I see the BBC is having a long interview with an anti-American, anti-drone activist, and no one arguing the opposite side.
The fair and balanced BBC? Why are you surprised?
The very least that could be done is to have them regulated by the same regulator as everyone else, rather than a body that's supposed to "champion" them. Even lefties should be able to agree to that.
Cant imagine Clegg wanting to take on red Len's Marxist manifesto - if it's close better the devil you know.
The truth is it won't be up to Clegg - the real power brokers in the party (and we know who they are) will carry far more influence and can't wait to get into bed with Labour.
Apart from Clegg himself, Danny Alexander and David Laws, I think it's fair to say that most of the other major players would sit more comfortably with Labour than with the Tories, but no doubt you'll correct me if I'm wrong.
The problem with coalitions is that no-one voted for *exactly* the set of interests that get to govern. So, nobody voted *for* Cameron plus Clegg.
The problem with single party government is that, while it's very representative when two parties get 80+% of the vote, it becomes increasingly less representative when that proportion drops significantly. I doubt I would be the only one who who would be deeply disturbed if a political party got an absolute majority in the House of Commons with less than 30% of the vote.
The rise of UKIP and the Greens and the SNP/PC and that funny bunch in Cornwall that SeanT like so much means we may well see ruling parties with very modest vote shares. It's not a problem *yet*; but it might become one in a few elections time.
Here is my prediction (fwiw), if the Conservatives are denied government in the next two elections by the rise of UKIP (which is not implausible), then reform of the voting system will become official Conservative Party policy. (And the Labour Party will suddenly develop a new found love for FPTP.)
No Scots will vote for Separation, whatever that is. They may however vote for Independence. I guess that idea of Americans celebrating "Separation day" on July 4th was a dud too eh?
Why are you even bothering with an inept PR tory too dumb to yet realise that Cammie doesn't even know whether he would support IN or OUT in his own fantasy Cast Iron EU Referendum pledge?
I guess I would respect Carlotta Vance more if she said fair enough and answered my question. See the other person's position without being too much of a smart arsed prat is probably a good motto for all of us.
Great thread David. Another possible (or not) complicating factor is how the Scots vote on separation in 2014. If our nationalist friends are to be believed once the campaign "really" starts, things will move their way. The result will have two knock on effects - how the parties subsequently do in the 2015 Westminster election, and how the argument about "Scots MPs" goes on from there - a government based on Scots MPs might have only 10 months to run, if Salmond's March 2016 timetable is met.
Meanwhile, it's been another wonderful week for Eck:
"The Icas report calls on the Scottish Government to outlines its plans for Scotland’s pension future ahead of the outcome of the referendum.
This is a bigger issue than currency. To the man and woman on the street, there are few issues more important than how they will fund their retirement.
The clock is ticking on pensions.
• David Wood is ICAS executive director, technical policy"
Unfortunately the clock is ticking irrespective of the referendum, the only real point they have unearthed is the huge deficit in pension arrangements and the problems ahead regardless of the referendum , still deficit is only 2 years government borrowing.
"WOMEN are more opposed to independence than men not because they dislike Alex Salmond but because they are far more sceptical about the detail of Scotland going it alone."
So the "we'll put in Sturgeon to fix the wimmin's issue" ain't gonna work.....
SNP need to start explaining it from the viewpoint of housework like hoovering , dusting and washing the dishes , women will then be able to get it and YES vote will be assured.
No Scots will vote for Separation, whatever that is. They may however vote for Independence. I guess that idea of Americans celebrating "Separation day" on July 4th was a dud too eh?
Hey with all those big US bases every day will be independence day ! Three cheers for the red white and blue.
Alan, we will be living high on the hog , but be assured I will send you a food parcel or two to keep you going
Are the SNP going to be forced to commit to supporting the party with most votes or seats? Thought not - they are Labour-lite.
Or Tartan Tories, mad socialists, Fascists etc. Such a rich cornucopia to pick from.
The only way the SNP would get 30+ seats at Westminster is if there's a Yes vote, so their future relevance to any coalition would be somewhat limited. Still, it would be entertaining to see Labour holding their noses and emphasising how much they and the SNP have always had in common.
Great thread David. Another possible (or not) complicating factor is how the Scots vote on separation in 2014. If our nationalist friends are to be believed once the campaign "really" starts, things will move their way. The result will have two knock on effects - how the parties subsequently do in the 2015 Westminster election, and how the argument about "Scots MPs" goes on from there - a government based on Scots MPs might have only 10 months to run, if Salmond's March 2016 timetable is met.
Meanwhile, it's been another wonderful week for Eck:
"The Icas report calls on the Scottish Government to outlines its plans for Scotland’s pension future ahead of the outcome of the referendum.
This is a bigger issue than currency. To the man and woman on the street, there are few issues more important than how they will fund their retirement.
The clock is ticking on pensions.
• David Wood is ICAS executive director, technical policy"
Unfortunately the clock is ticking irrespective of the referendum, the only real point they have unearthed is the huge deficit in pension arrangements and the problems ahead regardless of the referendum , still deficit is only 2 years government borrowing.
Separation would accelerate addressing the pension deficits under EU rules - which may, or may not, be a good thing.
What do the SNP propose, apart from running around shouting "scaremongering!"
Great thread David. Another possible (or not) complicating factor is how the Scots vote on separation in 2014. If our nationalist friends are to be believed once the campaign "really" starts, things will move their way. The result will have two knock on effects - how the parties subsequently do in the 2015 Westminster election, and how the argument about "Scots MPs" goes on from there - a government based on Scots MPs might have only 10 months to run, if Salmond's March 2016 timetable is met.
Meanwhile, it's been another wonderful week for Eck:
"The Icas report calls on the Scottish Government to outlines its plans for Scotland’s pension future ahead of the outcome of the referendum.
This is a bigger issue than currency. To the man and woman on the street, there are few issues more important than how they will fund their retirement.
The clock is ticking on pensions.
• David Wood is ICAS executive director, technical policy"
Oh ye of little faith. Don't you realise that Scotland will be at the top table ? Germany will put aside the implosion of the Euro, France will forget its recession, Italy will form a government and Spain will ignore economic armageddeon all so they can deal with the scottish pension issue for Eck. It's really that simple.
Didn't Brown screw up pension's in 2006 by raiding future reserves? Surely the question is how the UK will fund pensions without N Sea oil revenues, the deficit is already such that they cannot be met, not that Carlotta would see things from that point of view. Can the UK guarantee they can fund pensions without Scottish revenue? as they cannot even do it WITH IT! And if so, how?
The UK will print more money like it's doing now, Scotland won't be able to because it hasn't got its own currency. Haven't you worked that out yet ?
Alan, dear dear , we will print notes in our 10% of the sterling bank while your boys are printing in their share of it, we will own part of the presses so no issue.
Are the SNP going to be forced to commit to supporting the party with most votes or seats? Thought not - they are Labour-lite.
Or Tartan Tories, mad socialists, Fascists etc. Such a ruch cornucopia to pick from.
The only way the SNP would get 30+ seats at Westminster is if there's a Yes vote, so their future relevance to any coalition would be somewhat limited. Still, it would be entertaining to see Labour holding their noses and emphasising how much they and the SNP have always had in common.
I always liked the nickname The Cameron Highlanders for the SNP.
Are the SNP going to be forced to commit to supporting the party with most votes or seats? Thought not - they are Labour-lite.
Or Tartan Tories, mad socialists, Fascists etc. Such a ruch cornucopia to pick from.
The only way the SNP would get 30+ seats at Westminster is if there's a Yes vote, so their future relevance to any coalition would be somewhat limited. Still, it would be entertaining to see Labour holding their noses and emphasising how much they and the SNP have always had in common.
I could also see the SNP doing well in the context of a "no" vote (barring a humiliation) - "send our guys to Westminster to get the best deal on DevoMax" (Which is what most want anyway).
Great thread David. Another possible (or not) complicating factor is how the Scots vote on separation in 2014. If our nationalist friends are to be believed once the campaign "really" starts, things will move their way. The result will have two knock on effects - how the parties subsequently do in the 2015 Westminster election, and how the argument about "Scots MPs" goes on from there - a government based on Scots MPs might have only 10 months to run, if Salmond's March 2016 timetable is met.
Meanwhile, it's been another wonderful week for Eck:
"The Icas report calls on the Scottish Government to outlines its plans for Scotland’s pension future ahead of the outcome of the referendum.
This is a bigger issue than currency. To the man and woman on the street, there are few issues more important than how they will fund their retirement.
The clock is ticking on pensions.
• David Wood is ICAS executive director, technical policy"
Oh ye of little faith. Don't you realise that Scotland will be at the top table ? Germany will put aside the implosion of the Euro, France will forget its recession, Italy will form a government and Spain will ignore economic armageddeon all so they can deal with the scottish pension issue for Eck. It's really that simple.
Didn't Brown screw up pension's in 2006 by raiding future reserves? Surely the question is how the UK will fund pensions without N Sea oil revenues, the deficit is already such that they cannot be met, not that Carlotta would see things from that point of view. Can the UK guarantee they can fund pensions without Scottish revenue? as they cannot even do it WITH IT! And if so, how?
The UK will print more money like it's doing now, Scotland won't be able to because it hasn't got its own currency. Haven't you worked that out yet ?
Alan, dear dear , we will print notes in our 10% of the sterling bank while your boys are printing in their share of it, we will own part of the presses so no issue.
Which part of "Currency Union without Fiscal Transfers" is unclear? In any case, a "Currency Union" might be put to a popular vote in rUK.
@SouthamObserver - In Labour's plans, who is going to provide these minimum wage jobs to meet the job guarantee? Or is the intention that the state should not be a living wage employer?
Those paying the minimum wage, presumably. The living wage will not be compulsory, it will be incentivised. I am sure Labour would have no problem with the long-term unemployed taking higher paying jobs.
SO, only chance that would work is if benefits were slashed, lots of them will need to be herded to work with cattle prods and many will be pretty useless once in place.
No Scots will vote for Separation, whatever that is. They may however vote for Independence. I guess that idea of Americans celebrating "Separation day" on July 4th was a dud too eh?
Why are you even bothering with an inept PR tory too dumb to yet realise that Cammie doesn't even know whether he would support IN or OUT in his own fantasy Cast Iron EU Referendum pledge?
I guess I would respect Carlotta Vance more if she said fair enough and answered my question. See the other person's position without being too much of a smart arsed prat is probably a good motto for all of us.
You didn't ask a question - you made a point based on an analogy (that Scotland is a colony heading for independence, not part of a union heading for separation) that I disagree with. You do send MPs to Westminster, don't you?
