Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Some positive Survation Red Wall polling for LAB – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited May 15 in General
imageSome positive Survation Red Wall polling for LAB – politicalbetting.com

Read the full story here

«1345678

Comments

  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 3,535
    edited May 11
    FPT:

    I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.

    I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.

    Where to go?

    Bled (Slovenia) if you like chilling by a lake and/or a bit of walking - easy to get out of the main touristy bit, even on foot. Cheap transfer from Ljubljana.

    Aeolian islands, but likely too much faff to get to - don't know whether there are diect flights to Sicily, but you still have to cross Sicily and then get a boat.

    Edit: And second? Love and peaceful thoughts to all :kissing_heart:
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 38,142
    Third like the Lib Dems?

    Happy birthday Mike OGH.
  • ApplicantApplicant Posts: 2,424
    Do we know how they are defining "Red Wall" here?
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 1,507
    Ah, the spring-freshness of a new thread!
  • londonpubmanlondonpubman Posts: 1,536
    ❤️ to all participants 💙
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 8,313
    Applicant said:

    Do we know how they are defining "Red Wall" here?

    +1
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 1,955
    Those are only good figures if it's seats the Tories won in 2019 in the red wall. If it includes Jarrow etc its appalling
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 21,151
    Sandpit said:

    Third like the Lib Dems?

    Happy birthday Mike OGH.

    Seconded, or perhaps rather eighthed.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 101,147
    Applicant said:

    Do we know how they are defining "Red Wall" here?

    Population sampled: All residents aged 18+ in Red Wall seats (seats in the North of England and Midlands which changed from Labour to Conservatives in the 2019 General Election).
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 8,313
    Sandpit said:

    Third like the Lib Dems?

    Not the Scottish ones.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Scottish_Parliament_election
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 16,049
    Selebian said:

    FPT:

    I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.

    I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.

    Where to go?

    Bled (Slovenia) if you like chilling by a lake and/or a bit of walking - easy to get out of the main touristy bit, even on foot. Cheap transfer from Ljubljana.

    Aeolian islands, but likely too much faff to get to - don't know whether there are diect flights to Sicily, but you still have to cross Sicily and then get a boat.

    Edit: And second? Love and peaceful thoughts to all :kissing_heart:
    How recent is the Slovenia tip? Cos tourism there just exploded 2016-18

    Personally I am going riding in Sicily for a week in June and then want to spend a week there with a car. If I want to start in Syracuse and end up at Palermo do PBers recommend driving round the bottom, round the top or across the middle? bearing in mind I will have seen a bit of the interior (Madonie to Etna) from my horse.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 16,049
    Happy birthday Mike

    Rash to advertise your dob online, mind, we'll all be hacking your crypto wallet now.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 3,530
    Is there any comparable polling prior to the last election on the same question in the same seats?
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 8,016

    Applicant said:

    Do we know how they are defining "Red Wall" here?

    Population sampled: All residents aged 18+ in Red Wall seats (seats in the North of England and Midlands which changed from Labour to Conservatives in the 2019 General Election).
    There's a bit more info here, too. https://www.ippr.org/news-and-media/press-releases/revealed-here-s-what-motivated-so-called-red-wall-voters-last-week
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 4,989
    After a “night drive” and bit of sleep I’m back in sunny Yorkshire. ☔️

    Didn’t I tell you all those stupid papers were lying about a heatwave coming!

    https://www.yr.no/nb/værvarsel/daglig-tabell/2-2633352/Storbritannia/England/York/York
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 38,596
    @Leon , what was the book ?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 21,151
    IshmaelZ said:

    Happy birthday Mike

    Rash to advertise your dob online, mind, we'll all be hacking your crypto wallet now.

    Not as if he is a Rangers supporter, mind.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 101,147

    Applicant said:

    Do we know how they are defining "Red Wall" here?

    Population sampled: All residents aged 18+ in Red Wall seats (seats in the North of England and Midlands which changed from Labour to Conservatives in the 2019 General Election).
    There's a bit more info here, too. https://www.ippr.org/news-and-media/press-releases/revealed-here-s-what-motivated-so-called-red-wall-voters-last-week
    Here’s Survation’s notes.

    https://www.survation.com/labour-has-best-understanding-of-our-local-area-in-poll-of-red-wall-seats/
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 38,596
    Interesting account of J D Vance.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/05/jd-vance-trump-republican-frumforum/629814/
    The J. D. Vance I Knew

    Worth keeping an eye on for the 2028 presidential race.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 3,530

    boulay said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Which part of "control our borders" included "zero border checks" ?

    Brexit is a shitshow, and will remain so long after those who voted for it are dead.

    “Control our borders” including having “zero border checks” is by definition controlling our borders.

    We control whether we check or don’t. Not a complicated concept.

    You control your front door - you can choose to lock it or leave the door swinging open - whatever option you choose based on what’s best for your family - you are controlling it - your neighbour isn’t.
    This is true enough. However, I am pretty sure that "wide open with no checks" was neither what the Vote Leave campaign were proposing nor what leave voters believed they would get.

    If we choose to maintain the same control of our borders (none) but suffer greatly from the other side controlling their border (goods and people) then what have we gained? Brexit was supposed to make people's lived experience better, not worse.
    Vote Leave and Boris Johnson specifically proposed shedding the EU's protectionism.

    http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/vote_leave_to_create_300_000_british_jobs.html

    We're doing exactly that in dropping the EU's checks with non-EU produce, where its not necessary. Something we couldn't do as EU members. This is exactly what I voted for and what swung me from Remain to Leave.

    Vote Leave to create 300,000 British jobs
    May 12, 2016
    In the last few years, the EU has sought to complete five key trade deals, with the USA, Japan, ASEAN, India and Mercosur. Because of protectionism in other European countries, the EU has failed to get a trade deal with any of these countries.
    When we Vote Leave we will be able to do trade deals with all of these countries much more quickly. According to the EU’s own figures this will create 284,000 new jobs in the UK.
    Commenting, Boris Johnson said:

    'If we Vote Leave we will be able to forge bold new trade deals with growing economies around the world. These are deals that the EU has tried and failed to achieve due to protectionist forces in Europe.

    ‘After we liberate ourselves from the shackles of Brussels we will be able to create hundreds of thousands of new jobs right across the UK.

    ‘Predictably the gloomsters want to do down Britain - they claim we are not strong enough to stand on our own two feet. What total tosh. There is a huge world of opportunity and prosperity out there if we take this opportunity to take back control.’
    Oh do stop it. Brexit was pointless. There are no upsides unless you are Boris Johnson, Boris Johnson's band of hopeless-cases-who-wouldn't-be-appointed-by-anyone-else, and a few hedge funds. I know you don't want to accept you were gulled, but you were.

    We all now have to live with it, but trying to invent "benefits of Brexit" is about as absurd as Putin trying to invent benefits from his invasion.
    Oh give over.

    We already have a trade deal agreed with the country I grew up in. That didn't exist pre-Brexit and wasn't possible as an EU member. That is a real benefit, right there.
    Its certainly a benefit to New Zealand! Or will be in a decade when it comes into effect. Less of a benefit for British farmers though, which is who the government claimed to be helping by quitting the (massively flawed) CAP.
    Bart doesn't like farmers or anyone else that isn't like him (a very small clique), so he doesn't care.
    You're kind of right actually.

    Why should I like farmers? Or anyone else I don't know, whether they're like me or not?

    I neither like nor dislike farmers, I am entirely agnostic to them and everyone else I don't know. If farmers do well then great, good for them. If they don't, then that's OK too, let them get out of business and let a more productive farmer use the land or find an alternative use for the land instead.

    I don't care about farmers any more than I would have cared about miners had I not been a baby when that was happening. We needed coal for electricity for three decades after the miners lost their jobs - did you care about them enough to think we should have prevented the closure of the mines?
    You prove my point; you are like a stereotype of an extreme left winger; completely devoid of empathy for anyone, unless you feel that they are a bit like you. You are in favour of all sorts of privilege unless they are privileges you can't access yourself. Pretty sad outlook on life really.
    I have empathy for others, I just don't cherrypick farmers (or any other self-interested group) over others.

    Were we wrong to let the mines close in the 80s?

    Was it wrong to let British Leyland ultimately fail?

    Was it wrong to allow the Luddites not to succeed in blocking new technology that put them out of work?

    I don't believe in Ludditism. I believe that chaotic evolution and the free market allows the best for all in the long run - and that support should be offered as a safety net for those who struggle as opposed to a way of life or "picking winners".
    Lol. You will soon be bleating about house prices or some other thing that "is not fair", and how the state should intervene on your behalf to redress the balance. Good post though, almost made you sound pseudo-intellectual, even though it was all bollox that will change with the wind no doubt.
    My objection is to the state interfering in the market preventing people building homes.

    I extend my belief in the free market to land. Anyone should be able to use their own land for whatever they choose, including constructing homes, if they prefer that, within reason.

    I don't want the state interfering getting into construction or anything else. I want deregulation and the state to get out of the way.
    You want something that you think might benefit you personally. Pure and simple.
    No, I'm consistent. I don't believe the state should be telling us how to run our lives, or the economy.

