote:
The SNP is attempting to persuade voters in England it can be trusted with public spending if it wins a large block in Westminster.

By Faisal Islam, Political Editor

The SNP will offer to help the North of England "rebalance Britain" as it makes manifesto pledges about public spending south of the border for the first time, Sky News has learnt.

Nicola Sturgeon's party will promise to be "natural allies" of MPs in the North with pledges of increased spending on infrastructure – specifically high-speed rail.

...........................................

ALL sounds a bit 'fishy' to me, to be honest !

i wonder how many votes the snp would get if they ran a candidates in England
And why people and the major party's only say the snp could be bad for England
they could be good for England just as well as bad  

both major party's  have a brass neck because nether one of them has been good for England or Scotland so far

but hey it seems ok for English voters to affect the Scottish people
but when the shoes on the other foot  the tory`s and labour they want to take there ball back

Raggamuffin wrote:

darknessss wrote:Because the silly moo wants people to vote for a labour/SNP coalition....

so SHE can make milipede dance the highland jig...

Oh I see. I wonder what the Scots who vote SNP will think of that. They won't want to be associated with any deals with Labour will they? That would mean associating with England too much.

i suspect the election is going to be a disaster for both lab and cons who have both ruled out snp backing so expect a another general election 6 months to a year after this one

Raggamuffin wrote:Why does she need to convince voters in England of anything?

she doesn`t rags but the snp are the king makers this time round since both con and lab are pretty much done in Scotland at the moment

korban dallas wrote:i wonder how many votes the snp would get if they ran a candidates in England
And why people and the major party's only say the snp could be bad for England
they could be good for England just as well as bad  

both major party's  have a brass neck because nether one of them has been good for England or Scotland so far

but hey it seems ok for English voters to affect the Scottish people
but when the shoes on the other foot  the tory`s and labour they want to take there ball back

I suspect that a lot of English people see the SNP as being indifferent to what happens to them, with good reason.

Raggamuffin wrote:

darknessss wrote:Because the silly moo wants people to vote for a labour/SNP coalition....

so SHE can make milipede dance the highland jig...

Oh I see. I wonder what the Scots who vote SNP will think of that. They won't want to be associated with any deals with Labour will they? That would mean associating with England too much.

A lot of Scots who voted SNP are ex labour voters so i suspect they will be ok with labour
and NSturgon has asked labour to join forces with them but milliband to stupid to realise that`s the only way he will get in to number 10

and lets face it a labour PM and a SNP deputy PM would no doubt please both country's and keep Cameron out of number 10

korban dallas wrote:i wonder how many votes the snp would get if they ran a candidates in England
And why people and the major party's only say the snp could be bad for England
they could be good for England just as well as bad  

both major party's  have a brass neck because nether one of them has been good for England or Scotland so far

but hey it seems ok for English voters to affect the Scottish people
but when the shoes on the other foot  the tory`s and labour they want to take there ball back

I'll have to dissagree with you there Korban

the SNP are a bunch of EU loving tree hugging lefties, they are more "leftified" than labour in fact....


YEUK no thanks....

Raggamuffin wrote:

korban dallas wrote:i wonder how many votes the snp would get if they ran a candidates in England
And why people and the major party's only say the snp could be bad for England
they could be good for England just as well as bad  

both major party's  have a brass neck because nether one of them has been good for England or Scotland so far

but hey it seems ok for English voters to affect the Scottish people
but when the shoes on the other foot  the tory`s and labour they want to take there ball back

I suspect that a lot of English people see the SNP as being indifferent to what happens to them, with good reason.

good reason ?
i am not sure about that rags

SNP Have Done More for Scotland in Seven Years Than Labour Have Done in Seventy


extract from below link

Scotland is a very much better place today with the SNP fighting austerity cuts from London, than it would have been with so-called 'Scottish' Labour 'fighting for Scotland'. Capitulation on a massive scale would have seen even Scotland's water sold off by 'Scottish' Labour to London.


http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/alan/snp-labour_b_6113762.html


But i don`t think the Scots are indifferent to the English just fed up with the the English ran government and remember lot of scots live in England

Sturgeon don't give a fcuk about England she's all about what she can get for Scotland. It's a great pity the scots didn't win the vote for home rule.

korban dallas wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I suspect that a lot of English people see the SNP as being indifferent to what happens to them, with good reason.

good reason ?
i am not sure about that rags

SNP Have Done More for Scotland in Seven Years Than Labour Have Done in Seventy


extract from below link

Scotland is a very much better place today with the SNP fighting austerity cuts from London, than it would have been with so-called 'Scottish' Labour 'fighting for Scotland'. Capitulation on a massive scale would have seen even Scotland's water sold off by 'Scottish' Labour to London.


http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/alan/snp-labour_b_6113762.html


But  i don`t think the Scots are indifferent to the English just fed up with the the English ran government and remember  lot of scots live in England

Yeah, with good reason - the clue is in the name of the party.