I see the BBC is having a long interview with an anti-American, anti-drone activist, and no one arguing the opposite side.
Maybe they couldn't find anyone willing to defend drone attacks?
I marvelled at the BBC's World at One on Sunday, which had a guest on to say that only 4 per cent, yes 4 per cent, of the world's terror attacks in recent years had been committed by muslims ... and their other guest was also from the left and didn't venture any contradiction. I reached for the Off Switch.
I see the BBC is having a long interview with an anti-American, anti-drone activist, and no one arguing the opposite side.
Maybe they couldn't find anyone willing to defend drone attacks?
I marvelled at the BBC's World at One on Sunday, which had a guest on to say that only 4 per cent, yes 4 per cent, of the world's terror attacks in recent years had been committed by muslims ... and their other guest was also from the left and didn't venture any contradiction. I reached for the Off Switch.
Great thread David. Another possible (or not) complicating factor is how the Scots vote on separation in 2014. If our nationalist friends are to be believed once the campaign "really" starts, things will move their way. The result will have two knock on effects - how the parties subsequently do in the 2015 Westminster election, and how the argument about "Scots MPs" goes on from there - a government based on Scots MPs might have only 10 months to run, if Salmond's March 2016 timetable is met.
Meanwhile, it's been another wonderful week for Eck:
"The Icas report calls on the Scottish Government to outlines its plans for Scotland’s pension future ahead of the outcome of the referendum.
This is a bigger issue than currency. To the man and woman on the street, there are few issues more important than how they will fund their retirement.
The clock is ticking on pensions.
• David Wood is ICAS executive director, technical policy"
Oh ye of little faith. Don't you realise that Scotland will be at the top table ? Germany will put aside the implosion of the Euro, France will forget its recession, Italy will form a government and Spain will ignore economic armageddeon all so they can deal with the scottish pension issue for Eck. It's really that simple.
Didn't Brown screw up pension's in 2006 by raiding future reserves? Surely the question is how the UK will fund pensions without N Sea oil revenues, the deficit is already such that they cannot be met, not that Carlotta would see things from that point of view. Can the UK guarantee they can fund pensions without Scottish revenue? as they cannot even do it WITH IT! And if so, how?
The UK will print more money like it's doing now, Scotland won't be able to because it hasn't got its own currency. Haven't you worked that out yet ?
Alan, dear dear , we will print notes in our 10% of the sterling bank while your boys are printing in their share of it, we will own part of the presses so no issue.
LOL malc what happened all this SNP consent of the people mallarkey ? The rest of us will want a vote on currrency union, and it will be no.
I see the BBC is having a long interview with an anti-American, anti-drone activist, and no one arguing the opposite side.
Maybe they couldn't find anyone willing to defend drone attacks?
I marvelled at the BBC's World at One on Sunday, which had a guest on to say that only 4 per cent, yes 4 per cent, of the world's terror attacks in recent years had been committed by muslims ... and their other guest was also from the left and didn't venture any contradiction. I reached for the Off Switch.
Great thread David. Another possible (or not) complicating factor is how the Scots vote on separation in 2014. If our nationalist friends are to be believed once the campaign "really" starts, things will move their way. The result will have two knock on effects - how the parties subsequently do in the 2015 Westminster election, and how the argument about "Scots MPs" goes on from there - a government based on Scots MPs might have only 10 months to run, if Salmond's March 2016 timetable is met.
Meanwhile, it's been another wonderful week for Eck:
"The Icas report calls on the Scottish Government to outlines its plans for Scotland’s pension future ahead of the outcome of the referendum.
This is a bigger issue than currency. To the man and woman on the street, there are few issues more important than how they will fund their retirement.
The clock is ticking on pensions.
• David Wood is ICAS executive director, technical policy"
Unfortunately the clock is ticking irrespective of the referendum, the only real point they have unearthed is the huge deficit in pension arrangements and the problems ahead regardless of the referendum , still deficit is only 2 years government borrowing.
Separation would accelerate addressing the pension deficits under EU rules - which may, or may not, be a good thing.
What do the SNP propose, apart from running around shouting "scaremongering!"
Considering the majority of the issue will be in companies headquartered in England and the solution will be to stiff employees in both England and Scotland, have the donkey unionists provided any insights as to how they are going to handle it. Kind of strange bragging when you have blown your own legs off as well as your enemy's.
Given how many LDs immediately jumped ship in 2010 before things turned out so bad, and how many appear to yearn for the safe lefty embrace of Labour even now (though I get the sense the leadership now dislikes them more), if they still want to enter into a Coalition at all in 2015 (I think they might suggest a minority gov - saying the hard work is done so it's safe to do so, and conveniently gives them time to regroup and try to restore some identity), I think they'll jump into line with Labour with tail between their legs with very little fuss, whatever the vote percentages and seat numbers.
Great thread David. Another possible (or not) complicating factor is how the Scots vote on separation in 2014. If our nationalist friends are to be believed once the campaign "really" starts, things will move their way. The result will have two knock on effects - how the parties subsequently do in the 2015 Westminster election, and how the argument about "Scots MPs" goes on from there - a government based on Scots MPs might have only 10 months to run, if Salmond's March 2016 timetable is met.
Meanwhile, it's been another wonderful week for Eck:
"The Icas report calls on the Scottish Government to outlines its plans for Scotland’s pension future ahead of the outcome of the referendum.
This is a bigger issue than currency. To the man and woman on the street, there are few issues more important than how they will fund their retirement.
The clock is ticking on pensions.
• David Wood is ICAS executive director, technical policy"
Oh ye of little faith. Don't you realise that Scotland will be at the top table ? Germany will put aside the implosion of the Euro, France will forget its recession, Italy will form a government and Spain will ignore economic armageddeon all so they can deal with the scottish pension issue for Eck. It's really that simple.
Didn't Brown screw up pension's in 2006 by raiding future reserves? Surely the question is how the UK will fund pensions without N Sea oil revenues, the deficit is already such that they cannot be met, not that Carlotta would see things from that point of view. Can the UK guarantee they can fund pensions without Scottish revenue? as they cannot even do it WITH IT! And if so, how?
The UK will print more money like it's doing now, Scotland won't be able to because it hasn't got its own currency. Haven't you worked that out yet ?
Alan, dear dear , we will print notes in our 10% of the sterling bank while your boys are printing in their share of it, we will own part of the presses so no issue.
LOL malc what happened all this SNP consent of the people mallarkey ? The rest of us will want a vote on currrency union, and it will be no.
Alan, if vote is YES you know well Osborne and Cameron will be begging Alex to join, on bended knee.
Great thread David. Another possible (or not) complicating factor is how the Scots vote on separation in 2014. If our nationalist friends are to be believed once the campaign "really" starts, things will move their way. The result will have two knock on effects - how the parties subsequently do in the 2015 Westminster election, and how the argument about "Scots MPs" goes on from there - a government based on Scots MPs might have only 10 months to run, if Salmond's March 2016 timetable is met.
Meanwhile, it's been another wonderful week for Eck:
"The Icas report calls on the Scottish Government to outlines its plans for Scotland’s pension future ahead of the outcome of the referendum.
This is a bigger issue than currency. To the man and woman on the street, there are few issues more important than how they will fund their retirement.
The clock is ticking on pensions.
• David Wood is ICAS executive director, technical policy"
Unfortunately the clock is ticking irrespective of the referendum, the only real point they have unearthed is the huge deficit in pension arrangements and the problems ahead regardless of the referendum , still deficit is only 2 years government borrowing.
Separation would accelerate addressing the pension deficits under EU rules - which may, or may not, be a good thing.
What do the SNP propose, apart from running around shouting "scaremongering!"
Considering the majority of the issue will be in companies headquartered in England and the solution will be to stiff employees in both England and Scotland, have the donkey unionists provided any insights as to how they are going to handle it. Kind of strange bragging when you have blown your own legs off as well as your enemy's.
Not our problem we're not the ones leaving. I'd suggest the companies do a CVA and leave all the liabilitiess with the Scottish Pension Protection Fund. You do have one don't you ?
Great thread David. Another possible (or not) complicating factor is how the Scots vote on separation in 2014. If our nationalist friends are to be believed once the campaign "really" starts, things will move their way. The result will have two knock on effects - how the parties subsequently do in the 2015 Westminster election, and how the argument about "Scots MPs" goes on from there - a government based on Scots MPs might have only 10 months to run, if Salmond's March 2016 timetable is met.
Meanwhile, it's been another wonderful week for Eck:
"The Icas report calls on the Scottish Government to outlines its plans for Scotland’s pension future ahead of the outcome of the referendum.
This is a bigger issue than currency. To the man and woman on the street, there are few issues more important than how they will fund their retirement.
The clock is ticking on pensions.
• David Wood is ICAS executive director, technical policy"
Oh ye of little faith. Don't you realise that Scotland will be at the top table ? Germany will put aside the implosion of the Euro, France will forget its recession, Italy will form a government and Spain will ignore economic armageddeon all so they can deal with the scottish pension issue for Eck. It's really that simple.
Didn't Brown screw up pension's in 2006 by raiding future reserves? Surely the question is how the UK will fund pensions without N Sea oil revenues, the deficit is already such that they cannot be met, not that Carlotta would see things from that point of view. Can the UK guarantee they can fund pensions without Scottish revenue? as they cannot even do it WITH IT! And if so, how?
The UK will print more money like it's doing now, Scotland won't be able to because it hasn't got its own currency. Haven't you worked that out yet ?
Alan, dear dear , we will print notes in our 10% of the sterling bank while your boys are printing in their share of it, we will own part of the presses so no issue.
LOL malc what happened all this SNP consent of the people mallarkey ? The rest of us will want a vote on currrency union, and it will be no.
Alan, if vote is YES you know well Osborne and Cameron will be begging Alex to join, on bended knee.
I now know you're all mad up there. Who on God's earth would want to team up with Osborne to manage their finances ? ;-)
Great thread David. Another possible (or not) complicating factor is how the Scots vote on separation in 2014. If our nationalist friends are to be believed once the campaign "really" starts, things will move their way. The result will have two knock on effects - how the parties subsequently do in the 2015 Westminster election, and how the argument about "Scots MPs" goes on from there - a government based on Scots MPs might have only 10 months to run, if Salmond's March 2016 timetable is met.
Meanwhile, it's been another wonderful week for Eck:
"The Icas report calls on the Scottish Government to outlines its plans for Scotland’s pension future ahead of the outcome of the referendum.
This is a bigger issue than currency. To the man and woman on the street, there are few issues more important than how they will fund their retirement.
The clock is ticking on pensions.