    If someone wants a home, they should be able to build one, wherever they want if the land is theirs.

    If someone wants to sleep with a consenting adult, they should be able to do so, so long as both consent.

    Etc etc - its not the state's business what adults do with their own property or their own lives.
    Thankfully for the rest of us we are happy to delegate a certain amount of freedom so that our next door neighbour on one side doesn't decide it is their right to build a glue factory next to our garden and the neighbour on the other side set up a 24 hour brothel with outdoor music venue.

    There are reasons why your simplistic views tend to be regarded as a bit silly.
    I'd have no objection to a 24 hour brothel opening near me, so long as everyone there is a consenting adult, but there are noise pollution regulations regarding outdoor music which are regulated by the Environmental Health Agency. I've never proposed getting rid of anti-pollution regulations.

    So long as the brothel, or the glue factory, aren't polluting absolutely holding back development is a bad thing. If they are polluting, then special zoning and regulations for polluting industries makes a lot of sense.

    If your residential next door neighbour is a twat who makes a lot of outdoor noise 24/7 they'll swiftly get visited by the Police or similar because the noise pollution rules apply to all including residential neighbours too.
    In what ways are planning rules any more anti-libertarian than the rules you have just suggested? Keep the planning laws, by all means reform, but no planning is about as silly as removing the restrictions you just mentioned. Good attempt though "Bart", but nil points for debate!
    Because rules on pollution are about protecting others from the harm of pollution and setting standards that anyone can operate by, so long as they don't pollute.

    Restrictions in order to inflate certain people's assets and take away the rights of others to act, even if they're not harming others, is not the same thing.

    As you've said, you don't want housing assets to fall in value. That's just protectionism and market rigging - let the free market determine the fair free value of housing, the state shouldn't be involved in price gouging.
  • ApplicantApplicant Posts: 2,424
    edited May 11
    .

    Applicant said:

    Do we know how they are defining "Red Wall" here?

    Population sampled: All residents aged 18+ in Red Wall seats (seats in the North of England and Midlands which changed from Labour to Conservatives in the 2019 General Election).
    OK, so they've missed a fair few. I'd have preferred including any Labour held seats that the Tories missed by less than, say, 10% too because of the BXP factor - eg they wouldn't have included Hartlepool.

    They've also included some that I'm not sure should count as Red Wall - scanning the list, there are plenty of traditional marginals that don't (or shouldn't) count as Red Wall.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 1,955

    Applicant said:

    Do we know how they are defining "Red Wall" here?

    Population sampled: All residents aged 18+ in Red Wall seats (seats in the North of England and Midlands which changed from Labour to Conservatives in the 2019 General Election).
    Then it is pretty good polling for Labour. Doesn't suggest they win everything back though
  • LeonLeon Posts: 19,362
    Nigelb said:

    @Leon , what was the book ?

    Armenian Golgotha, by Grigoris Balakian

    Slightly slow start, but when he gets to the eye witness account of the genocide, my God

    It’s right up there with the famous memoirs about Auschwitz. Perhaps more impactful because so much of it is unknown - and I consider myself quite well read, historically

    eg I had no idea so much of the genocide happened in northern Syria. I never knew that Armenians lived there in large numbers. Perhaps I didn’t know because the Turks killed them all, so there’s none left
  • LeonLeon Posts: 19,362
    edited May 11
    IshmaelZ said:

    Selebian said:

    FPT:

    I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.

    I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.

    Where to go?

    Bled (Slovenia) if you like chilling by a lake and/or a bit of walking - easy to get out of the main touristy bit, even on foot. Cheap transfer from Ljubljana.

    Aeolian islands, but likely too much faff to get to - don't know whether there are diect flights to Sicily, but you still have to cross Sicily and then get a boat.

    Edit: And second? Love and peaceful thoughts to all :kissing_heart:
    How recent is the Slovenia tip? Cos tourism there just exploded 2016-18

    Personally I am going riding in Sicily for a week in June and then want to spend a week there with a car. If I want to start in Syracuse and end up at Palermo do PBers recommend driving round the bottom, round the top or across the middle? bearing in mind I will have seen a bit of the interior (Madonie to Etna) from my horse.
    Round the top, go north then east to Palermo

    The interior can be a bit boring and bleak. Especially in summer when the heat drives everyone indoors all day
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 8,313
    edited May 11

    Applicant said:

    I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.

    I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.

    Where to go?

    You can probably do the touristy bits of the three Baltic countries in a week? Or maybe Sweden? @Cicero and/or @StuartDickson would no doubt be happy to advise.
    Ah, should have said, I've been to the baltic countries and I don't want to be running around multiple places, I just want to settle into a hotel somewhere with my laptop and occasionally go out and eat and potter around [place with an interesting vibe].
    You can fly to the new Scandinavian Mountains Airport, up in the high hills, right on the Swedish/Norwegian border. Flights from London, Groningen and Luxembourg, but not Berlin or Amsterdam. Hire a “stuga” and enjoy the wildlife and natural beauty. A paradise for cyclists, fishing and hiking in the summer. Five or six big ski resorts in the winter. The Berlin flight can be dealt with by a short trip down to Oslo.

    If you want “vibe” fly to Gothenburg and spend the week on the Bohuslän coast. Absolutely bonkers. Stunningly beautiful, swimming, kayaking, nightlife, just chilling out. Laptop to your heart’s content under a parasol.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 9,198
    Nigelb said:

    Interesting account of J D Vance.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/05/jd-vance-trump-republican-frumforum/629814/
    The J. D. Vance I Knew

    Worth keeping an eye on for the 2028 presidential race.

    Whatever loony Christian QAnon adjacent twat Trump selects as his VP must be the favourite for 2028 unless the economy is fucked beyond recognition in that case the favourite must be Dem (AOC, Ossoff?).
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 4,989
    Applicant said:

    Do we know how they are defining "Red Wall" here?

    We suspect how historians will define it, as their students write dissatations about it - that place where life long Labour voted Tory once …before going back to being life long Labour 🤭

    I’ll keep saying it because I am 100% right - the problem for the Tory’s is Brexit is not done*

    *in its impact on how people vote going forward it’s not.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 27,713
    IshmaelZ said:

    Selebian said:

    FPT:

    I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.

    I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.

    Where to go?

    Bled (Slovenia) if you like chilling by a lake and/or a bit of walking - easy to get out of the main touristy bit, even on foot. Cheap transfer from Ljubljana.

    Aeolian islands, but likely too much faff to get to - don't know whether there are diect flights to Sicily, but you still have to cross Sicily and then get a boat.

    Edit: And second? Love and peaceful thoughts to all :kissing_heart:
    How recent is the Slovenia tip? Cos tourism there just exploded 2016-18

    Personally I am going riding in Sicily for a week in June and then want to spend a week there with a car. If I want to start in Syracuse and end up at Palermo do PBers recommend driving round the bottom, round the top or across the middle? bearing in mind I will have seen a bit of the interior (Madonie to Etna) from my horse.
    Went to Bled a few years ago and thoroughly enjoyed ourselves until Mrs C sprained her ankle. Slovenian medical services were excellent, though; seen pretty well immediately everywhere we had to go. Only problem was that 'as we wouldn't be able to return them' we had to buy her crutches.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 6,304
    edited May 11
    Delete duplicate
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 3,535
    IshmaelZ said:

    Selebian said:

    FPT:

    I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.

    I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.

    Where to go?

    Bled (Slovenia) if you like chilling by a lake and/or a bit of walking - easy to get out of the main touristy bit, even on foot. Cheap transfer from Ljubljana.

    Aeolian islands, but likely too much faff to get to - don't know whether there are diect flights to Sicily, but you still have to cross Sicily and then get a boat.

    Edit: And second? Love and peaceful thoughts to all :kissing_heart:
    How recent is the Slovenia tip? Cos tourism there just exploded 2016-18

    Personally I am going riding in Sicily for a week in June and then want to spend a week there with a car. If I want to start in Syracuse and end up at Palermo do PBers recommend driving round the bottom, round the top or across the middle? bearing in mind I will have seen a bit of the interior (Madonie to Etna) from my horse.
    Hmmm, work trip, must have been no later than 2014. Crikey, much longer ago than I thought... Perhaps I should not return, in case my memories are ruined!
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 6,304
    Michael Gove appears on TV and suddenly "Drugs" is trending on Twitter.
    Looking at the video... sheesh.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 6,236
    IshmaelZ said:

    Selebian said:

    FPT:

    I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.

    I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.

    Where to go?

    Bled (Slovenia) if you like chilling by a lake and/or a bit of walking - easy to get out of the main touristy bit, even on foot. Cheap transfer from Ljubljana.

    Aeolian islands, but likely too much faff to get to - don't know whether there are diect flights to Sicily, but you still have to cross Sicily and then get a boat.