The SNP only cares about Scotland, and voters in England know that.

darknessss wrote:

korban dallas wrote:i wonder how many votes the snp would get if they ran a candidates in England
And why people and the major party's only say the snp could be bad for England
they could be good for England just as well as bad  

both major party's  have a brass neck because nether one of them has been good for England or Scotland so far

but hey it seems ok for English voters to affect the Scottish people
but when the shoes on the other foot  the tory`s and labour they want to take there ball back

I'll have to dissagree with you there Korban

the SNP are a bunch of EU loving tree hugging lefties, they are more "leftified" than labour in fact....


YEUK no thanks....

nothing wrong with being a lefty or for that matter a righty
i want rid of nukes for example not because i am a "lefty " but because we don`t need them and i don`t like them
i think education should be free at the point of delivery.
Education is the bedrock of a successfully society and a good path to economic stability

the SNP know that

Raggamuffin wrote:

korban dallas wrote:
good reason ?
i am not sure about that rags

SNP Have Done More for Scotland in Seven Years Than Labour Have Done in Seventy


extract from below link

Scotland is a very much better place today with the SNP fighting austerity cuts from London, than it would have been with so-called 'Scottish' Labour 'fighting for Scotland'. Capitulation on a massive scale would have seen even Scotland's water sold off by 'Scottish' Labour to London.


http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/alan/snp-labour_b_6113762.html


But  i don`t think the Scots are indifferent to the English just fed up with the the English ran government and remember  lot of scots live in England

Yeah, with good reason - the clue is in the name of the party.

The SNP only cares about Scotland, and voters in England know that.

And the tory`s only seemingly care about England
At least labour party which actually started in Scotland i believe, had both country's interests at heart ( in the past anyway ) that why Scotland was mostly labour

nicko wrote:Sturgeon don't give a fcuk about England she's all about what she can get for Scotland.  It's a great pity the scots didn't win the vote for home rule.

and the same could be said about the tory`s Niko at least from a scots point of view ,and yes it was a great pity

ironic really during the referendum they couldn't help them self`s from begging the Scots to vote No
Now the scots are being treated as they allways are, as second class citizens who are out to destroy the English and vilified

the fact Cameron and milliband bribed the Scots and then basically moved the goal posts after they won
is what the Scots expect from a English government been that way for hundreds of years

And actual just like the SNP a lot of English voters want out of the EU
so it`s hardly a Scottish only issue or a wholly Scottish aspiration  
hence Cameron is being badgered to call  for a vote in the country for such a move
and if people didn`t want Scottish influence in west minister they should have let hem devolve
and Cameron would have been a shoe in this election in England

basically lab and the cons want there cake and eat to it all


tuff
they made there bed time to lie on it

korban dallas wrote:And actual just like the SNP a lot of English voters want out of the EU
so it`s hardly a Scottish only issue or a wholly Scottish aspiration  
hence Cameron is being badgered to call  for a vote in the country for such a move
and if people didn`t want Scottish influence in west minister they should have let hem devolve
and Cameron would have been a shoe in this election in England

basically lab and the cons want there cake and eat to it all


tuff
they made there bed time to lie on it

Spot on KD. Cameron begged for Scotland to stay and play a full part in the Union. That was fine when the SNP only had half a dozen seats but strange that it changes when they may have a whole load more.

Everybody knows Irn be careful what you wish for ....you just might get it. along with any unintended consequences of that wish .

korban dallas wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Yeah, with good reason - the clue is in the name of the party.

The SNP only cares about Scotland, and voters in England know that.

And the tory`s only seemingly care about England
At least labour party which actually  started in Scotland i believe, had both country's interests at heart ( in the past anyway ) that why Scotland was mostly labour

You were asking what would happen if the SNP stood in England though. A lot of people in England might admire the way the SNP sticks up for Scotland, but unless they changed their name and became a UK party, I doubt many people in England would vote for them because they've made it clear that they only care about Scotland.

Raggamuffin wrote:

korban dallas wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Yeah, with good reason - the clue is in the name of the party.

The SNP only cares about Scotland, and voters in England know that.

And the tory`s only seemingly care about England
At least labour party which actually  started in Scotland i believe, had both country's interests at heart ( in the past anyway ) that why Scotland was mostly labour

You were asking what would happen if the SNP stood in England though. A lot of people in England might admire the way the SNP sticks up for Scotland, but unless they changed their name and became a UK party, I doubt many people in England would vote for them because they've made it clear that they only care about Scotland.

Well, there are plenty of parties that don't really worry about everyone, right? Like the Tories and the Republicans

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

You were asking what would happen if the SNP stood in England though. A lot of people in England might admire the way the SNP sticks up for Scotland, but unless they changed their name and became a UK party, I doubt many people in England would vote for them because they've made it clear that they only care about Scotland.