• David Wood is ICAS executive director, technical policy"
Unfortunately the clock is ticking irrespective of the referendum, the only real point they have unearthed is the huge deficit in pension arrangements and the problems ahead regardless of the referendum , still deficit is only 2 years government borrowing.
Separation would accelerate addressing the pension deficits under EU rules - which may, or may not, be a good thing.
What do the SNP propose, apart from running around shouting "scaremongering!"
Considering the majority of the issue will be in companies headquartered in England and the solution will be to stiff employees in both England and Scotland, have the donkey unionists provided any insights as to how they are going to handle it. Kind of strange bragging when you have blown your own legs off as well as your enemy's.
Not our problem we're not the ones leaving. I'd suggest the companies do a CVA and leave all the liabilitiess with the Scottish Pension Protection Fund. You do have one don't you ?
Alan, your mind is going , we own 10% of the current one and will use that to cover it, hopefully mine is not in deficit or I may have to emigrate. Luckily I would have option to take mine before that time , just whether to take it in worthless sterling or become a bawbee billionaire to decide.
Great thread David. Another possible (or not) complicating factor is how the Scots vote on separation in 2014. If our nationalist friends are to be believed once the campaign "really" starts, things will move their way. The result will have two knock on effects - how the parties subsequently do in the 2015 Westminster election, and how the argument about "Scots MPs" goes on from there - a government based on Scots MPs might have only 10 months to run, if Salmond's March 2016 timetable is met.
Meanwhile, it's been another wonderful week for Eck:
"The Icas report calls on the Scottish Government to outlines its plans for Scotland’s pension future ahead of the outcome of the referendum.
This is a bigger issue than currency. To the man and woman on the street, there are few issues more important than how they will fund their retirement.
The clock is ticking on pensions.
• David Wood is ICAS executive director, technical policy"
Oh ye of little faith. Don't you realise that Scotland will be at the top table ? Germany will put aside the implosion of the Euro, France will forget its recession, Italy will form a government and Spain will ignore economic armageddeon all so they can deal with the scottish pension issue for Eck. It's really that simple.
Didn't Brown screw up pension's in 2006 by raiding future reserves? Surely the question is how the UK will fund pensions without N Sea oil revenues, the deficit is already such that they cannot be met, not that Carlotta would see things from that point of view. Can the UK guarantee they can fund pensions without Scottish revenue? as they cannot even do it WITH IT! And if so, how?
The UK will print more money like it's doing now, Scotland won't be able to because it hasn't got its own currency. Haven't you worked that out yet ?
Alan, dear dear , we will print notes in our 10% of the sterling bank while your boys are printing in their share of it, we will own part of the presses so no issue.
LOL malc what happened all this SNP consent of the people mallarkey ? The rest of us will want a vote on currrency union, and it will be no.
Alan, if vote is YES you know well Osborne and Cameron will be begging Alex to join, on bended knee.
I now know you're all mad up there. Who on God's earth would want to team up with Osborne to manage their finances ? ;-)
We just want to see him begging then we will join the arc of prosperity and give him two fingers.
Great thread David. Another possible (or not) complicating factor is how the Scots vote on separation in 2014. If our nationalist friends are to be believed once the campaign "really" starts, things will move their way. The result will have two knock on effects - how the parties subsequently do in the 2015 Westminster election, and how the argument about "Scots MPs" goes on from there - a government based on Scots MPs might have only 10 months to run, if Salmond's March 2016 timetable is met.
Meanwhile, it's been another wonderful week for Eck:
"The Icas report calls on the Scottish Government to outlines its plans for Scotland’s pension future ahead of the outcome of the referendum.
This is a bigger issue than currency. To the man and woman on the street, there are few issues more important than how they will fund their retirement.
The clock is ticking on pensions.
• David Wood is ICAS executive director, technical policy"
Unfortunately the clock is ticking irrespective of the referendum, the only real point they have unearthed is the huge deficit in pension arrangements and the problems ahead regardless of the referendum , still deficit is only 2 years government borrowing.
Separation would accelerate addressing the pension deficits under EU rules - which may, or may not, be a good thing.
What do the SNP propose, apart from running around shouting "scaremongering!"
Considering the majority of the issue will be in companies headquartered in England and the solution will be to stiff employees in both England and Scotland, have the donkey unionists provided any insights as to how they are going to handle it. Kind of strange bragging when you have blown your own legs off as well as your enemy's.
Not our problem we're not the ones leaving. I'd suggest the companies do a CVA and leave all the liabilitiess with the Scottish Pension Protection Fund. You do have one don't you ?
Alan, your mind is going , we own 10% of the current one and will use that to cover it, hopefully mine is not in deficit or I may have to emigrate. Luckily I would have option to take mine before that time , just whether to take it in worthless sterling or become a bawbee billionaire to decide.
You can emigrate SOTB, malc and send your relations pictures of food and clothing. :-)
Great thread David. Another possible (or not) complicating factor is how the Scots vote on separation in 2014. If our nationalist friends are to be believed once the campaign "really" starts, things will move their way. The result will have two knock on effects - how the parties subsequently do in the 2015 Westminster election, and how the argument about "Scots MPs" goes on from there - a government based on Scots MPs might have only 10 months to run, if Salmond's March 2016 timetable is met.
Meanwhile, it's been another wonderful week for Eck:
"The Icas report calls on the Scottish Government to outlines its plans for Scotland’s pension future ahead of the outcome of the referendum.
This is a bigger issue than currency. To the man and woman on the street, there are few issues more important than how they will fund their retirement.
The clock is ticking on pensions.
• David Wood is ICAS executive director, technical policy"
Oh ye of little faith. Don't you realise that Scotland will be at the top table ? Germany will put aside the implosion of the Euro, France will forget its recession, Italy will form a government and Spain will ignore economic armageddeon all so they can deal with the scottish pension issue for Eck. It's really that simple.
Didn't Brown screw up pension's in 2006 by raiding future reserves? Surely the question is how the UK will fund pensions without N Sea oil revenues, the deficit is already such that they cannot be met, not that Carlotta would see things from that point of view. Can the UK guarantee they can fund pensions without Scottish revenue? as they cannot even do it WITH IT! And if so, how?
The UK will print more money like it's doing now, Scotland won't be able to because it hasn't got its own currency. Haven't you worked that out yet ?
Alan, dear dear , we will print notes in our 10% of the sterling bank while your boys are printing in their share of it, we will own part of the presses so no issue.
You really think the UK is going to agree to allow Scotland to print money without permission from us?
I could also see the SNP doing well in the context of a "no" vote (barring a humiliation) - "send our guys to Westminster to get the best deal on DevoMax" (Which is what most want anyway).
Well, if after a No vote the Unionist parties really take the p!ss about more powers, I guess that's a scenario. I still think high teens would be an achievement.
If so, who do you think will be in contention for the SNP nomination in the upcoming Donside by-election?
Looking at local SNP Cllrs...the names that caught my attention were the Aberdeenshire group leader who stood in Aberdeen North in 2010 GE...and Callum McCaig....would they be interested in becoming MSPs? Would they be suitable candidates for a by-election?
If so, who do you think will be in contention for the SNP nomination in the upcoming Donside by-election?
Looking at local SNP Cllrs...the names that caught my attention were the Aberdeenshire group leader who stood in Aberdeen North in 2010 GE...and Callum McCaig....would they be interested in becoming MSPs? Would they be suitable candidates for a by-election?
Andrea, Afraid not I am from Burns country, Ayrshire in south west.
Great thread David. Another possible (or not) complicating factor is how the Scots vote on separation in 2014. If our nationalist friends are to be believed once the campaign "really" starts, things will move their way. The result will have two knock on effects - how the parties subsequently do in the 2015 Westminster election, and how the argument about "Scots MPs" goes on from there - a government based on Scots MPs might have only 10 months to run, if Salmond's March 2016 timetable is met.
Meanwhile, it's been another wonderful week for Eck:
"The Icas report calls on the Scottish Government to outlines its plans for Scotland’s pension future ahead of the outcome of the referendum.
This is a bigger issue than currency. To the man and woman on the street, there are few issues more important than how they will fund their retirement.
The clock is ticking on pensions.
• David Wood is ICAS executive director, technical policy"
Oh ye of little faith. Don't you realise that Scotland will be at the top table ? Germany will put aside the implosion of the Euro, France will forget its recession, Italy will form a government and Spain will ignore economic armageddeon all so they can deal with the scottish pension issue for Eck. It's really that simple.
Didn't Brown screw up pension's in 2006 by raiding future reserves? Surely the question is how the UK will fund pensions without N Sea oil revenues, the deficit is already such that they cannot be met, not that Carlotta would see things from that point of view. Can the UK guarantee they can fund pensions without Scottish revenue? as they cannot even do it WITH IT! And if so, how?
The UK will print more money like it's doing now, Scotland won't be able to because it hasn't got its own currency. Haven't you worked that out yet ?
Alan, dear dear , we will print notes in our 10% of the sterling bank while your boys are printing in their share of it, we will own part of the presses so no issue.
LOL malc what happened all this SNP consent of the people mallarkey ? The rest of us will want a vote on currrency union, and it will be no.
Alan, if vote is YES you know well Osborne and Cameron will be begging Alex to join, on bended knee.
I now know you're all mad up there. Who on God's earth would want to team up with Osborne to manage their finances ? ;-)
We just want to see him begging then we will join the arc of prosperity and give him two fingers.
"and give him two fingers" I hope that's in the way a proctologist might .
I see the BBC is having a long interview with an anti-American, anti-drone activist, and no one arguing the opposite side.
Maybe they couldn't find anyone willing to defend drone attacks?
I marvelled at the BBC's World at One on Sunday, which had a guest on to say that only 4 per cent, yes 4 per cent, of the world's terror attacks in recent years had been committed by muslims ... and their other guest was also from the left and didn't venture any contradiction. I reached for the Off Switch.
Looks like the vast, vast majority in that dataset are committed by ETA (separatists in France and Spain). Considering that ETA is now ceasing armed struggle, it seems like that numbers aren't that relevant. It also only talks about Europe, and thus ignores all the attacks in the Middle East, which is where most terrorist attacks happen.
I'd also be interested in the number of civilian casualties by each type.
Great thread David. Another possible (or not) complicating factor is how the Scots vote on separation in 2014. If our nationalist friends are to be believed once the campaign "really" starts, things will move their way. The result will have two knock on effects - how the parties subsequently do in the 2015 Westminster election, and how the argument about "Scots MPs" goes on from there - a government based on Scots MPs might have only 10 months to run, if Salmond's March 2016 timetable is met.