    Edit: And second? Love and peaceful thoughts to all :kissing_heart:
    How recent is the Slovenia tip? Cos tourism there just exploded 2016-18

    Personally I am going riding in Sicily for a week in June and then want to spend a week there with a car. If I want to start in Syracuse and end up at Palermo do PBers recommend driving round the bottom, round the top or across the middle? bearing in mind I will have seen a bit of the interior (Madonie to Etna) from my horse.
    On a similar question, by youngest daughter has recently got a real bee in her bonnet about going to Scotland. She wants to see a mountain and a castle and a Highland Cow. Which is all very nice, but she is only seven and too small for munro bagging or too much history all in one go. Still, I'd like to take her (and her sisters, 10 and 12, and my wife) to Scotland in October. Somewhere with things to do for moderately active pre-teen girls, and somewhere where they can take in the scale of the place and be suitably awestruck. Any thoughts?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 49,748
    Nigelb said:

    Interesting account of J D Vance.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/05/jd-vance-trump-republican-frumforum/629814/
    The J. D. Vance I Knew

    Worth keeping an eye on for the 2028 presidential race.

    Definitely one to keep an eye on for future POTUS run.

  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 8,313
    Looks like the royals are showing a renewed interest in their Scottish titles: Rothesay, Strathearn etc. Might mean something. Might not.

    https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1608576/prince-william-kate-middleton-title-change-scotland-evg
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 3,530
    Cookie said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Selebian said:

    FPT:

    I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.

    I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.

    Where to go?

    Bled (Slovenia) if you like chilling by a lake and/or a bit of walking - easy to get out of the main touristy bit, even on foot. Cheap transfer from Ljubljana.

    Aeolian islands, but likely too much faff to get to - don't know whether there are diect flights to Sicily, but you still have to cross Sicily and then get a boat.

    Edit: And second? Love and peaceful thoughts to all :kissing_heart:
    How recent is the Slovenia tip? Cos tourism there just exploded 2016-18

    Personally I am going riding in Sicily for a week in June and then want to spend a week there with a car. If I want to start in Syracuse and end up at Palermo do PBers recommend driving round the bottom, round the top or across the middle? bearing in mind I will have seen a bit of the interior (Madonie to Etna) from my horse.
    On a similar question, by youngest daughter has recently got a real bee in her bonnet about going to Scotland. She wants to see a mountain and a castle and a Highland Cow. Which is all very nice, but she is only seven and too small for munro bagging or too much history all in one go. Still, I'd like to take her (and her sisters, 10 and 12, and my wife) to Scotland in October. Somewhere with things to do for moderately active pre-teen girls, and somewhere where they can take in the scale of the place and be suitably awestruck. Any thoughts?
    May seem obvious but Edinburgh is a lovely city to visit. Got the zoo, the Royal Mile, the castle, parks, lots of sites and plenty of hills for active walking but nothings too far if you need to carry her on your shoulders if she gets tired.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 19,362
    edited May 11
    Cookie said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Selebian said:

    FPT:

    I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.

    I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.

    Where to go?

    Bled (Slovenia) if you like chilling by a lake and/or a bit of walking - easy to get out of the main touristy bit, even on foot. Cheap transfer from Ljubljana.

    Aeolian islands, but likely too much faff to get to - don't know whether there are diect flights to Sicily, but you still have to cross Sicily and then get a boat.

    Edit: And second? Love and peaceful thoughts to all :kissing_heart:
    How recent is the Slovenia tip? Cos tourism there just exploded 2016-18

    Personally I am going riding in Sicily for a week in June and then want to spend a week there with a car. If I want to start in Syracuse and end up at Palermo do PBers recommend driving round the bottom, round the top or across the middle? bearing in mind I will have seen a bit of the interior (Madonie to Etna) from my horse.
    On a similar question, by youngest daughter has recently got a real bee in her bonnet about going to Scotland. She wants to see a mountain and a castle and a Highland Cow. Which is all very nice, but she is only seven and too small for munro bagging or too much history all in one go. Still, I'd like to take her (and her sisters, 10 and 12, and my wife) to Scotland in October. Somewhere with things to do for moderately active pre-teen girls, and somewhere where they can take in the scale of the place and be suitably awestruck. Any thoughts?
    The obvious place is Skye, but then everyone else thinks the same (as we have discussed on here). Busy in summer. The Sleat peninsula is quieter and rather lovely

    Harris is really beautiful but harder to get to, less to do and see

    Eveywhere will have midges

    EDIT: I see you’re going in October. Don’t worry about midges. Worry about the weather

  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 4,263
    I thought I'd escape the hilarious acrimony of the last thread by switching on PMQs for some sweetness and light.
    But there's no PMQs. Why's that?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 38,596
    Dura_Ace said:

    Nigelb said:

    Interesting account of J D Vance.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/05/jd-vance-trump-republican-frumforum/629814/
    The J. D. Vance I Knew

    Worth keeping an eye on for the 2028 presidential race.

    Whatever loony Christian QAnon adjacent twat Trump selects as his VP must be the favourite for 2028 unless the economy is fucked beyond recognition in that case the favourite must be Dem (AOC, Ossoff?).
    Didn't work for Pence.

    Vance looks to be an operator of sufficient combined ability and cynicism to have a shot.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 19,698
    edited May 11
    As noted above. These seats are very heterogeneous. There are a fair few which would be expected to be won by either Party with an 80 seat majority (marginals basically).
    There are also ones where the demographic drift has been to the Tories for a fair while.
    Labour did pretty well in some. Cumberland and West Yorkshire for example. OK in others. Poorly in yet more.
    It's almost as if it isn't one place.
    Generalisations about the Red Wall are usually just that.
    And that, too is a generalisation.
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 1,507
    Cookie said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Selebian said:

    FPT:

    I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.

    I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.

    Where to go?

    Bled (Slovenia) if you like chilling by a lake and/or a bit of walking - easy to get out of the main touristy bit, even on foot. Cheap transfer from Ljubljana.

    Aeolian islands, but likely too much faff to get to - don't know whether there are diect flights to Sicily, but you still have to cross Sicily and then get a boat.

    Edit: And second? Love and peaceful thoughts to all :kissing_heart:
    How recent is the Slovenia tip? Cos tourism there just exploded 2016-18

    Personally I am going riding in Sicily for a week in June and then want to spend a week there with a car. If I want to start in Syracuse and end up at Palermo do PBers recommend driving round the bottom, round the top or across the middle? bearing in mind I will have seen a bit of the interior (Madonie to Etna) from my horse.
    On a similar question, by youngest daughter has recently got a real bee in her bonnet about going to Scotland. She wants to see a mountain and a castle and a Highland Cow. Which is all very nice, but she is only seven and too small for munro bagging or too much history all in one go. Still, I'd like to take her (and her sisters, 10 and 12, and my wife) to Scotland in October. Somewhere with things to do for moderately active pre-teen girls, and somewhere where they can take in the scale of the place and be suitably awestruck. Any thoughts?
    The difficulty is the balance between things to do, and "things to do". If "moderately active" and great scenery is the goal, can I recommend a trip up to the Black Isle - loads of great walks but not mountains. And you can have a stop-off in e.g. Edinburgh on the way up and back, and do "City things" (museums, galleries, etc.) for a change in pace.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 43,917

    Applicant said:

    Do we know how they are defining "Red Wall" here?

    Population sampled: All residents aged 18+ in Red Wall seats (seats in the North of England and Midlands which changed from Labour to Conservatives in the 2019 General Election).
    Then it is pretty good polling for Labour. Doesn't suggest they win everything back though
    Plus - mid-term polling....
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 6,304
    Cookie said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Selebian said:

    FPT:

    I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.

    I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.

    Where to go?

    Bled (Slovenia) if you like chilling by a lake and/or a bit of walking - easy to get out of the main touristy bit, even on foot. Cheap transfer from Ljubljana.

    Aeolian islands, but likely too much faff to get to - don't know whether there are diect flights to Sicily, but you still have to cross Sicily and then get a boat.

    Edit: And second? Love and peaceful thoughts to all :kissing_heart:
    How recent is the Slovenia tip? Cos tourism there just exploded 2016-18

    Personally I am going riding in Sicily for a week in June and then want to spend a week there with a car. If I want to start in Syracuse and end up at Palermo do PBers recommend driving round the bottom, round the top or across the middle? bearing in mind I will have seen a bit of the interior (Madonie to Etna) from my horse.
    On a similar question, by youngest daughter has recently got a real bee in her bonnet about going to Scotland. She wants to see a mountain and a castle and a Highland Cow. Which is all very nice, but she is only seven and too small for munro bagging or too much history all in one go. Still, I'd like to take her (and her sisters, 10 and 12, and my wife) to Scotland in October. Somewhere with things to do for moderately active pre-teen girls, and somewhere where they can take in the scale of the place and be suitably awestruck. Any thoughts?
    A small herd of Highland coos are to be seen roaming around the north Pentlands, accessible from Swanston. You can sometimes get quite close to them, unfenced, which is a thrill.
    There's also a dry ski slope very close to that but I don't know the details for getting on the slope. It looks kid friendly, though, judging by the young families I've seen there. You can get up the northern peaks of the Pentlands quite easily but they aren't proper mountains.

    Munro bagging is possible even with small legs. The ski centre at the Spittal of Glenshee has several very accessible Munros, and even a 7-year old will make it to the top of Carn Aosda or Cairnwell. It's about 300m climb from the car park, and it's proper mountains up there.
  • ApplicantApplicant Posts: 2,424

    I thought I'd escape the hilarious acrimony of the last thread by switching on PMQs for some sweetness and light.
    But there's no PMQs. Why's that?