Well, there are plenty of parties that don't really worry about everyone, right? Like the Tories and the Republicans

That's very true Ben & why the good guys like me are voting UKIP.

UKIP.......The party that cares.

Shady wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Well, there are plenty of parties that don't really worry about everyone, right? Like the Tories and the Republicans

That's very true Ben & why the good guys like me are voting UKIP.

UKIP.......The party that cares.

You mean their care of people who hold similar views, a minority of the population, which is not really caring about the majority 85% of the nation is it?

Raggamuffin wrote:

korban dallas wrote:
And the tory`s only seemingly care about England
At least labour party which actually  started in Scotland i believe, had both country's interests at heart ( in the past anyway ) that why Scotland was mostly labour

You were asking what would happen if the SNP stood in England though. A lot of people in England might admire the way the SNP sticks up for Scotland, but unless they changed their name and became a UK party, I doubt many people in England would vote for them because they've made it clear that they only care about Scotland.

so its the name that bothers them .....?

Nemesis wrote:

Shady wrote:

That's very true Ben & why the good guys like me are voting UKIP.

UKIP.......The party that cares.

You mean their care of people who hold similar views, a minority of the population, which is not really caring about the majority 85% of the nation is it?

I'm still trying to help you but you don't help yourself by posting inane rubbish.

You must realize that I can't stop posters laughing at you behind your back.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

You were asking what would happen if the SNP stood in England though. A lot of people in England might admire the way the SNP sticks up for Scotland, but unless they changed their name and became a UK party, I doubt many people in England would vote for them because they've made it clear that they only care about Scotland.

Well, there are plenty of parties that don't really worry about everyone, right? Like the Tories and the Republicans

Yes, but that's not based on geography, and there's no nationalism involved. The only reason a person in England would vote for the SNP would be to keep one of the other parties out, but that wouldn't work because they're unlikely to get enough votes to make a difference.

korban dallas wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

You were asking what would happen if the SNP stood in England though. A lot of people in England might admire the way the SNP sticks up for Scotland, but unless they changed their name and became a UK party, I doubt many people in England would vote for them because they've made it clear that they only care about Scotland.

so its the name that bothers them .....?

Well partly, yes, of course. Why would someone in England want to vote for a party called the "Scottish National Party"? The name itself implies that England can get stuffed, no?

Shady wrote:

Nemesis wrote:

You mean their care of people who hold similar views, a minority of the population, which is not really caring about the majority 85% of the nation is it?

I'm still trying to help you but you don't help yourself by posting inane rubbish.

You must realize that I can't stop posters laughing at you behind your back.

If you cannot laugh at yourself of which I can then you have no humour and am happy if people do laugh at me, that makes no bearing on me or my views.
It just seems you are too bitter and as seen because you view others as subhuman you clearly have many anger issues, with way too much hate for others.
So thanks for the divergence of opinion, but the reality is 15% agree with UKIP and not 85%, its about time you respected the majority view and start to question why your views are not the majority.

korban dallas wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Yeah, with good reason - the clue is in the name of the party.

The SNP only cares about Scotland, and voters in England know that.

And the tory`s only seemingly care about England
At least labour party which actually  started in Scotland i believe, had both country's interests at heart ( in the past anyway ) that why Scotland was mostly labour

WHILE it is true that labour unions can trace their origins back to disputes in Britain in the 18th and 19th century (beginning, I believe, in those textile spinning mills in Scotland ?);  the first true Labor Party was formed in Queensland in the mid-1890s (more than 5 years before the British Labour Party in 1900..), following on from the formation of the Shearers' Union in Qld in the early 1890s, and the first Miners' Union in Victoria a few months later...

New Zealand, Canada and the USA followed soon after; (there are Labor, 'Liberal' and Libertarian political parties over there in the USA, but none of them have ever made any headway against the two major parties over there..).

AND of course, there was always a sprinkling of English and Scottish shop stewards and Uniion organisers, and Irish separationists, among the labour organisers of that time.  After the formation of the Shearers Union after the Qld Shearers' strike, and the Miners Unions in Victoria and Queensland, some of the organisers then moved on to helping with the establishment of Labour Unions in NZ, the USA and back in Britain..  ONE of the main Aussie labour organisers helped to set up the American Teamsters Union in the late 1890s aand early 1900s, and remained on their national council for several years afterwards..

THE Labor/Labour Parties in all of our countries needed the organised Union movement to provide their foundations ~ the same as the Tory/Liberal/GOP have always relied on the "Landed Gentry", "Robber Barons", idle rich, and their bankers and financiers, to provide their own core constituency..

(WHICH in turn always makes it very odd, indeed, to see the likes of nicko, Tommy M., Victor, Didge, Raggs, Tess and company being such rabid Conservatives at heart..).    

I enjoyed your history lesson, but unfortunately the last bit showed your leftist rubbish.