Meanwhile, it's been another wonderful week for Eck:
"The Icas report calls on the Scottish Government to outlines its plans for Scotland’s pension future ahead of the outcome of the referendum.
This is a bigger issue than currency. To the man and woman on the street, there are few issues more important than how they will fund their retirement.
The clock is ticking on pensions.
• David Wood is ICAS executive director, technical policy"
Oh ye of little faith. Don't you realise that Scotland will be at the top table ? Germany will put aside the implosion of the Euro, France will forget its recession, Italy will form a government and Spain will ignore economic armageddeon all so they can deal with the scottish pension issue for Eck. It's really that simple.
Didn't Brown screw up pension's in 2006 by raiding future reserves? Surely the question is how the UK will fund pensions without N Sea oil revenues, the deficit is already such that they cannot be met, not that Carlotta would see things from that point of view. Can the UK guarantee they can fund pensions without Scottish revenue? as they cannot even do it WITH IT! And if so, how?
The UK will print more money like it's doing now, Scotland won't be able to because it hasn't got its own currency. Haven't you worked that out yet ?
Alan, dear dear , we will print notes in our 10% of the sterling bank while your boys are printing in their share of it, we will own part of the presses so no issue.
You really think the UK is going to agree to allow Scotland to print money without permission from us?
As a sovereign nation we would not deign to even tell you we were doing it. The rump will be busy bailing out the lifeboats and will be desperately asking us for help. Most likely scenario is that we will be asking why you are not eating cake.
I always liked the nickname The Cameron Highlanders for the SNP.
I think it's safe to say that whatever pockets of Tartan Toryism still remain in the SNP, they ain't Cameroonians!
Now that's a real shame.
You may have worked out I have a thing for Military names, The Queen's Own Cameron Highlanders is a wonderful name, a name fitting their illustrious history.
Great thread David. Another possible (or not) complicating factor is how the Scots vote on separation in 2014. If our nationalist friends are to be believed once the campaign "really" starts, things will move their way. The result will have two knock on effects - how the parties subsequently do in the 2015 Westminster election, and how the argument about "Scots MPs" goes on from there - a government based on Scots MPs might have only 10 months to run, if Salmond's March 2016 timetable is met.
Meanwhile, it's been another wonderful week for Eck:
"The Icas report calls on the Scottish Government to outlines its plans for Scotland’s pension future ahead of the outcome of the referendum.
This is a bigger issue than currency. To the man and woman on the street, there are few issues more important than how they will fund their retirement.
The clock is ticking on pensions.
• David Wood is ICAS executive director, technical policy"
Oh ye of little faith. Don't you realise that Scotland will be at the top table ? Germany will put aside the implosion of the Euro, France will forget its recession, Italy will form a government and Spain will ignore economic armageddeon all so they can deal with the scottish pension issue for Eck. It's really that simple.
Didn't Brown screw up pension's in 2006 by raiding future reserves? Surely the question is how the UK will fund pensions without N Sea oil revenues, the deficit is already such that they cannot be met, not that Carlotta would see things from that point of view. Can the UK guarantee they can fund pensions without Scottish revenue? as they cannot even do it WITH IT! And if so, how?
The UK will print more money like it's doing now, Scotland won't be able to because it hasn't got its own currency. Haven't you worked that out yet ?
Alan, dear dear , we will print notes in our 10% of the sterling bank while your boys are printing in their share of it, we will own part of the presses so no issue.
LOL malc what happened all this SNP consent of the people mallarkey ? The rest of us will want a vote on currrency union, and it will be no.
Alan, if vote is YES you know well Osborne and Cameron will be begging Alex to join, on bended knee.
I now know you're all mad up there. Who on God's earth would want to team up with Osborne to manage their finances ? ;-)
We just want to see him begging then we will join the arc of prosperity and give him two fingers.
"and give him two fingers" I hope that's in the way a proctologist might .
Alan, if it was, it would be a fir tree rather than two digits.
Great thread David. Another possible (or not) complicating factor is how the Scots vote on separation in 2014. If our nationalist friends are to be believed once the campaign "really" starts, things will move their way. The result will have two knock on effects - how the parties subsequently do in the 2015 Westminster election, and how the argument about "Scots MPs" goes on from there - a government based on Scots MPs might have only 10 months to run, if Salmond's March 2016 timetable is met.
Meanwhile, it's been another wonderful week for Eck:
"The Icas report calls on the Scottish Government to outlines its plans for Scotland’s pension future ahead of the outcome of the referendum.
This is a bigger issue than currency. To the man and woman on the street, there are few issues more important than how they will fund their retirement.
The clock is ticking on pensions.
• David Wood is ICAS executive director, technical policy"
Oh ye of little faith. Don't you realise that Scotland will be at the top table ? Germany will put aside the implosion of the Euro, France will forget its recession, Italy will form a government and Spain will ignore economic armageddeon all so they can deal with the scottish pension issue for Eck. It's really that simple.
Didn't Brown screw up pension's in 2006 by raiding future reserves? Surely the question is how the UK will fund pensions without N Sea oil revenues, the deficit is already such that they cannot be met, not that Carlotta would see things from that point of view. Can the UK guarantee they can fund pensions without Scottish revenue? as they cannot even do it WITH IT! And if so, how?
The UK will print more money like it's doing now, Scotland won't be able to because it hasn't got its own currency. Haven't you worked that out yet ?
Alan, dear dear , we will print notes in our 10% of the sterling bank while your boys are printing in their share of it, we will own part of the presses so no issue.
You really think the UK is going to agree to allow Scotland to print money without permission from us?
As a sovereign nation we would not deign to even tell you we were doing it. The rump will be busy bailing out the lifeboats and will be desperately asking us for help. Most likely scenario is that we will be asking why you are not eating cake.
So you are proposing your own currency? The BoE would simply have to state "we are not LOLR for Scottish institutions and will not redeem their notes". Simple really.
@malcolmg I think calling the Scottish Accountants body "donkey unionists" unlikely to endear you to them! This is what Scottish accountants say:
"The Icas report calls on the Scottish Government to outlines its plans for Scotland’s pension future ahead of the outcome of the referendum."
Unionist lapdogs carlotta, sell their souls for a fiver
Is the definition of a unionist lapdog anyone that says anything uncomfortable for the SNP?
Not at all, however I would have respected them better if they had perhaps been highlighting these huge deficits in the past rather than lining their pockets Have they just woken up to the £237 billion black hole.
Great thread David. Another possible (or not) complicating factor is how the Scots vote on separation in 2014. If our nationalist friends are to be believed once the campaign "really" starts, things will move their way. The result will have two knock on effects - how the parties subsequently do in the 2015 Westminster election, and how the argument about "Scots MPs" goes on from there - a government based on Scots MPs might have only 10 months to run, if Salmond's March 2016 timetable is met.
Meanwhile, it's been another wonderful week for Eck:
"The Icas report calls on the Scottish Government to outlines its plans for Scotland’s pension future ahead of the outcome of the referendum.
This is a bigger issue than currency. To the man and woman on the street, there are few issues more important than how they will fund their retirement.
The clock is ticking on pensions.
• David Wood is ICAS executive director, technical policy"
Oh ye of little faith. Don't you realise that Scotland will be at the top table ? Germany will put aside the implosion of the Euro, France will forget its recession, Italy will form a government and Spain will ignore economic armageddeon all so they can deal with the scottish pension issue for Eck. It's really that simple.
Didn't Brown screw up pension's in 2006 by raiding future reserves? Surely the question is how the UK will fund pensions without N Sea oil revenues, the deficit is already such that they cannot be met, not that Carlotta would see things from that point of view. Can the UK guarantee they can fund pensions without Scottish revenue? as they cannot even do it WITH IT! And if so, how?
The UK will print more money like it's doing now, Scotland won't be able to because it hasn't got its own currency. Haven't you worked that out yet ?
Alan, dear dear , we will print notes in our 10% of the sterling bank while your boys are printing in their share of it, we will own part of the presses so no issue.
You really think the UK is going to agree to allow Scotland to print money without permission from us?
As a sovereign nation we would not deign to even tell you we were doing it. The rump will be busy bailing out the lifeboats and will be desperately asking us for help. Most likely scenario is that we will be asking why you are not eating cake.
You don't really understand how currency unions work do you? The whole point of them is that each country within them can't individually print money without permission from a higher body. If the UK and an independent Scotland had such a higher body, the UK would have 90% of the votes on that decision. If you reneged on that to try to print your own money, the Bank of England would announce that they would no longer accept Scottish bank notes and wouldn't be backing up any Scottish banks.
If so, who do you think will be in contention for the SNP nomination in the upcoming Donside by-election?
Looking at local SNP Cllrs...the names that caught my attention were the Aberdeenshire group leader who stood in Aberdeen North in 2010 GE...and Callum McCaig....would they be interested in becoming MSPs? Would they be suitable candidates for a by-election?
Andrea, Afraid not I am from Burns country, Ayrshire in south west.
Great thread David. Another possible (or not) complicating factor is how the Scots vote on separation in 2014. If our nationalist friends are to be believed once the campaign "really" starts, things will move their way. The result will have two knock on effects - how the parties subsequently do in the 2015 Westminster election, and how the argument about "Scots MPs" goes on from there - a government based on Scots MPs might have only 10 months to run, if Salmond's March 2016 timetable is met.
Meanwhile, it's been another wonderful week for Eck:
"The Icas report calls on the Scottish Government to outlines its plans for Scotland’s pension future ahead of the outcome of the referendum.
This is a bigger issue than currency. To the man and woman on the street, there are few issues more important than how they will fund their retirement.
The clock is ticking on pensions.
• David Wood is ICAS executive director, technical policy"
Oh ye of little faith. Don't you realise that Scotland will be at the top table ? Germany will put aside the implosion of the Euro, France will forget its recession, Italy will form a government and Spain will ignore economic armageddeon all so they can deal with the scottish pension issue for Eck. It's really that simple.
Didn't Brown screw up pension's in 2006 by raiding future reserves? Surely the question is how the UK will fund pensions without N Sea oil revenues, the deficit is already such that they cannot be met, not that Carlotta would see things from that point of view. Can the UK guarantee they can fund pensions without Scottish revenue? as they cannot even do it WITH IT! And if so, how?
The UK will print more money like it's doing now, Scotland won't be able to because it hasn't got its own currency. Haven't you worked that out yet ?
Alan, dear dear , we will print notes in our 10% of the sterling bank while your boys are printing in their share of it, we will own part of the presses so no issue.
You really think the UK is going to agree to allow Scotland to print money without permission from us?
As a sovereign nation we would not deign to even tell you we were doing it. The rump will be busy bailing out the lifeboats and will be desperately asking us for help. Most likely scenario is that we will be asking why you are not eating cake.