    There's never PMQs until the Queen's Speech debate is finished, IIRC.

    I guess because technically there's a chance it could be defeated, in which case there would be a new PM to face the Qs. Or an election.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 6,304
    Farooq said:

    Cookie said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Selebian said:

    FPT:

    I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.

    I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.

    Where to go?

    Bled (Slovenia) if you like chilling by a lake and/or a bit of walking - easy to get out of the main touristy bit, even on foot. Cheap transfer from Ljubljana.

    Aeolian islands, but likely too much faff to get to - don't know whether there are diect flights to Sicily, but you still have to cross Sicily and then get a boat.

    Edit: And second? Love and peaceful thoughts to all :kissing_heart:
    How recent is the Slovenia tip? Cos tourism there just exploded 2016-18

    Personally I am going riding in Sicily for a week in June and then want to spend a week there with a car. If I want to start in Syracuse and end up at Palermo do PBers recommend driving round the bottom, round the top or across the middle? bearing in mind I will have seen a bit of the interior (Madonie to Etna) from my horse.
    On a similar question, by youngest daughter has recently got a real bee in her bonnet about going to Scotland. She wants to see a mountain and a castle and a Highland Cow. Which is all very nice, but she is only seven and too small for munro bagging or too much history all in one go. Still, I'd like to take her (and her sisters, 10 and 12, and my wife) to Scotland in October. Somewhere with things to do for moderately active pre-teen girls, and somewhere where they can take in the scale of the place and be suitably awestruck. Any thoughts?
    A small herd of Highland coos are to be seen roaming around the north Pentlands, accessible from Swanston. You can sometimes get quite close to them, unfenced, which is a thrill.
    There's also a dry ski slope very close to that but I don't know the details for getting on the slope. It looks kid friendly, though, judging by the young families I've seen there. You can get up the northern peaks of the Pentlands quite easily but they aren't proper mountains.

    Munro bagging is possible even with small legs. The ski centre at the Spittal of Glenshee has several very accessible Munros, and even a 7-year old will make it to the top of Carn Aosda or Cairnwell. It's about 300m climb from the car park, and it's proper mountains up there.
    EDIT: the Swanston coos roam a large area, so it's not guaranteed
  • RobDRobD Posts: 57,209

    I thought I'd escape the hilarious acrimony of the last thread by switching on PMQs for some sweetness and light.
    But there's no PMQs. Why's that?

    Queen's speech debate?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 38,142
    Cookie said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Selebian said:

    FPT:

    I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.

    I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.

    Where to go?

    Bled (Slovenia) if you like chilling by a lake and/or a bit of walking - easy to get out of the main touristy bit, even on foot. Cheap transfer from Ljubljana.

    Aeolian islands, but likely too much faff to get to - don't know whether there are diect flights to Sicily, but you still have to cross Sicily and then get a boat.

    Edit: And second? Love and peaceful thoughts to all :kissing_heart:
    How recent is the Slovenia tip? Cos tourism there just exploded 2016-18

    Personally I am going riding in Sicily for a week in June and then want to spend a week there with a car. If I want to start in Syracuse and end up at Palermo do PBers recommend driving round the bottom, round the top or across the middle? bearing in mind I will have seen a bit of the interior (Madonie to Etna) from my horse.
    On a similar question, by youngest daughter has recently got a real bee in her bonnet about going to Scotland. She wants to see a mountain and a castle and a Highland Cow. Which is all very nice, but she is only seven and too small for munro bagging or too much history all in one go. Still, I'd like to take her (and her sisters, 10 and 12, and my wife) to Scotland in October. Somewhere with things to do for moderately active pre-teen girls, and somewhere where they can take in the scale of the place and be suitably awestruck. Any thoughts?
    Skye is pretty impressive, or take them monster-hunting to Loch Ness.
  • state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 4,399
    Cookie said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Selebian said:

    FPT:

    I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.

    I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.

    Where to go?

    Bled (Slovenia) if you like chilling by a lake and/or a bit of walking - easy to get out of the main touristy bit, even on foot. Cheap transfer from Ljubljana.

    Aeolian islands, but likely too much faff to get to - don't know whether there are diect flights to Sicily, but you still have to cross Sicily and then get a boat.

    Edit: And second? Love and peaceful thoughts to all :kissing_heart:
    How recent is the Slovenia tip? Cos tourism there just exploded 2016-18

    Personally I am going riding in Sicily for a week in June and then want to spend a week there with a car. If I want to start in Syracuse and end up at Palermo do PBers recommend driving round the bottom, round the top or across the middle? bearing in mind I will have seen a bit of the interior (Madonie to Etna) from my horse.
    On a similar question, by youngest daughter has recently got a real bee in her bonnet about going to Scotland. She wants to see a mountain and a castle and a Highland Cow. Which is all very nice, but she is only seven and too small for munro bagging or too much history all in one go. Still, I'd like to take her (and her sisters, 10 and 12, and my wife) to Scotland in October. Somewhere with things to do for moderately active pre-teen girls, and somewhere where they can take in the scale of the place and be suitably awestruck. Any thoughts?
    A seven year old she will have heard the story of the Loch Ness monster so I would go Nessie spotting.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 8,313
    Edinburgh appears to be edging towards a minority SNP-Green coalition running the city after Scottish Labour bosses made clear they would block a continuation of the SNP-Labour partnership which has been in power for the past five years.

    Sources said the Capital's Labour group leader Cammy Day had been in talks with Scottish party headquarters about the possibility of renewing the SNP-Labour coalition, but it was made clear such a move would be vetoed.

    Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar said ahead of last week's elections he did not want formal council coalitions between Labour and other parties, especially the Tories or SNP. But it is understood Councillor Day was keen to see if there could be some flexibility. However, a source said: “The message he got back was No.”

    The SNP won 19 seats at the election, Labour 13, the Lib Dems 12, Greens 10 and Tories nine.

    Other potential combinations which have been floated include a Labour, Lib Dem, Green coalition, which would add up to a majority or a Labour-Lib Dem minority coalition, but it has not been clear whether such arrangements would also fall foul of Labour’s coalition ban.

    https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/politics/council/edinburgh-council-coalition-talks-snp-green-coalition-appears-to-be-moving-closer-3688670
  • LeonLeon Posts: 19,362
    mwadams said:

    Cookie said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Selebian said:

    FPT:

    I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.

    I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.

    Where to go?

    Bled (Slovenia) if you like chilling by a lake and/or a bit of walking - easy to get out of the main touristy bit, even on foot. Cheap transfer from Ljubljana.

    Aeolian islands, but likely too much faff to get to - don't know whether there are diect flights to Sicily, but you still have to cross Sicily and then get a boat.

    Edit: And second? Love and peaceful thoughts to all :kissing_heart:
    How recent is the Slovenia tip? Cos tourism there just exploded 2016-18

    Personally I am going riding in Sicily for a week in June and then want to spend a week there with a car. If I want to start in Syracuse and end up at Palermo do PBers recommend driving round the bottom, round the top or across the middle? bearing in mind I will have seen a bit of the interior (Madonie to Etna) from my horse.
    On a similar question, by youngest daughter has recently got a real bee in her bonnet about going to Scotland. She wants to see a mountain and a castle and a Highland Cow. Which is all very nice, but she is only seven and too small for munro bagging or too much history all in one go. Still, I'd like to take her (and her sisters, 10 and 12, and my wife) to Scotland in October. Somewhere with things to do for moderately active pre-teen girls, and somewhere where they can take in the scale of the place and be suitably awestruck. Any thoughts?
    The difficulty is the balance between things to do, and "things to do". If "moderately active" and great scenery is the goal, can I recommend a trip up to the Black Isle - loads of great walks but not mountains. And you can have a stop-off in e.g. Edinburgh on the way up and back, and do "City things" (museums, galleries, etc.) for a change in pace.
    It surely has to be Skye

    Mountains: the Cuillins, some of the most impressive in Europe, despite their small size

    Highland cattle: everywhere

    Awesomeness: lochs and forests and sea and the old man of Storr

    Castles: Dunvegan! (And others)

    I took my older daughter there when she was about 8 and she adored it

    We had good weather tho…

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 38,596
    Putting pressure on Durham police is of course, quite wrong...

    https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1524138989539704832
    Priti Patel is seen congratulating Tory MP Richard Holden, seemingly in reference to his calls for police to reinvestigate the "beergate" controversy involving Sir Keir Starmer, who denies any wrongdoing.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 19,362
    Dura_Ace said:

    A creature of habit.


    Lol

    Your photoshopping skills are impressive
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 13,878
    Farooq said:

    Michael Gove appears on TV and suddenly "Drugs" is trending on Twitter.
    Looking at the video... sheesh.

    Perhaps he is a deep undercover DEA agent working to infiltrate a global drugs empire?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 21,151
    edited May 11
    Cookie said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Selebian said:

    FPT:

    I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.

    I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.

    Where to go?

