Talk:Scottish mafia

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Politics of the United Kingdom Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles

Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

More information:
/
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Scotland Mid‑importance

	Scotland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tony Blair English?

Let's have citations if the article is to include that (i) TB claims he's English and (ii) people believe him. Mr Stephen 08:44, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well seeing as his father was English, and he supports the English football team [1] it is pretty clear that he is English. I don't see what it matters if people believe him or not. Catchpole 08:56, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In the last World Cup Gordon Brown made it publicly known that he supported the England football team - that didn't make him English! (And the Scottish National Party leader Alex Salmond supported Brazil - I somehow doubt his nationality changed either!) Timrollpickering 12:58, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is it really so difficult to look at the Tony Blair article and see that he is in fact a Scot? 62.31.243.217 (talk) 11:09, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Let's stick to the criteria that to be a Scot you must be born in Scotland, as stated by the author of this article. Thus Tony Blair is a Scot. This is the reason why I removed Darling from the list of Scottish ministers, he was born in England making him English. To do anything else would be silly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fairgomate (talk • contribs) 03:08, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I noticed that your account is new to Wikipedia so you may not be familiar with some of the heated discussions about nationality we have here from time to time. The place where you are born is not always the only criteria for the nationality of an individual, but also where you are raised and what nationality you are associated with in source material. As Britain currently has no separate legal recognition for the different nationalities within the country all citizens are "British". However, to reflect a neutral point of view on subjects of nationalism within the UK, Wikipedia sometimes needs to stray beyond the strict legal definition to the less tangible definitions for the nationalities of the sub-divisions.

It can get a little difficult to form a consensus at times, but we do manage to reach results that John Prescott is British (despite being born in Wales he is most associated with Yorkshire and North East England) and Ieuan Wyn Jones (leader of Plaid Cymru) is Welsh. Road Wizard (talk) 08:41, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"It should be noted that..."

(concerning the over-representation of SE England MPs amongst the Conservatives)

Maybe, but not in this context. The article is about the Scottish Raj. There's no need also to mention the undoubted Tory bias towards the South East. The Angel of Islington (talk) 01:43, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Use

a pejorative term used by English nationalists

Is there any evidence this is a term coined by or used by English nationalists? My recollection is that the term was in active use before issues like the West Lothian Question and the number of Scots in the Labour front line became a source of grievance (Scotland was also "overrepresented" in the last Conservative Cabinet as well!) and it seemed little different from other "mafias" in politics such as the "Cambridge Mafia" in the Conservative cabinets of the 1980s and 1990s. Timrollpickering (talk) 15:08, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is of course absolutely correct so I removed the disparaging nonsense about it being English nationalists. The very same paragraph goes on to cite press sources which are not nationalist using the term. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.132.136.191 (talk) 13:10, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Inaccurate

Hideously one-sided. I removed most references that were not relevant. If someone could include a reference to the imbalance of rights then I think it will make the article much more well-rounded. I may do so myself. It's also worth noting that it's not just about the number of Scottish MPs but more about the power they possess. The British Raj weren't exactly a major force because of the NUMBER of them, but more because of the power they wielded. This needs to be better reflected.

Nitpicking

If we are going to have an article which talks about English nationalists' nitpicking over the small number of Scots MPs who are in prominent positions at Westminster, then where does it stop? We Scots, could start writing articles on the number of English people in prominent quango positions in Scotland, or heads of organisations which have unfair and undemocratic influence over important decision-making processes, relating to energy, environment, community projects etc. There would be a much longer list, I can assure you. I'm all for an English parliament, if that's what English people want. Trouble is you've had one for a long time, it's called Westminster. It invariably looks after English interests first, and always has done. --Reasonable30 (talk) 08:04, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yawn. Do you honestly think there is anyone out there who has not heard these same views again and again and again? The only thing Westminster looks out for is subsidizing tuition fees for Scots, giving away free bus travel to elderly Scots, giving away free prescriptions to all Scots, giving away more money to the NHS in Scotland than proportionately to any other region of the UK. I'm not too hot on the fact that a lot of cancer drugs are available in Scotland but nowhere else in the UK, particularly as the funds from those are coming from south of the border. See Barnett formula. I could go on. 14:15, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Why doesn't Scotland just fully incorporate itself with England - it would after all be the largest English County and then everyone would be on a level footing, no need for any Scots parliament, separate legal system, currency etc. Voila, problem over, you dump the Saltire and start flying the flag of St George! (I fail to see why anyone hasn't thought of this before.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.123.139.102 (talk) 13:18, 13 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is there is no legal national entity called England. England is merely a division of the UK. Whereas Scorland is recognisd through its national parliament as a costituent country of the UK. We have in Scotland our own education system, our own law system, our own democratically elected parliament. England merely being a division of the UK has to accept that Scots elected into the UK government have equal right to promotion in government as those from the England district. And furthermore the scots are a small minority in parliament and if their England district MP's didn't want them in power they wouldn't be ministers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fairgomate (talk • contribs) 08:18, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tidy Up