So you are proposing your own currency? The BoE would simply have to state "we are not LOLR for Scottish institutions and will not redeem their notes". Simple really.
Carlotta I don't care what the currency is as long as I can buy things with it. Any sensible person can see that it makes sense for all of the UK to continue with Sterling, given the amount of trade etc. Anybody of another opinion is either stupid or just anti Scottish independence and petty minded. Simple.
Great thread David. Another possible (or not) complicating factor is how the Scots vote on separation in 2014. If our nationalist friends are to be believed once the campaign "really" starts, things will move their way. The result will have two knock on effects - how the parties subsequently do in the 2015 Westminster election, and how the argument about "Scots MPs" goes on from there - a government based on Scots MPs might have only 10 months to run, if Salmond's March 2016 timetable is met.
Meanwhile, it's been another wonderful week for Eck:
"The Icas report calls on the Scottish Government to outlines its plans for Scotland’s pension future ahead of the outcome of the referendum.
This is a bigger issue than currency. To the man and woman on the street, there are few issues more important than how they will fund their retirement.
The clock is ticking on pensions.
• David Wood is ICAS executive director, technical policy"
Oh ye of little faith. Don't you realise that Scotland will be at the top table ? Germany will put aside the implosion of the Euro, France will forget its recession, Italy will form a government and Spain will ignore economic armageddeon all so they can deal with the scottish pension issue for Eck. It's really that simple.
Didn't Brown screw up pension's in 2006 by raiding future reserves? Surely the question is how the UK will fund pensions without N Sea oil revenues, the deficit is already such that they cannot be met, not that Carlotta would see things from that point of view. Can the UK guarantee they can fund pensions without Scottish revenue? as they cannot even do it WITH IT! And if so, how?
The UK will print more money like it's doing now, Scotland won't be able to because it hasn't got its own currency. Haven't you worked that out yet ?
Alan, dear dear , we will print notes in our 10% of the sterling bank while your boys are printing in their share of it, we will own part of the presses so no issue.
You really think the UK is going to agree to allow Scotland to print money without permission from us?
As a sovereign nation we would not deign to even tell you we were doing it. The rump will be busy bailing out the lifeboats and will be desperately asking us for help. Most likely scenario is that we will be asking why you are not eating cake.
So you are proposing your own currency? The BoE would simply have to state "we are not LOLR for Scottish institutions and will not redeem their notes". Simple really.
Given the currency merry go round I suggest Eck says he will use "the dollar". This should give him lots of leeway as there are so may dollars to chose from US, Canadian, Ozzie, NZ, Singapore, Bermuda........ Even Eck should be able to string that lot out for 18 months to make himself look consistent.
If so, who do you think will be in contention for the SNP nomination in the upcoming Donside by-election?
Looking at local SNP Cllrs...the names that caught my attention were the Aberdeenshire group leader who stood in Aberdeen North in 2010 GE...and Callum McCaig....would they be interested in becoming MSPs? Would they be suitable candidates for a by-election?
Andrea, Afraid not I am from Burns country, Ayrshire in south west.
Traditional Tory territory?
Hmmm, I think not apart from Ayrshire South , rest used to be diehard labour given mines and heavy industry. Mainly an industrial desert now and getting more and more SNP.
Luckily the scenery and coastline are gorgeous , so very pleasant if you have employment.
Great thread David. Another possible (or not) complicating factor is how the Scots vote on separation in 2014. If our nationalist friends are to be believed once the campaign "really" starts, things will move their way. The result will have two knock on effects - how the parties subsequently do in the 2015 Westminster election, and how the argument about "Scots MPs" goes on from there - a government based on Scots MPs might have only 10 months to run, if Salmond's March 2016 timetable is met.
Meanwhile, it's been another wonderful week for Eck:
"The Icas report calls on the Scottish Government to outlines its plans for Scotland’s pension future ahead of the outcome of the referendum.
This is a bigger issue than currency. To the man and woman on the street, there are few issues more important than how they will fund their retirement.
The clock is ticking on pensions.
• David Wood is ICAS executive director, technical policy"
Oh ye of little faith. Don't you realise that Scotland will be at the top table ? Germany will put aside the implosion of the Euro, France will forget its recession, Italy will form a government and Spain will ignore economic armageddeon all so they can deal with the scottish pension issue for Eck. It's really that simple.
Didn't Brown screw up pension's in 2006 by raiding future reserves? Surely the question is how the UK will fund pensions without N Sea oil revenues, the deficit is already such that they cannot be met, not that Carlotta would see things from that point of view. Can the UK guarantee they can fund pensions without Scottish revenue? as they cannot even do it WITH IT! And if so, how?
The UK will print more money like it's doing now, Scotland won't be able to because it hasn't got its own currency. Haven't you worked that out yet ?
Alan, dear dear , we will print notes in our 10% of the sterling bank while your boys are printing in their share of it, we will own part of the presses so no issue.
You really think the UK is going to agree to allow Scotland to print money without permission from us?
As a sovereign nation we would not deign to even tell you we were doing it. The rump will be busy bailing out the lifeboats and will be desperately asking us for help. Most likely scenario is that we will be asking why you are not eating cake.
So you are proposing your own currency? The BoE would simply have to state "we are not LOLR for Scottish institutions and will not redeem their notes". Simple really.
Carlotta I don't care what the currency is as long as I can buy things with it. Any sensible person can see that it makes sense for all of the UK to continue with Sterling, given the amount of trade etc. Anybody of another opinion is either stupid or just anti Scottish independence and petty minded. Simple.
and if it makes sense to continue with the currency, it makes sense to continue with with the country, well done you're getting there. :-)
No Scots will vote for Separation, whatever that is. They may however vote for Independence. I guess that idea of Americans celebrating "Separation day" on July 4th was a dud too eh?
Why are you even bothering with an inept PR tory too dumb to yet realise that Cammie doesn't even know whether he would support IN or OUT in his own fantasy Cast Iron EU Referendum pledge?
I guess I would respect Carlotta Vance more if she said fair enough and answered my question. See the other person's position without being too much of a smart arsed prat is probably a good motto for all of us.
You didn't ask a question - you made a point based on an analogy (that Scotland is a colony heading for independence, not part of a union heading for separation) that I disagree with. You do send MPs to Westminster, don't you?
I guess when I see the word separation by some Pber who discusses the matter of independence as if they know what they are talking about then I switch off. I cannot think of a single country associated with London where the country leaving Empire or Comonwealth or Britain asked for separation. Use the right term in future as you would about any other country. It is brainfart stuff, like calling all labour people commies and all Tories nazis. It is ridiculous and anyone with half a brain would realise that it is designed merely to wind up. You want a rational answer then be rational.
Great thread David. Another possible (or not) complicating factor is how the Scots vote on separation in 2014. If our nationalist friends are to be believed once the campaign "really" starts, things will move their way. The result will have two knock on effects - how the parties subsequently do in the 2015 Westminster election, and how the argument about "Scots MPs" goes on from there - a government based on Scots MPs might have only 10 months to run, if Salmond's March 2016 timetable is met.
Meanwhile, it's been another wonderful week for Eck:
"The Icas report calls on the Scottish Government to outlines its plans for Scotland’s pension future ahead of the outcome of the referendum.
This is a bigger issue than currency. To the man and woman on the street, there are few issues more important than how they will fund their retirement.
The clock is ticking on pensions.
• David Wood is ICAS executive director, technical policy"
Oh ye of little faith. Don't you realise that Scotland will be at the top table ? Germany will put aside the implosion of the Euro, France will forget its recession, Italy will form a government and Spain will ignore economic armageddeon all so they can deal with the scottish pension issue for Eck. It's really that simple.
Didn't Brown screw up pension's in 2006 by raiding future reserves? Surely the question is how the UK will fund pensions without N Sea oil revenues, the deficit is already such that they cannot be met, not that Carlotta would see things from that point of view. Can the UK guarantee they can fund pensions without Scottish revenue? as they cannot even do it WITH IT! And if so, how?
The UK will print more money like it's doing now, Scotland won't be able to because it hasn't got its own currency. Haven't you worked that out yet ?
Alan, dear dear , we will print notes in our 10% of the sterling bank while your boys are printing in their share of it, we will own part of the presses so no issue.
You really think the UK is going to agree to allow Scotland to print money without permission from us?
As a sovereign nation we would not deign to even tell you we were doing it. The rump will be busy bailing out the lifeboats and will be desperately asking us for help. Most likely scenario is that we will be asking why you are not eating cake.
So you are proposing your own currency? The BoE would simply have to state "we are not LOLR for Scottish institutions and will not redeem their notes". Simple really.
Carlotta I don't care what the currency is as long as I can buy things with it. Any sensible person can see that it makes sense for all of the UK to continue with Sterling, given the amount of trade etc. Anybody of another opinion is either stupid or just anti Scottish independence and petty minded. Simple.
and if it makes sense to continue with the currency, it makes sense to continue with with the country, well done you're getting there. :-)
Alan, the duffers had their chance even up till recently to go for devo max and blew it , they will reap the consequences and we will have to see how independence works out. It has been a desperate campaign for the unionists since they cheated the public in 1979 and result will be the break up of the UK
If so, who do you think will be in contention for the SNP nomination in the upcoming Donside by-election?
Looking at local SNP Cllrs...the names that caught my attention were the Aberdeenshire group leader who stood in Aberdeen North in 2010 GE...and Callum McCaig....would they be interested in becoming MSPs? Would they be suitable candidates for a by-election?
Andrea, Afraid not I am from Burns country, Ayrshire in south west.
Fitalass would know, she knows the SNP around there as well.
If so, who do you think will be in contention for the SNP nomination in the upcoming Donside by-election?
Looking at local SNP Cllrs...the names that caught my attention were the Aberdeenshire group leader who stood in Aberdeen North in 2010 GE...and Callum McCaig....would they be interested in becoming MSPs? Would they be suitable candidates for a by-election?
Andrea, Afraid not I am from Burns country, Ayrshire in south west.
Traditional Tory territory?
Hmmm, I think not apart from Ayrshire South , rest used to be diehard labour given mines and heavy industry. Mainly an industrial desert now and getting more and more SNP.
Luckily the scenery and coastline are gorgeous , so very pleasant if you have employment.
I've been by rail from Glasgow to Ardrossan and then by ferry onto Arran, albeit 20 years ago.
"Measles: 'greater risk of infection' in private schools Opting out of MMR vaccination could have created 'reservoirs of disease' says leading UK doctor"
If so, who do you think will be in contention for the SNP nomination in the upcoming Donside by-election?