    Bled (Slovenia) if you like chilling by a lake and/or a bit of walking - easy to get out of the main touristy bit, even on foot. Cheap transfer from Ljubljana.

    Aeolian islands, but likely too much faff to get to - don't know whether there are diect flights to Sicily, but you still have to cross Sicily and then get a boat.

    Edit: And second? Love and peaceful thoughts to all :kissing_heart:
    How recent is the Slovenia tip? Cos tourism there just exploded 2016-18

    Personally I am going riding in Sicily for a week in June and then want to spend a week there with a car. If I want to start in Syracuse and end up at Palermo do PBers recommend driving round the bottom, round the top or across the middle? bearing in mind I will have seen a bit of the interior (Madonie to Etna) from my horse.
    On a similar question, by youngest daughter has recently got a real bee in her bonnet about going to Scotland. She wants to see a mountain and a castle and a Highland Cow. Which is all very nice, but she is only seven and too small for munro bagging or too much history all in one go. Still, I'd like to take her (and her sisters, 10 and 12, and my wife) to Scotland in October. Somewhere with things to do for moderately active pre-teen girls, and somewhere where they can take in the scale of the place and be suitably awestruck. Any thoughts?
    Not an expert on preteens of any gender, but ...

    Thinjk about taking in Stirling for a couple of days at least - great castle, real scenery, nice town, cattle too in field or in nearby attractions. Wallace Monument, of course, and near the Trossachs for some Highland scenery. Access by train easy if that helps. That would tick the daughterly boxes pdq.

    https://www.visitscotland.com/blog/holiday-ideas/great-places-to-see-highland-cows-in-scotland/

    Maybe look at Oban for a cruise around Mull, if available?

    The Highlands can be quite a big place in terms of driving but the Trossachs should give some heather and bumps. Train/A9 to Aviemore if you want more?

    I'm tempted to say forget Ben Nevis/Fort William - not my fave area. BN is far too high/lethal for many.

    Lothians and east Borders do have plenty of castles and walks and beaches and things to do. And Edinburgh as well.

    Look at Historic Scotland and National Trust for Scotland websites.

    Possibly also National Museum of Rural Life or whatever it is called at East Kilbride - more over to the Glasgow side but still accessible enough.

    But avoid midge season in Highlands!





  • eekeek Posts: 18,825
    Regarding Q1 - it's looking like it's too late to try and get Levelling Up going before the next election.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 57,209

    Edinburgh appears to be edging towards a minority SNP-Green coalition running the city after Scottish Labour bosses made clear they would block a continuation of the SNP-Labour partnership which has been in power for the past five years.

    Sources said the Capital's Labour group leader Cammy Day had been in talks with Scottish party headquarters about the possibility of renewing the SNP-Labour coalition, but it was made clear such a move would be vetoed.

    Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar said ahead of last week's elections he did not want formal council coalitions between Labour and other parties, especially the Tories or SNP. But it is understood Councillor Day was keen to see if there could be some flexibility. However, a source said: “The message he got back was No.”

    The SNP won 19 seats at the election, Labour 13, the Lib Dems 12, Greens 10 and Tories nine.

    Other potential combinations which have been floated include a Labour, Lib Dem, Green coalition, which would add up to a majority or a Labour-Lib Dem minority coalition, but it has not been clear whether such arrangements would also fall foul of Labour’s coalition ban.

    https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/politics/council/edinburgh-council-coalition-talks-snp-green-coalition-appears-to-be-moving-closer-3688670

    Refusing to work with opposition parties at the local level is dumb, especially in Scotland where a large proportion of councils are NOC.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 1,955
    edited May 11
    Leon said:

    mwadams said:

    Cookie said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Selebian said:

    FPT:

    I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.

    I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.

    Where to go?

    Bled (Slovenia) if you like chilling by a lake and/or a bit of walking - easy to get out of the main touristy bit, even on foot. Cheap transfer from Ljubljana.

    Aeolian islands, but likely too much faff to get to - don't know whether there are diect flights to Sicily, but you still have to cross Sicily and then get a boat.

    Edit: And second? Love and peaceful thoughts to all :kissing_heart:
    How recent is the Slovenia tip? Cos tourism there just exploded 2016-18

    Personally I am going riding in Sicily for a week in June and then want to spend a week there with a car. If I want to start in Syracuse and end up at Palermo do PBers recommend driving round the bottom, round the top or across the middle? bearing in mind I will have seen a bit of the interior (Madonie to Etna) from my horse.
    On a similar question, by youngest daughter has recently got a real bee in her bonnet about going to Scotland. She wants to see a mountain and a castle and a Highland Cow. Which is all very nice, but she is only seven and too small for munro bagging or too much history all in one go. Still, I'd like to take her (and her sisters, 10 and 12, and my wife) to Scotland in October. Somewhere with things to do for moderately active pre-teen girls, and somewhere where they can take in the scale of the place and be suitably awestruck. Any thoughts?
    The difficulty is the balance between things to do, and "things to do". If "moderately active" and great scenery is the goal, can I recommend a trip up to the Black Isle - loads of great walks but not mountains. And you can have a stop-off in e.g. Edinburgh on the way up and back, and do "City things" (museums, galleries, etc.) for a change in pace.
    It surely has to be Skye

    Mountains: the Cuillins, some of the most impressive in Europe, despite their small size

    Highland cattle: everywhere

    Awesomeness: lochs and forests and sea and the old man of Storr

    Castles: Dunvegan! (And others)

    I took my older daughter there when she was about 8 and she adored it

    We had good weather tho…

    I'd add the drive across on the A87 through the five sisters is up there with glencoe as a stunning scenery drive
    And Eilean Donan on the road is a good castle for a visit
  • Alphabet_SoupAlphabet_Soup Posts: 1,451
    IshmaelZ said:

    Selebian said:

    FPT:

    I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.

    I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.

    Where to go?

    Bled (Slovenia) if you like chilling by a lake and/or a bit of walking - easy to get out of the main touristy bit, even on foot. Cheap transfer from Ljubljana.

    Aeolian islands, but likely too much faff to get to - don't know whether there are diect flights to Sicily, but you still have to cross Sicily and then get a boat.

    Edit: And second? Love and peaceful thoughts to all :kissing_heart:
    How recent is the Slovenia tip? Cos tourism there just exploded 2016-18

    Personally I am going riding in Sicily for a week in June and then want to spend a week there with a car. If I want to start in Syracuse and end up at Palermo do PBers recommend driving round the bottom, round the top or across the middle? bearing in mind I will have seen a bit of the interior (Madonie to Etna) from my horse.
    This place is worth a look:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scopello,_Trapani

    A post-industrial tuna factory, re-purposed as a small-scale resort.
  • ApplicantApplicant Posts: 2,424
    Applicant said:

    I thought I'd escape the hilarious acrimony of the last thread by switching on PMQs for some sweetness and light.
    But there's no PMQs. Why's that?

    There's never PMQs until the Queen's Speech debate is finished, IIRC.

    I guess because technically there's a chance it could be defeated, in which case there would be a new PM to face the Qs. Or an election.
    Another thought: all questions fall at prorogation and can't be tabled again until Queen's Speech day, so presumably there's not time to arrange them for the first week
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 21,151

    Cookie said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Selebian said:

    FPT:

    I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.

    I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.

    Where to go?

    Bled (Slovenia) if you like chilling by a lake and/or a bit of walking - easy to get out of the main touristy bit, even on foot. Cheap transfer from Ljubljana.

    Aeolian islands, but likely too much faff to get to - don't know whether there are diect flights to Sicily, but you still have to cross Sicily and then get a boat.

    Edit: And second? Love and peaceful thoughts to all :kissing_heart:
    How recent is the Slovenia tip? Cos tourism there just exploded 2016-18

    Personally I am going riding in Sicily for a week in June and then want to spend a week there with a car. If I want to start in Syracuse and end up at Palermo do PBers recommend driving round the bottom, round the top or across the middle? bearing in mind I will have seen a bit of the interior (Madonie to Etna) from my horse.
    On a similar question, by youngest daughter has recently got a real bee in her bonnet about going to Scotland. She wants to see a mountain and a castle and a Highland Cow. Which is all very nice, but she is only seven and too small for munro bagging or too much history all in one go. Still, I'd like to take her (and her sisters, 10 and 12, and my wife) to Scotland in October. Somewhere with things to do for moderately active pre-teen girls, and somewhere where they can take in the scale of the place and be suitably awestruck. Any thoughts?
    A seven year old she will have heard the story of the Loch Ness monster so I would go Nessie spotting.
    Maybe a cruise from Inverness, if going that way, visiting Urquhart castgle for a break ashore.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 6,236
    Farooq said:

    Cookie said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Selebian said:

    FPT:

    I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.

    I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.

    Where to go?

    Bled (Slovenia) if you like chilling by a lake and/or a bit of walking - easy to get out of the main touristy bit, even on foot. Cheap transfer from Ljubljana.

    Aeolian islands, but likely too much faff to get to - don't know whether there are diect flights to Sicily, but you still have to cross Sicily and then get a boat.