Horribly biased article. I've started to clear it up. Tony Blair is indisputably Scottish, as that is where he was born, and this is the widely-accepted criterion for nationality. If this is removed again I will ask for this page to be semi-protected. I will be clearing up the rest of this article soon. Finally, adding a list of English MPs is unnecessary and not welcome in this article.90.214.234.33 (talk) 21:10, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Correct, Blair is a Scot as he was born in Scotland. Darling is English as he was born in England. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fairgomate (talk • contribs) 03:12, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See my reply to you in the Tony Blair English? section above. Nationality in the UK is not usually so simple to define. Legally all UK citizens are British, so the definitions of nationality we use on articles involving nationalism within the UK are not clearly set out or agreed.

It is important to reach consensus on such topics as without it another editor can come along later and remove your text and apply their own definition of nationality instead. Road Wizard (talk) 08:50, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A long time afterwards but a large part of the problem is ambiguity over whether the term refers to a) any Labour politician representing a Scottish seat; b) any Labour politician born in Scotland; and c) any Labour politician who is the product of the Scottish Labour Party. Traditionally the term "mafia" in politics has been all over the place - the "Cambridge Mafia" broadly corresponds to c) albeit mainly from a specific time period, but ISTR the term "East Anglian Mafia" that corresponded to a). I'm not persuaded that everyone who's ever thrown around the term "Scottish Mafia" has stopped to clarify the definition or specifically list every single politician they're including in the term. Timrollpickering (talk) 00:23, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

2015 election wipeout of Labour

Since Labour was wiped out in Scotland in the 2015 election by the Scottish National Party, leaving Labour MP, where does this leave this article? --184.186.92.117 (talk) 13:12, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hideously out of date. It needs to be rewritten to make clear that it describes the UK political situation only from 1997 to 2010, not since then. The line saying the Conservatives won only 15 seats in the most recent election, making it the No. 3 party in Scottish politics after the Scottish National Party and Labour is also well out of date and no longer true since 2016. Robofish (talk) 13:57, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Next election: possible revival of Scottish Labour in UK Parliament

Recent polls in Scotland shows that the Scottish Labour Party could be set to make a significant political revival in the UK Parliament by gaining a significant number of MPs at the expense of the SNP. A YouGov poll released earlier today showed Labour gaining around 29 MPs in Scotland which will lead to them once again becoming the largest party in Scotland. Where does this leave this article? Pikachu3408 (talk) 22:21, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024 election: Consensus about potential Scottish cabinet secretaries in the next UK Labour Government.

With Labour likely to return to power in the 2024 general election along with a potential political revival of Scottish Labour in the UK Parliament. A consensus should be agreed upon about potential Scottish cabinet secretaries in the next UK Labour Government who could be pejoratively referred to as a Scottish mafia. The previous definition was before 2010 when they left government was as follows a) any Labour politician representing a Scottish seat; (for example Ian Murray and possibly Douglas Alexander) b) any Labour politician born in Scotland; (this will also include for example Yvette Cooper (born in Inverness) and Anneliese Dodds (born in Aberdeen) both of them represent seats in England) and c) any Labour politician who is the product of the Scottish Labour Party. Are we in agreement with this definition? Pikachu3408 (talk) 21:00, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]