Looking at local SNP Cllrs...the names that caught my attention were the Aberdeenshire group leader who stood in Aberdeen North in 2010 GE...and Callum McCaig....would they be interested in becoming MSPs? Would they be suitable candidates for a by-election?
Andrea, Afraid not I am from Burns country, Ayrshire in south west.
Traditional Tory territory?
Hmmm, I think not apart from Ayrshire South , rest used to be diehard labour given mines and heavy industry. Mainly an industrial desert now and getting more and more SNP.
Luckily the scenery and coastline are gorgeous , so very pleasant if you have employment.
I've been by rail from Glasgow to Ardrossan and then by ferry onto Arran, albeit 20 years ago.
If you look at the bridge in the pictures, as a boy we used to stand up there and get engulfed by the steam, it was an openwork lattice bridge , fond memories of the steam trains.
I see that the tory GHQ and Dennis Macshane has been at work disseminating anti UKIP propaganda. Funny how the Times and the Telegraph have found and are printing the same story. A last ditch effort to blunt the UKIP surge, or a daily campaign until the elections?
On the story: I'm sure a few, a very few, candidates haven't been properly vetted; but thats only to be expected after the rapid growth in membership and followers for Ukip in the last 6 months.
Great comments underneath, almost everyone says "so what Im still voting UKIP".
People that have done something wrong / said the wrong thing once or twice are only sentenced to lifelong discredit by the PC left... unless you are one of the PC left of course #RonAtkinson/Paul Elliott
Who do you think is behind the attacks on UKIP from the Tory supporting press today.
A clue.
It's not the PC left.
It does look like a concerted effort, doesn't it? All the reports are saying basically the same thing. It is rather reminiscent of the negatve reports on Clegg in the smae papers prompted by Tory HQ after the first debate during the last GE campaign.
But UKIP will have to expect this. The Tories will not give up their vote without a struggle. The thing is, most UKIP voters probably won't be that bothered anyway.
I see the BBC is having a long interview with an anti-American, anti-drone activist, and no one arguing the opposite side.
Maybe they couldn't find anyone willing to defend drone attacks?
I marvelled at the BBC's World at One on Sunday, which had a guest on to say that only 4 per cent, yes 4 per cent, of the world's terror attacks in recent years had been committed by muslims ... and their other guest was also from the left and didn't venture any contradiction. I reached for the Off Switch.
Looks like the vast, vast majority in that dataset are committed by ETA (separatists in France and Spain). Considering that ETA is now ceasing armed struggle, it seems like that numbers aren't that relevant. It also only talks about Europe, and thus ignores all the attacks in the Middle East, which is where most terrorist attacks happen.
I'd also be interested in the number of civilian casualties by each type.
Very naughty that - by starting in 2006, the commentator misses boththe London and Madrid Al-Qaeda attacks. They killed more people in the UK and Spain than all other terrorist attacks in both countries this century.
If so, who do you think will be in contention for the SNP nomination in the upcoming Donside by-election?
Looking at local SNP Cllrs...the names that caught my attention were the Aberdeenshire group leader who stood in Aberdeen North in 2010 GE...and Callum McCaig....would they be interested in becoming MSPs? Would they be suitable candidates for a by-election?
Andrea, Afraid not I am from Burns country, Ayrshire in south west.
Traditional Tory territory?
Hmmm, I think not apart from Ayrshire South , rest used to be diehard labour given mines and heavy industry. Mainly an industrial desert now and getting more and more SNP.
Luckily the scenery and coastline are gorgeous , so very pleasant if you have employment.
I've been by rail from Glasgow to Ardrossan and then by ferry onto Arran, albeit 20 years ago.
If you look at the bridge in the pictures, as a boy we used to stand up there and get engulfed by the steam, it was an openwork lattice bridge , fond memories of the steam trains.
By coincidence, happened to spot ex-LMS loco 45305 at Ilford Depot just yesterday. It was on a lowloader, so must have arrived by road, but not sure what it was doing at an electric train maintenance yard. I think the name is "Alderman AE Draper".
"Children who are given anti-racism lessons in school are more likely to be intolerant outside the classroom, a major study found yesterday.
It said accusing white pupils of racism causes animosity, and discussing sensitive ethnic concerns such as honour killings paints minority group children in a bad light.
The survey said children who live in mixed neighbourhoods are often free of hostility towards other racial groups. A Dutch study has found children who are given anti-racism lessons in school are more likely to be intolerant outside the classroom
But it found that ‘when more attention in class is being paid to the multicultural society, the liberalising effect of positive contact in class on youngsters’ xenophobic attitude decreases’.
So Labour get power and offer tax cuts to companies that promise not to pay anyone below the living wage.
Companies then go and outsource every single job that was below the living wage and then register for tax cuts.
Workers lose out, tax payers lose out, the deficit grows but Companies gain. Anyone spot the problem?
Err, yes. Everyone can. Which is why any scheme would have measures designed to prevent that happening. You could, for example, make the tax incentives only applicable to training schemes etc affecitng those being paid the living wage. Or you could only make it available to companies which ensure that contractors supplying staff to do outsourced work for them offer those staff the living wage. And so on.
I disagree, David - to the extent they have to decide soon. The LibDems must not (for their own good) pre-ordain a new coalition and setting a rule now will only ave the effect of committing them to some coalition or other, which will have a considerable impact on voting. What you need is last time: get the votes, then work out what you're going to do. All well and good if you can work out in private what you're going to do, but plausible deniability of a plan is a plus.
I guess when I see the word separation by some Pber who discusses the matter of independence as if they know what they are talking about then I switch off. I cannot think of a single country associated with London where the country leaving Empire or Comonwealth or Britain asked for separation. Use the right term in future as you would about any other country. It is brainfart stuff, like calling all labour people commies and all Tories nazis. It is ridiculous and anyone with half a brain would realise that it is designed merely to wind up. You want a rational answer then be rational.
See the other person's position without being too much of a smart arsed prat, was it? You said it.
No Scots will vote for Separation, whatever that is. They may however vote for Independence. I guess that idea of Americans celebrating "Separation day" on July 4th was a dud too eh?
Why are you even bothering with an inept PR tory too dumb to yet realise that Cammie doesn't even know whether he would support IN or OUT in his own fantasy Cast Iron EU Referendum pledge?
I guess I would respect Carlotta Vance more if she said fair enough and answered my question. See the other person's position without being too much of a smart arsed prat is probably a good motto for all of us.
You didn't ask a question - you made a point based on an analogy (that Scotland is a colony heading for independence, not part of a union heading for separation) that I disagree with. You do send MPs to Westminster, don't you?
. I cannot think of a single country associated with London where the country leaving Empire or Comonwealth or Britain asked for separation.
How many of them were in a union voluntarily entered into?
Children achieve independence from parents. Adults on dissolving their union "separate."
I'm not the one indulging in linguistic gymnastics.
Its reassuring to see just how far behind the curve the PB Tories (and Cameron and Osborne) are on this issue, and the housing issue. Jeremy Warner on the Telegraph and Boris Johnson in London are the future for Tory policy in these areas.
It's no wonder the PB Tories are addicted to the rise in benefits which Osborne has presided over. Benefit junkies all of them.
But they are the past, locked into the 1979-2015 consensus, yesterdays men, they just can't see it, the benefit cap keeps them warm.
It is bizarre that so many Tories are reluctant to think creatively on this. The idea that you can sustain a society in which only the top few percent enjoy improving living standards is pretty far fetched. The Tories like to talk about southern Europe, they should look at what's happening there as voters realise it's not going to get any better any time soon.
A recommendation is made by the independent Low Pay Commission as to the minimum wage each year, specifically what the country can best afford to do. A move to a Living Wage would, depending on implementation, be similar or very similar to a significant increase in the National Minimum Wage. Whilst there is now a wide consensus (I have posted on this previously) that the introduction of the NMW did not cause changes in employment or inflation, the LPC will surely be aware of this.
It lays out in some considerable detail the reasons why, in the opinion of the Commission, a large increase is not suitable at the present time. Once the UK returns to solid growth, that principle will necessarily need to be re-examined.
I see the BBC is having a long interview with an anti-American, anti-drone activist, and no one arguing the opposite side.
Maybe they couldn't find anyone willing to defend drone attacks?
I marvelled at the BBC's World at One on Sunday, which had a guest on to say that only 4 per cent, yes 4 per cent, of the world's terror attacks in recent years had been committed by muslims ... and their other guest was also from the left and didn't venture any contradiction. I reached for the Off Switch.
Looks like the vast, vast majority in that dataset are committed by ETA (separatists in France and Spain). Considering that ETA is now ceasing armed struggle, it seems like that numbers aren't that relevant. It also only talks about Europe, and thus ignores all the attacks in the Middle East, which is where most terrorist attacks happen.
I'd also be interested in the number of civilian casualties by each type.
Very naughty that - by starting in 2006, the commentator misses boththe London and Madrid Al-Qaeda attacks. They killed more people in the UK and Spain than all other terrorist attacks in both countries this century.
Correct Southam.
And what happens if you reach back to the Oklahoma bomb massacre? Or if you include the terrorist outrages that were part and parcel of the Sri Lanka civil war?
It's a very tendentious use of statistics, and should be treated with disdain.
I appreciate the time David has taken in putting this piece together and as a long-time Liberal Democrat supporter and member, it deserves what I hope is a coherent and measured response.
The first, and not insignificant point is that it takes two to tango by which I mean for any kind of Coalition (of whatever form from the current arrangement to a simple Supply & Confidence agreement) to exist presupposes two sides who want such a thing. I am far from confident that any of the Conservative, Labour or Liberal Democrat parties (with the possible exception of those closest to David Cameron and Nick Clegg for whom status quo post-2015 will look like triumphant vindication) really want to go through the Coalition Experience again.
Indeed, I'm far from convinced that were David Cameron or Nick Clegg to try to sell Coalition 2 to their parties (especially if both had lost seats to a resurgent Labour Party) they might find their own positions under threat.
Among the vast and growing circumference of things I don't know is the attitude of the Conservatives. One assumes that IF they win a majority in the next Commons, they will simply govern as a majority party. As the probability of the Conservatives being the largest party in the next Commons coincides with the certainty of them having won more votes than Labour in order to achieve that, then, subject to the Lib Dem performance, it will be up to David Cameron to determine whether he wishes to continue or redefine the Coalition (two very different things) or whether he opts to form a minority Government.