    Edit: And second? Love and peaceful thoughts to all :kissing_heart:
    How recent is the Slovenia tip? Cos tourism there just exploded 2016-18

    Personally I am going riding in Sicily for a week in June and then want to spend a week there with a car. If I want to start in Syracuse and end up at Palermo do PBers recommend driving round the bottom, round the top or across the middle? bearing in mind I will have seen a bit of the interior (Madonie to Etna) from my horse.
    On a similar question, by youngest daughter has recently got a real bee in her bonnet about going to Scotland. She wants to see a mountain and a castle and a Highland Cow. Which is all very nice, but she is only seven and too small for munro bagging or too much history all in one go. Still, I'd like to take her (and her sisters, 10 and 12, and my wife) to Scotland in October. Somewhere with things to do for moderately active pre-teen girls, and somewhere where they can take in the scale of the place and be suitably awestruck. Any thoughts?
    A small herd of Highland coos are to be seen roaming around the north Pentlands, accessible from Swanston. You can sometimes get quite close to them, unfenced, which is a thrill.
    There's also a dry ski slope very close to that but I don't know the details for getting on the slope. It looks kid friendly, though, judging by the young families I've seen there. You can get up the northern peaks of the Pentlands quite easily but they aren't proper mountains.

    Munro bagging is possible even with small legs. The ski centre at the Spittal of Glenshee has several very accessible Munros, and even a 7-year old will make it to the top of Carn Aosda or Cairnwell. It's about 300m climb from the car park, and it's proper mountains up there.
    Brilliant - I've just looked up those munros, and they would be perfect - I had no idea there were munros so accessible to children! She would love that. I might even get my wife up it.
    BT's suggestion of Edinburgh is also noted - maybe a two centre trip: the Cairngorms and Edinburgh - and perhaps leave Leon's suggestion of Skye and/or the Hebrides for a separate trip.
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 1,507
    edited May 11
    Leon said:

    mwadams said:

    Cookie said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Selebian said:

    FPT:

    I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.

    I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.

    Where to go?

    Bled (Slovenia) if you like chilling by a lake and/or a bit of walking - easy to get out of the main touristy bit, even on foot. Cheap transfer from Ljubljana.

    Aeolian islands, but likely too much faff to get to - don't know whether there are diect flights to Sicily, but you still have to cross Sicily and then get a boat.

    Edit: And second? Love and peaceful thoughts to all :kissing_heart:
    How recent is the Slovenia tip? Cos tourism there just exploded 2016-18

    Personally I am going riding in Sicily for a week in June and then want to spend a week there with a car. If I want to start in Syracuse and end up at Palermo do PBers recommend driving round the bottom, round the top or across the middle? bearing in mind I will have seen a bit of the interior (Madonie to Etna) from my horse.
    On a similar question, by youngest daughter has recently got a real bee in her bonnet about going to Scotland. She wants to see a mountain and a castle and a Highland Cow. Which is all very nice, but she is only seven and too small for munro bagging or too much history all in one go. Still, I'd like to take her (and her sisters, 10 and 12, and my wife) to Scotland in October. Somewhere with things to do for moderately active pre-teen girls, and somewhere where they can take in the scale of the place and be suitably awestruck. Any thoughts?
    The difficulty is the balance between things to do, and "things to do". If "moderately active" and great scenery is the goal, can I recommend a trip up to the Black Isle - loads of great walks but not mountains. And you can have a stop-off in e.g. Edinburgh on the way up and back, and do "City things" (museums, galleries, etc.) for a change in pace.
    It surely has to be Skye

    Mountains: the Cuillins, some of the most impressive in Europe, despite their small size

    Highland cattle: everywhere

    Awesomeness: lochs and forests and sea and the old man of Storr

    Castles: Dunvegan! (And others)

    I took my older daughter there when she was about 8 and she adored it

    We had good weather tho…

    That is a very good call.

    That said, next on my list is to take the 8yo to Orkney as soon as I can find some time. (On which neolithic note, I'm just about to have another quick potter round the BM Stonehenge exhibition.)
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 21,151
    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    Cookie said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Selebian said:

    FPT:

    I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.

    I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.

    Where to go?

    Bled (Slovenia) if you like chilling by a lake and/or a bit of walking - easy to get out of the main touristy bit, even on foot. Cheap transfer from Ljubljana.

    Aeolian islands, but likely too much faff to get to - don't know whether there are diect flights to Sicily, but you still have to cross Sicily and then get a boat.

    Edit: And second? Love and peaceful thoughts to all :kissing_heart:
    How recent is the Slovenia tip? Cos tourism there just exploded 2016-18

    Personally I am going riding in Sicily for a week in June and then want to spend a week there with a car. If I want to start in Syracuse and end up at Palermo do PBers recommend driving round the bottom, round the top or across the middle? bearing in mind I will have seen a bit of the interior (Madonie to Etna) from my horse.
    On a similar question, by youngest daughter has recently got a real bee in her bonnet about going to Scotland. She wants to see a mountain and a castle and a Highland Cow. Which is all very nice, but she is only seven and too small for munro bagging or too much history all in one go. Still, I'd like to take her (and her sisters, 10 and 12, and my wife) to Scotland in October. Somewhere with things to do for moderately active pre-teen girls, and somewhere where they can take in the scale of the place and be suitably awestruck. Any thoughts?
    A small herd of Highland coos are to be seen roaming around the north Pentlands, accessible from Swanston. You can sometimes get quite close to them, unfenced, which is a thrill.
    There's also a dry ski slope very close to that but I don't know the details for getting on the slope. It looks kid friendly, though, judging by the young families I've seen there. You can get up the northern peaks of the Pentlands quite easily but they aren't proper mountains.

    Munro bagging is possible even with small legs. The ski centre at the Spittal of Glenshee has several very accessible Munros, and even a 7-year old will make it to the top of Carn Aosda or Cairnwell. It's about 300m climb from the car park, and it's proper mountains up there.
    EDIT: the Swanston coos roam a large area, so it's not guaranteed
    Arthuir's Seat a definite if in Edinburgh.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 10,465

    boulay said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Which part of "control our borders" included "zero border checks" ?

    Brexit is a shitshow, and will remain so long after those who voted for it are dead.

    “Control our borders” including having “zero border checks” is by definition controlling our borders.

    We control whether we check or don’t. Not a complicated concept.

    You control your front door - you can choose to lock it or leave the door swinging open - whatever option you choose based on what’s best for your family - you are controlling it - your neighbour isn’t.
    This is true enough. However, I am pretty sure that "wide open with no checks" was neither what the Vote Leave campaign were proposing nor what leave voters believed they would get.

    If we choose to maintain the same control of our borders (none) but suffer greatly from the other side controlling their border (goods and people) then what have we gained? Brexit was supposed to make people's lived experience better, not worse.
    Vote Leave and Boris Johnson specifically proposed shedding the EU's protectionism.

    http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/vote_leave_to_create_300_000_british_jobs.html

    We're doing exactly that in dropping the EU's checks with non-EU produce, where its not necessary. Something we couldn't do as EU members. This is exactly what I voted for and what swung me from Remain to Leave.

    Vote Leave to create 300,000 British jobs
    May 12, 2016
    In the last few years, the EU has sought to complete five key trade deals, with the USA, Japan, ASEAN, India and Mercosur. Because of protectionism in other European countries, the EU has failed to get a trade deal with any of these countries.
    When we Vote Leave we will be able to do trade deals with all of these countries much more quickly. According to the EU’s own figures this will create 284,000 new jobs in the UK.
    Commenting, Boris Johnson said:

    'If we Vote Leave we will be able to forge bold new trade deals with growing economies around the world. These are deals that the EU has tried and failed to achieve due to protectionist forces in Europe.

    ‘After we liberate ourselves from the shackles of Brussels we will be able to create hundreds of thousands of new jobs right across the UK.

    ‘Predictably the gloomsters want to do down Britain - they claim we are not strong enough to stand on our own two feet. What total tosh. There is a huge world of opportunity and prosperity out there if we take this opportunity to take back control.’
    Oh do stop it. Brexit was pointless. There are no upsides unless you are Boris Johnson, Boris Johnson's band of hopeless-cases-who-wouldn't-be-appointed-by-anyone-else, and a few hedge funds. I know you don't want to accept you were gulled, but you were.

    We all now have to live with it, but trying to invent "benefits of Brexit" is about as absurd as Putin trying to invent benefits from his invasion.
    Oh give over.

    We already have a trade deal agreed with the country I grew up in. That didn't exist pre-Brexit and wasn't possible as an EU member. That is a real benefit, right there.
    Its certainly a benefit to New Zealand! Or will be in a decade when it comes into effect. Less of a benefit for British farmers though, which is who the government claimed to be helping by quitting the (massively flawed) CAP.
    Bart doesn't like farmers or anyone else that isn't like him (a very small clique), so he doesn't care.
    You're kind of right actually.

    Why should I like farmers? Or anyone else I don't know, whether they're like me or not?

    I neither like nor dislike farmers, I am entirely agnostic to them and everyone else I don't know. If farmers do well then great, good for them. If they don't, then that's OK too, let them get out of business and let a more productive farmer use the land or find an alternative use for the land instead.

    I don't care about farmers any more than I would have cared about miners had I not been a baby when that was happening. We needed coal for electricity for three decades after the miners lost their jobs - did you care about them enough to think we should have prevented the closure of the mines?
    You prove my point; you are like a stereotype of an extreme left winger; completely devoid of empathy for anyone, unless you feel that they are a bit like you. You are in favour of all sorts of privilege unless they are privileges you can't access yourself. Pretty sad outlook on life really.
    I have empathy for others, I just don't cherrypick farmers (or any other self-interested group) over others.

    Were we wrong to let the mines close in the 80s?

    Was it wrong to let British Leyland ultimately fail?

    Was it wrong to allow the Luddites not to succeed in blocking new technology that put them out of work?

    I don't believe in Ludditism. I believe that chaotic evolution and the free market allows the best for all in the long run - and that support should be offered as a safety net for those who struggle as opposed to a way of life or "picking winners".
    Lol. You will soon be bleating about house prices or some other thing that "is not fair", and how the state should intervene on your behalf to redress the balance. Good post though, almost made you sound pseudo-intellectual, even though it was all bollox that will change with the wind no doubt.
    My objection is to the state interfering in the market preventing people building homes.

    I extend my belief in the free market to land. Anyone should be able to use their own land for whatever they choose, including constructing homes, if they prefer that, within reason.

    I don't want the state interfering getting into construction or anything else. I want deregulation and the state to get out of the way.
    You want something that you think might benefit you personally. Pure and simple.
    No, I'm consistent. I don't believe the state should be telling us how to run our lives, or the economy.

    If someone wants a home, they should be able to build one, wherever they want if the land is theirs.

    If someone wants to sleep with a consenting adult, they should be able to do so, so long as both consent.

    Etc etc - its not the state's business what adults do with their own property or their own lives.
    Thankfully for the rest of us we are happy to delegate a certain amount of freedom so that our next door neighbour on one side doesn't decide it is their right to build a glue factory next to our garden and the neighbour on the other side set up a 24 hour brothel with outdoor music venue.

    There are reasons why your simplistic views tend to be regarded as a bit silly.
    I'd have no objection to a 24 hour brothel opening near me, so long as everyone there is a consenting adult, but there are noise pollution regulations regarding outdoor music which are regulated by the Environmental Health Agency. I've never proposed getting rid of anti-pollution regulations.

    So long as the brothel, or the glue factory, aren't polluting absolutely holding back development is a bad thing. If they are polluting, then special zoning and regulations for polluting industries makes a lot of sense.

    If your residential next door neighbour is a twat who makes a lot of outdoor noise 24/7 they'll swiftly get visited by the Police or similar because the noise pollution rules apply to all including residential neighbours too.
    In what ways are planning rules any more anti-libertarian than the rules you have just suggested? Keep the planning laws, by all means reform, but no planning is about as silly as removing the restrictions you just mentioned. Good attempt though "Bart", but nil points for debate!
    Because rules on pollution are about protecting others from the harm of pollution and setting standards that anyone can operate by, so long as they don't pollute.

    Restrictions in order to inflate certain people's assets and take away the rights of others to act, even if they're not harming others, is not the same thing.

    As you've said, you don't want housing assets to fall in value. That's just protectionism and market rigging - let the free market determine the fair free value of housing, the state shouldn't be involved in price gouging.
    There are potential benefits of house prices falling. From a selfish point of view, that could be good for me, I could buy more property, but I wouldn't wish for it. It would be a disaster for many families that might find themselves in negative equity, and maybe be victims of repossession. But you wouldn't care about them. For people like you they are just a statistic as long as you are not one of the stats yourself. Having seen it happen to people in the 80s and 90s, I wouldn't wish it on anyone, even on an opinionated selfish oaf like yourself.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 27,713

    Edinburgh appears to be edging towards a minority SNP-Green coalition running the city after Scottish Labour bosses made clear they would block a continuation of the SNP-Labour partnership which has been in power for the past five years.

    Sources said the Capital's Labour group leader Cammy Day had been in talks with Scottish party headquarters about the possibility of renewing the SNP-Labour coalition, but it was made clear such a move would be vetoed.

    Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar said ahead of last week's elections he did not want formal council coalitions between Labour and other parties, especially the Tories or SNP. But it is understood Councillor Day was keen to see if there could be some flexibility. However, a source said: “The message he got back was No.”

    The SNP won 19 seats at the election, Labour 13, the Lib Dems 12, Greens 10 and Tories nine.

    Other potential combinations which have been floated include a Labour, Lib Dem, Green coalition, which would add up to a majority or a Labour-Lib Dem minority coalition, but it has not been clear whether such arrangements would also fall foul of Labour’s coalition ban.

    https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/politics/council/edinburgh-council-coalition-talks-snp-green-coalition-appears-to-be-moving-closer-3688670

    If there's no chance of a Lab/LD coalition that doesn't bode well for Starmer as PM 2024. (Or, more likely, early 2025.)
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 13,878
    Nigelb said:

    Putting pressure on Durham police is of course, quite wrong...

    https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1524138989539704832
    Priti Patel is seen congratulating Tory MP Richard Holden, seemingly in reference to his calls for police to reinvestigate the "beergate" controversy involving Sir Keir Starmer, who denies any wrongdoing.

    I am old enough to remember when it was still quite wrong to comment ahead of Sue Gray.
  • StuartDicksonStuartDickson Posts: 8,313
    RobD said:

    Edinburgh appears to be edging towards a minority SNP-Green coalition running the city after Scottish Labour bosses made clear they would block a continuation of the SNP-Labour partnership which has been in power for the past five years.

    Sources said the Capital's Labour group leader Cammy Day had been in talks with Scottish party headquarters about the possibility of renewing the SNP-Labour coalition, but it was made clear such a move would be vetoed.

    Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar said ahead of last week's elections he did not want formal council coalitions between Labour and other parties, especially the Tories or SNP. But it is understood Councillor Day was keen to see if there could be some flexibility. However, a source said: “The message he got back was No.”

    The SNP won 19 seats at the election, Labour 13, the Lib Dems 12, Greens 10 and Tories nine.

    Other potential combinations which have been floated include a Labour, Lib Dem, Green coalition, which would add up to a majority or a Labour-Lib Dem minority coalition, but it has not been clear whether such arrangements would also fall foul of Labour’s coalition ban.

    https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/politics/council/edinburgh-council-coalition-talks-snp-green-coalition-appears-to-be-moving-closer-3688670

    Refusing to work with opposition parties at the local level is dumb, especially in Scotland where a large proportion of councils are NOC.
    I can understand the non-Tory parties vetoing any coalitions with the Tories: it is after all the national Zeitgeist. But the 4 main centre-left parties are just being childish if they refuse to work together at local level. Predictably, Labour are being the most childish. It’ll seriously piss off their grassroots activists, locking them out of power in most areas.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 16,049

    IshmaelZ said:

    Selebian said:

    FPT:

    I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.

    I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.

    Where to go?

    Bled (Slovenia) if you like chilling by a lake and/or a bit of walking - easy to get out of the main touristy bit, even on foot. Cheap transfer from Ljubljana.

    Aeolian islands, but likely too much faff to get to - don't know whether there are diect flights to Sicily, but you still have to cross Sicily and then get a boat.

    Edit: And second? Love and peaceful thoughts to all :kissing_heart:
    How recent is the Slovenia tip? Cos tourism there just exploded 2016-18

    Personally I am going riding in Sicily for a week in June and then want to spend a week there with a car. If I want to start in Syracuse and end up at Palermo do PBers recommend driving round the bottom, round the top or across the middle? bearing in mind I will have seen a bit of the interior (Madonie to Etna) from my horse.
    This place is worth a look:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scopello,_Trapani

    A post-industrial tuna factory, re-purposed as a small-scale resort.
    thank you that does look good
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 27,713
    edited May 11

    Nigelb said:

    Putting pressure on Durham police is of course, quite wrong...

    https://twitter.com/SkyNews/status/1524138989539704832
    Priti Patel is seen congratulating Tory MP Richard Holden, seemingly in reference to his calls for police to reinvestigate the "beergate" controversy involving Sir Keir Starmer, who denies any wrongdoing.

    I am old enough to remember when it was still quite wrong to comment ahead of Sue Gray.
    The even outside possibility of Priti being PM fills me with dread.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 21,151
    Cookie said:

    Farooq said:

    Cookie said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Selebian said:

    FPT:

    I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.

    I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.

    Where to go?

    Bled (Slovenia) if you like chilling by a lake and/or a bit of walking - easy to get out of the main touristy bit, even on foot. Cheap transfer from Ljubljana.

    Aeolian islands, but likely too much faff to get to - don't know whether there are diect flights to Sicily, but you still have to cross Sicily and then get a boat.