As David rightly states, it's far from inconceivable that Labour will win more seats but fewer votes than the Conservatives. IF the combined Conservative-Liberal Democrat seat tallies produce a majority and IF the two parties are able to agree to a continuation of the current arrangement, that's a workable option (though I think unlikely). So, it's back to the things I don't know and that includes Labour. IF Labour fall short of a majority but the Coinservatives and Liberal Democrats are unable to form a new Government either through lack of numbers or lack of agreement, then the ball is in Ed's court. He can decide to form a minority administration or he can seek (and it's up to him NOT the Liberal Democrat leadership) some form of working arrangement with the Lib Dems. I suspect he won't.
The pre-2010 Lib Dem line is and remains the only valid one - first refusal to the party with most votes. It is conveniently forgotten by those opposed to the Coalition that it could not have happened without David Cameron's initial offer of talks on the Friday afternoon after the election. Cameron COULD have chosen to say no to any deal and to offer to form a minority administration but he presumably wasn't prepared to gamble on the likelihood (remote) of a Labour-Lib Dem deal (short on numbers). I think that was politically weak though I praised him for it at the time.
In 2015, Ed Milliband may find himself in a similar position - does he gamble on the possibility (however remote) of a second Conservative-Lib Dem deal being achieved or does he pre-empt that by making an offer to Nick Clegg (presumably). Unlike Cameron in 2010, Milliband in 2015 will probably be second in terms of votes if he hasn't won a majority so if the Lib Dem line is the same (which in my view it should be) Ed will have to wait to see if any new Coalition or similar will be created (I suspect it won't).
Thus, for all David's earnest rhetoric about how much of a problem all this is for the Liberal Democrats, it is potentially a much thornier problem for David Cameron and Ed Milliband (or whoever leads the Conservative and Labour parties on May 8th 2015). Needless to say, any party (and I don't exclude UKIP though I consider the possibility remote) winning an overall majority (however small) in the next Commons (or coming within say less than five seats of a majority given Sinn Fein non-attendance) will render the entire discussion moot and I suspect that's what many people in all parties and no party really want.
Its reassuring to see just how far behind the curve the PB Tories (and Cameron and Osborne) are on this issue, and the housing issue. Jeremy Warner on the Telegraph and Boris Johnson in London are the future for Tory policy in these areas.
It's no wonder the PB Tories are addicted to the rise in benefits which Osborne has presided over. Benefit junkies all of them.
But they are the past, locked into the 1979-2015 consensus, yesterdays men, they just can't see it, the benefit cap keeps them warm.
It is bizarre that so many Tories are reluctant to think creatively on this. The idea that you can sustain a society in which only the top few percent enjoy improving living standards is pretty far fetched. The Tories like to talk about southern Europe, they should look at what's happening there as voters realise it's not going to get any better any time soon.
Why did you find it beyond your means to apologise for misquoting me yesterday? Seeing you use the word "bizarre" reminded me.
Its reassuring to see just how far behind the curve the PB Tories (and Cameron and Osborne) are on this issue, and the housing issue. Jeremy Warner on the Telegraph and Boris Johnson in London are the future for Tory policy in these areas.
It's no wonder the PB Tories are addicted to the rise in benefits which Osborne has presided over. Benefit junkies all of them.
But they are the past, locked into the 1979-2015 consensus, yesterdays men, they just can't see it, the benefit cap keeps them warm.
It is bizarre that so many Tories are reluctant to think creatively on this. The idea that you can sustain a society in which only the top few percent enjoy improving living standards is pretty far fetched. The Tories like to talk about southern Europe, they should look at what's happening there as voters realise it's not going to get any better any time soon.
piffle.
those trapped in the past are the command economy junkies. Look at your proposals - to regulate, tax, move little pieces of money around and solve precisely nothing. If you want to have people with more to live on cut back the taxes and regulation and let them keep more of their own money; change the tax codes to allow companies to earn more and employ more people.; quit deluding yourself that every time you dabble you make things better.
The fact that the 787 has made one successful service flight after its grounding is hardly surprising. What matters is the likelihood of further problems occurring with the batteries in the future.
Before the problems in January, they claimed that there would be a smoke incident in 1 in every 10 million flight hours. Instead they had 2 much more serious incidents in 100,000 flight hours.
The 787 should be on probation. Instead, the media are unquestionably accepting Boeing's line on the changes.
The fact that the 787 has made one successful service flight after its grounding is hardly surprising. What matters is the likelihood of further problems occurring with the batteries in the future.
Before the problems in January, they claimed that there would be a smoke incident in 1 in every 10 million flight hours. Instead they had 2 much more serious incidents in 100,000 flight hours.
The 787 should be on probation. Instead, the media are unquestionably accepting Boeing's line on the changes.
"The media", perhaps. I'm sure airlines are doing proper assessments of whether "the fix" is a fix.
I am far from confident that any of the Conservative, Labour or Liberal Democrat parties (with the possible exception of those closest to David Cameron and Nick Clegg for whom status quo post-2015 will look like triumphant vindication) really want to go through the Coalition Experience again.
I agree with that.
EDIT That should depress LD numbers as the GE approaches.
those trapped in the past are the command economy junkies. Look at your proposals - to regulate, tax, move little pieces of money around and solve precisely nothing. If you want to have people with more to live on cut back the taxes and regulation and let them keep more of their own money; change the tax codes to allow companies to earn more and employ more people.; quit deluding yourself that every time you dabble you make things better.
So, how ARE Osborne's funding for lending /FirstBuy/HomeBuy schemes doing?
those trapped in the past are the command economy junkies. Look at your proposals - to regulate, tax, move little pieces of money around and solve precisely nothing. If you want to have people with more to live on cut back the taxes and regulation and let them keep more of their own money; change the tax codes to allow companies to earn more and employ more people.; quit deluding yourself that every time you dabble you make things better.
So, how ARE Osborne's funding for lending /FirstBuy/HomeBuy schemes doing?
best ask him, personally I think they're nonsense.
It's also interesting that even in Vettel's prime there are questions over whether it's him or his car that's the real star. Force India's deputy team principal reckons half the grid could take the title if they were driving a Red Bull: http://www.espn.co.uk/forceindia/motorsport/story/106767.html
Moving taxation from income to property should also be in the mix. The Tories are stuck in the past on that one too.
Property tax has proved to be very successful in Italy, tim.
It will probably see Berlusconi and his party back in government as part of a coalition under Letta.
Here is some news from Yahoo on progress in the negotiations:
"There's a very positive attitude by the premier-designate" toward the negotiations, Berlusconi said.
Reflecting that optimism, an auction of six-month Treasury bonds went well, according to data from Italy's central bank Friday. The interest rate dropped from 0.83 percent to 0.50 percent from the previous month, as €8 billion ($10.5 billion) in bonds were auctioned. ... A major obstacle has been a highly unpopular property tax that Berlusconi vowed to abolish if he regained power. The tax was created by Berlusconi's replacement, Premier Mario Monti, as a key revenue raiser in his bid to prevent Italy from sliding deeper into the euro zone's sovereign debt crisis.
Letta, who needs Monti's small centrist forces to create the coalition, conferred with the caretaker premier Friday morning. Monti's party has indicated the property tax could be tweaked.
Italian polling company SWG published results Friday of a survey asking voters who they would choose if the election were held now. Berlusconi's party surged in the survey, while the bickering Democratic Party lost a few percentage points. The 5-Star Movement's voters appeared to stay loyal, with no new gains.
Berlusconi is saying he'll sign up if the property tax is repealed: Monti wants it "tweaked". No deal and there will be another General Election with Berlusconi riding high in the polls. I wonder who will win this argument.
I think Ed would be better modelling his politics on Berlusconi rather than Hollande. At least the former knows what it takes to get elected and it certainly isn't the impostion of property taxes.
Some of the fiercest criticism of George Osborne can be found (surprisingly) in City AM which portrays itself as the voice of the City of London.
In last Monday's edition, Robert Wood, chief UK economist at Berenberg Bank, pointed out that Osborne's policy was a fusion of the much-vaunted Plans A and B. He pointed out that not only will public sector borrowing NOT fall between 2011-14 on current performance, it will still be £108 billion in 2014-15. Public debt will still be 100.8% of GDP in 2015.
Wood argues that for all the criticism levelled at the Eurozone and particularly Spain, Italy, Portugal and Greece, they've actually gone through the austerity process while Britain, for all its talk, gloating and pontification, has done virtually nothing and has barely started.
It's a powerful argument slating Osborne and the Coalition for failing to carry through the promises of 2010 but also challenging the two Eds by saying that in effect the Coalition, from 2010-15 has more or less pursued the same economic policy that a re-elected Labour Government would have followed from 2010.
Comments
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/liberaldemocrats/8770484/Top-50-most-influential-Liberal-Democrats-2011-1-25.html
Apart from Clegg himself, Danny Alexander and David Laws, I think it's fair to say that most of the other major players would sit more comfortably with Labour than with the Tories, but no doubt you'll correct me if I'm wrong.
The problem with coalitions is that no-one voted for *exactly* the set of interests that get to govern. So, nobody voted *for* Cameron plus Clegg.
The problem with single party government is that, while it's very representative when two parties get 80+% of the vote, it becomes increasingly less representative when that proportion drops significantly. I doubt I would be the only one who who would be deeply disturbed if a political party got an absolute majority in the House of Commons with less than 30% of the vote.
The rise of UKIP and the Greens and the SNP/PC and that funny bunch in Cornwall that SeanT like so much means we may well see ruling parties with very modest vote shares. It's not a problem *yet*; but it might become one in a few elections time.
Here is my prediction (fwiw), if the Conservatives are denied government in the next two elections by the rise of UKIP (which is not implausible), then reform of the voting system will become official Conservative Party policy. (And the Labour Party will suddenly develop a new found love for FPTP.)
Just think it is possible with a Cleggasm II.
Thought not - they are Labour-lite.
It's proven difficult for two parties to agree, can you imagine the difficulties of a coalition with say five parties.
I suspect that the leader of the largest party in seats, would prefer to go it alone than a rainbow alliance.
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2013/04/britons-still-dont-believe-that-the-tories-are-on-their-side/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=britons-still-dont-believe-that-the-tories-are-on-their-side&utm_source=Lord+Ashcroft+Polls&utm_campaign=83c29b8a1a-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email
The only way the SNP would get 30+ seats at Westminster is if there's a Yes vote, so their future relevance to any coalition would be somewhat limited. Still, it would be entertaining to see Labour holding their noses and emphasising how much they and the SNP have always had in common.
What do the SNP propose, apart from running around shouting "scaremongering!"
20 miles for a Food Bank? Is that 10 miles there and 10 miles back, or 20 miles there and 20 miles back? Please give it to me straight.
http://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/328083105510457344/photo/1
The thing is I heard this prior to the last election and we all know with whom they went into coalition with.
http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/01/terrorism-in-europe/
Out by a factor of 10!
It's 0.4%
http://www.loonwatch.com/2011/11/updated-europol-data-less-than-1-of-terrorist-attacks-by-muslims/
Now the UK does not break out acts by affiliation - but in my lifetime Muslims are roundings compared to the IRA for example.
EDIT
If you feed Con 20, Lab 20 , LD 12 into Electoral Calculus' seat predictor "Others" get 44% and 548 seats!
(they don't let you give a number for others/UKIP)
http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/userpoll.html
are you from Aberdeen?
If so, who do you think will be in contention for the SNP nomination in the upcoming Donside by-election?
Looking at local SNP Cllrs...the names that caught my attention were the Aberdeenshire group leader who stood in Aberdeen North in 2010 GE...and Callum McCaig....would they be interested in becoming MSPs? Would they be suitable candidates for a by-election?
"The Icas report calls on the Scottish Government to outlines its plans for Scotland’s pension future ahead of the outcome of the referendum."
I'd also be interested in the number of civilian casualties by each type.
Ok, thanks anyway. I don't know why I thought you were from Aberdeen!
You may have worked out I have a thing for Military names, The Queen's Own Cameron Highlanders is a wonderful name, a name fitting their illustrious history.
been highlighting these huge deficits in the past rather than lining their pockets
Have they just woken up to the £237 billion black hole.
Luckily the scenery and coastline are gorgeous , so very pleasant if you have employment.
It is brainfart stuff, like calling all labour people commies and all Tories nazis. It is ridiculous and anyone with half a brain would realise that it is designed merely to wind up. You want a rational answer then be rational.
Opting out of MMR vaccination could have created 'reservoirs of disease' says leading UK doctor"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/apr/27/uk-measles-risk-private-schools-traveller-groups?CMP=twt_fd
Doesn't actually cite any data.....
http://www.railbrit.co.uk/location.php?loc=Kilwinning
If you look at the bridge in the pictures, as a boy we used to stand up there and get engulfed by the steam, it was an openwork lattice bridge , fond memories of the steam trains.
Great comments underneath, almost everyone says "so what Im still voting UKIP".
People that have done something wrong / said the wrong thing once or twice are only sentenced to lifelong discredit by the PC left... unless you are one of the PC left of course #RonAtkinson/Paul Elliott
But the conservative party are part of the PC left in my book anyway
But UKIP will have to expect this. The Tories will not give up their vote without a struggle. The thing is, most UKIP voters probably won't be that bothered anyway.
Companies then go and outsource every single job that was below the living wage and then register for tax cuts.
Workers lose out, tax payers lose out, the deficit grows but Companies gain. Anyone spot the problem?
"Children who are given anti-racism lessons in school are more likely to be intolerant outside the classroom, a major study found yesterday.
It said accusing white pupils of racism causes animosity, and discussing sensitive ethnic concerns such as honour killings paints minority group children in a bad light.
The survey said children who live in mixed neighbourhoods are often free of hostility towards other racial groups. A Dutch study has found children who are given anti-racism lessons in school are more likely to be intolerant outside the classroom
But it found that ‘when more attention in class is being paid to the multicultural society, the liberalising effect of positive contact in class on youngsters’ xenophobic attitude decreases’.
The project carried out in the Netherlands comes at a time of controversy over the place of multiculturalism – which blames Britain for historic racism and demands the encouragement of minority cultures – in the national curriculum and teaching in British schools. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2315483/How-anti-racism-lesson-INCREASE-pupil-intolerance-They-cause-animosity-cultures.html?ico=news^headlines
Children achieve independence from parents. Adults on dissolving their union "separate."
I'm not the one indulging in linguistic gymnastics.
Their report is here.
It lays out in some considerable detail the reasons why, in the opinion of the Commission, a large increase is not suitable at the present time. Once the UK returns to solid growth, that principle will necessarily need to be re-examined.
And what happens if you reach back to the Oklahoma bomb massacre? Or if you include the terrorist outrages that were part and parcel of the Sri Lanka civil war?
It's a very tendentious use of statistics, and should be treated with disdain.
I appreciate the time David has taken in putting this piece together and as a long-time Liberal Democrat supporter and member, it deserves what I hope is a coherent and measured response.
The first, and not insignificant point is that it takes two to tango by which I mean for any kind of Coalition (of whatever form from the current arrangement to a simple Supply & Confidence agreement) to exist presupposes two sides who want such a thing. I am far from confident that any of the Conservative, Labour or Liberal Democrat parties (with the possible exception of those closest to David Cameron and Nick Clegg for whom status quo post-2015 will look like triumphant vindication) really want to go through the Coalition Experience again.
Indeed, I'm far from convinced that were David Cameron or Nick Clegg to try to sell Coalition 2 to their parties (especially if both had lost seats to a resurgent Labour Party) they might find their own positions under threat.
Among the vast and growing circumference of things I don't know is the attitude of the Conservatives. One assumes that IF they win a majority in the next Commons, they will simply govern as a majority party. As the probability of the Conservatives being the largest party in the next Commons coincides with the certainty of them having won more votes than Labour in order to achieve that, then, subject to the Lib Dem performance, it will be up to David Cameron to determine whether he wishes to continue or redefine the Coalition (two very different things) or whether he opts to form a minority Government.
As David rightly states, it's far from inconceivable that Labour will win more seats but fewer votes than the Conservatives. IF the combined Conservative-Liberal Democrat seat tallies produce a majority and IF the two parties are able to agree to a continuation of the current arrangement, that's a workable option (though I think unlikely). So, it's back to the things I don't know and that includes Labour. IF Labour fall short of a majority but the Coinservatives and Liberal Democrats are unable to form a new Government either through lack of numbers or lack of agreement, then the ball is in Ed's court. He can decide to form a minority administration or he can seek (and it's up to him NOT the Liberal Democrat leadership) some form of working arrangement with the Lib Dems. I suspect he won't.
The pre-2010 Lib Dem line is and remains the only valid one - first refusal to the party with most votes. It is conveniently forgotten by those opposed to the Coalition that it could not have happened without David Cameron's initial offer of talks on the Friday afternoon after the election. Cameron COULD have chosen to say no to any deal and to offer to form a minority administration but he presumably wasn't prepared to gamble on the likelihood (remote) of a Labour-Lib Dem deal (short on numbers). I think that was politically weak though I praised him for it at the time.
In 2015, Ed Milliband may find himself in a similar position - does he gamble on the possibility (however remote) of a second Conservative-Lib Dem deal being achieved or does he pre-empt that by making an offer to Nick Clegg (presumably). Unlike Cameron in 2010, Milliband in 2015 will probably be second in terms of votes if he hasn't won a majority so if the Lib Dem line is the same (which in my view it should be) Ed will have to wait to see if any new Coalition or similar will be created (I suspect it won't).
Thus, for all David's earnest rhetoric about how much of a problem all this is for the Liberal Democrats, it is potentially a much thornier problem for David Cameron and Ed Milliband (or whoever leads the Conservative and Labour parties on May 8th 2015). Needless to say, any party (and I don't exclude UKIP though I consider the possibility remote) winning an overall majority (however small) in the next Commons (or coming within say less than five seats of a majority given Sinn Fein non-attendance) will render the entire discussion moot and I suspect that's what many people in all parties and no party really want.
those trapped in the past are the command economy junkies. Look at your proposals - to regulate, tax, move little pieces of money around and solve precisely nothing. If you want to have people with more to live on cut back the taxes and regulation and let them keep more of their own money; change the tax codes to allow companies to earn more and employ more people.; quit deluding yourself that every time you dabble you make things better.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22315317
The fact that the 787 has made one successful service flight after its grounding is hardly surprising. What matters is the likelihood of further problems occurring with the batteries in the future.
Before the problems in January, they claimed that there would be a smoke incident in 1 in every 10 million flight hours. Instead they had 2 much more serious incidents in 100,000 flight hours.
The 787 should be on probation. Instead, the media are unquestionably accepting Boeing's line on the changes.
EDIT
That should depress LD numbers as the GE approaches.
http://www.espn.co.uk/fia/motorsport/story/106762.html
It's also interesting that even in Vettel's prime there are questions over whether it's him or his car that's the real star. Force India's deputy team principal reckons half the grid could take the title if they were driving a Red Bull:
http://www.espn.co.uk/forceindia/motorsport/story/106767.html
It will probably see Berlusconi and his party back in government as part of a coalition under Letta.
Here is some news from Yahoo on progress in the negotiations:
"There's a very positive attitude by the premier-designate" toward the negotiations, Berlusconi said.
Reflecting that optimism, an auction of six-month Treasury bonds went well, according to data from Italy's central bank Friday. The interest rate dropped from 0.83 percent to 0.50 percent from the previous month, as €8 billion ($10.5 billion) in bonds were auctioned.
...
A major obstacle has been a highly unpopular property tax that Berlusconi vowed to abolish if he regained power. The tax was created by Berlusconi's replacement, Premier Mario Monti, as a key revenue raiser in his bid to prevent Italy from sliding deeper into the euro zone's sovereign debt crisis.
Letta, who needs Monti's small centrist forces to create the coalition, conferred with the caretaker premier Friday morning. Monti's party has indicated the property tax could be tweaked.
Italian polling company SWG published results Friday of a survey asking voters who they would choose if the election were held now. Berlusconi's party surged in the survey, while the bickering Democratic Party lost a few percentage points. The 5-Star Movement's voters appeared to stay loyal, with no new gains.
Berlusconi is saying he'll sign up if the property tax is repealed: Monti wants it "tweaked". No deal and there will be another General Election with Berlusconi riding high in the polls. I wonder who will win this argument.
I think Ed would be better modelling his politics on Berlusconi rather than Hollande. At least the former knows what it takes to get elected and it certainly isn't the impostion of property taxes.
In last Monday's edition, Robert Wood, chief UK economist at Berenberg Bank, pointed out that Osborne's policy was a fusion of the much-vaunted Plans A and B. He pointed out that not only will public sector borrowing NOT fall between 2011-14 on current performance, it will still be £108 billion in 2014-15. Public debt will still be 100.8% of GDP in 2015.
Wood argues that for all the criticism levelled at the Eurozone and particularly Spain, Italy, Portugal and Greece, they've actually gone through the austerity process while Britain, for all its talk, gloating and pontification, has done virtually nothing and has barely started.
It's a powerful argument slating Osborne and the Coalition for failing to carry through the promises of 2010 but also challenging the two Eds by saying that in effect the Coalition, from 2010-15 has more or less pursued the same economic policy that a re-elected Labour Government would have followed from 2010.