    Edit: And second? Love and peaceful thoughts to all :kissing_heart:
    How recent is the Slovenia tip? Cos tourism there just exploded 2016-18

    Personally I am going riding in Sicily for a week in June and then want to spend a week there with a car. If I want to start in Syracuse and end up at Palermo do PBers recommend driving round the bottom, round the top or across the middle? bearing in mind I will have seen a bit of the interior (Madonie to Etna) from my horse.
    On a similar question, by youngest daughter has recently got a real bee in her bonnet about going to Scotland. She wants to see a mountain and a castle and a Highland Cow. Which is all very nice, but she is only seven and too small for munro bagging or too much history all in one go. Still, I'd like to take her (and her sisters, 10 and 12, and my wife) to Scotland in October. Somewhere with things to do for moderately active pre-teen girls, and somewhere where they can take in the scale of the place and be suitably awestruck. Any thoughts?
    A small herd of Highland coos are to be seen roaming around the north Pentlands, accessible from Swanston. You can sometimes get quite close to them, unfenced, which is a thrill.
    There's also a dry ski slope very close to that but I don't know the details for getting on the slope. It looks kid friendly, though, judging by the young families I've seen there. You can get up the northern peaks of the Pentlands quite easily but they aren't proper mountains.

    Munro bagging is possible even with small legs. The ski centre at the Spittal of Glenshee has several very accessible Munros, and even a 7-year old will make it to the top of Carn Aosda or Cairnwell. It's about 300m climb from the car park, and it's proper mountains up there.
    Brilliant - I've just looked up those munros, and they would be perfect - I had no idea there were munros so accessible to children! She would love that. I might even get my wife up it.
    BT's suggestion of Edinburgh is also noted - maybe a two centre trip: the Cairngorms and Edinburgh - and perhaps leave Leon's suggestion of Skye and/or the Hebrides for a separate trip.
    October timing is a worry, in terms of what might have shut down for the winter. Have a look at the Scottish Tourist Board website though they do market autumn holidays.
  • AlistairMAlistairM Posts: 872

    Cookie said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Selebian said:

    FPT:

    I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.

    I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.

    Where to go?

    Bled (Slovenia) if you like chilling by a lake and/or a bit of walking - easy to get out of the main touristy bit, even on foot. Cheap transfer from Ljubljana.

    Aeolian islands, but likely too much faff to get to - don't know whether there are diect flights to Sicily, but you still have to cross Sicily and then get a boat.

    Edit: And second? Love and peaceful thoughts to all :kissing_heart:
    How recent is the Slovenia tip? Cos tourism there just exploded 2016-18

    Personally I am going riding in Sicily for a week in June and then want to spend a week there with a car. If I want to start in Syracuse and end up at Palermo do PBers recommend driving round the bottom, round the top or across the middle? bearing in mind I will have seen a bit of the interior (Madonie to Etna) from my horse.
    On a similar question, by youngest daughter has recently got a real bee in her bonnet about going to Scotland. She wants to see a mountain and a castle and a Highland Cow. Which is all very nice, but she is only seven and too small for munro bagging or too much history all in one go. Still, I'd like to take her (and her sisters, 10 and 12, and my wife) to Scotland in October. Somewhere with things to do for moderately active pre-teen girls, and somewhere where they can take in the scale of the place and be suitably awestruck. Any thoughts?
    A seven year old she will have heard the story of the Loch Ness monster so I would go Nessie spotting.
    I thought it was going to be awful but the Loch Ness visitor centre is very good. It tells a story of Nessie and lets everyone make up their own minds.

    https://www.lochness.com/

    My 12yo, 8yo and 4yo (at the time) all very much enjoyed it. Beware of the almost never-ending gift shop at the end!

    Also nearby Urquhart Castle is very much worth a visit with a stunning location right on Loch Ness.
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 3,530
    .

    boulay said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Which part of "control our borders" included "zero border checks" ?

    Brexit is a shitshow, and will remain so long after those who voted for it are dead.

    “Control our borders” including having “zero border checks” is by definition controlling our borders.

    We control whether we check or don’t. Not a complicated concept.

    You control your front door - you can choose to lock it or leave the door swinging open - whatever option you choose based on what’s best for your family - you are controlling it - your neighbour isn’t.
    This is true enough. However, I am pretty sure that "wide open with no checks" was neither what the Vote Leave campaign were proposing nor what leave voters believed they would get.

    If we choose to maintain the same control of our borders (none) but suffer greatly from the other side controlling their border (goods and people) then what have we gained? Brexit was supposed to make people's lived experience better, not worse.
    Vote Leave and Boris Johnson specifically proposed shedding the EU's protectionism.

    http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/vote_leave_to_create_300_000_british_jobs.html

    We're doing exactly that in dropping the EU's checks with non-EU produce, where its not necessary. Something we couldn't do as EU members. This is exactly what I voted for and what swung me from Remain to Leave.

    Vote Leave to create 300,000 British jobs
    May 12, 2016
    In the last few years, the EU has sought to complete five key trade deals, with the USA, Japan, ASEAN, India and Mercosur. Because of protectionism in other European countries, the EU has failed to get a trade deal with any of these countries.
    When we Vote Leave we will be able to do trade deals with all of these countries much more quickly. According to the EU’s own figures this will create 284,000 new jobs in the UK.
    Commenting, Boris Johnson said:

    'If we Vote Leave we will be able to forge bold new trade deals with growing economies around the world. These are deals that the EU has tried and failed to achieve due to protectionist forces in Europe.

    ‘After we liberate ourselves from the shackles of Brussels we will be able to create hundreds of thousands of new jobs right across the UK.

    ‘Predictably the gloomsters want to do down Britain - they claim we are not strong enough to stand on our own two feet. What total tosh. There is a huge world of opportunity and prosperity out there if we take this opportunity to take back control.’
    Oh do stop it. Brexit was pointless. There are no upsides unless you are Boris Johnson, Boris Johnson's band of hopeless-cases-who-wouldn't-be-appointed-by-anyone-else, and a few hedge funds. I know you don't want to accept you were gulled, but you were.

    We all now have to live with it, but trying to invent "benefits of Brexit" is about as absurd as Putin trying to invent benefits from his invasion.
    Oh give over.

    We already have a trade deal agreed with the country I grew up in. That didn't exist pre-Brexit and wasn't possible as an EU member. That is a real benefit, right there.
    Its certainly a benefit to New Zealand! Or will be in a decade when it comes into effect. Less of a benefit for British farmers though, which is who the government claimed to be helping by quitting the (massively flawed) CAP.
    Bart doesn't like farmers or anyone else that isn't like him (a very small clique), so he doesn't care.
    You're kind of right actually.

    Why should I like farmers? Or anyone else I don't know, whether they're like me or not?

    I neither like nor dislike farmers, I am entirely agnostic to them and everyone else I don't know. If farmers do well then great, good for them. If they don't, then that's OK too, let them get out of business and let a more productive farmer use the land or find an alternative use for the land instead.

    I don't care about farmers any more than I would have cared about miners had I not been a baby when that was happening. We needed coal for electricity for three decades after the miners lost their jobs - did you care about them enough to think we should have prevented the closure of the mines?
    You prove my point; you are like a stereotype of an extreme left winger; completely devoid of empathy for anyone, unless you feel that they are a bit like you. You are in favour of all sorts of privilege unless they are privileges you can't access yourself. Pretty sad outlook on life really.
    I have empathy for others, I just don't cherrypick farmers (or any other self-interested group) over others.

    Were we wrong to let the mines close in the 80s?

    Was it wrong to let British Leyland ultimately fail?

    Was it wrong to allow the Luddites not to succeed in blocking new technology that put them out of work?

    I don't believe in Ludditism. I believe that chaotic evolution and the free market allows the best for all in the long run - and that support should be offered as a safety net for those who struggle as opposed to a way of life or "picking winners".
    Lol. You will soon be bleating about house prices or some other thing that "is not fair", and how the state should intervene on your behalf to redress the balance. Good post though, almost made you sound pseudo-intellectual, even though it was all bollox that will change with the wind no doubt.
    My objection is to the state interfering in the market preventing people building homes.

    I extend my belief in the free market to land. Anyone should be able to use their own land for whatever they choose, including constructing homes, if they prefer that, within reason.

    I don't want the state interfering getting into construction or anything else. I want deregulation and the state to get out of the way.
    You want something that you think might benefit you personally. Pure and simple.
    No, I'm consistent. I don't believe the state should be telling us how to run our lives, or the economy.

    If someone wants a home, they should be able to build one, wherever they want if the land is theirs.

    If someone wants to sleep with a consenting adult, they should be able to do so, so long as both consent.

    Etc etc - its not the state's business what adults do with their own property or their own lives.
    Thankfully for the rest of us we are happy to delegate a certain amount of freedom so that our next door neighbour on one side doesn't decide it is their right to build a glue factory next to our garden and the neighbour on the other side set up a 24 hour brothel with outdoor music venue.

    There are reasons why your simplistic views tend to be regarded as a bit silly.
    I'd have no objection to a 24 hour brothel opening near me, so long as everyone there is a consenting adult, but there are noise pollution regulations regarding outdoor music which are regulated by the Environmental Health Agency. I've never proposed getting rid of anti-pollution regulations.

    So long as the brothel, or the glue factory, aren't polluting absolutely holding back development is a bad thing. If they are polluting, then special zoning and regulations for polluting industries makes a lot of sense.

    If your residential next door neighbour is a twat who makes a lot of outdoor noise 24/7 they'll swiftly get visited by the Police or similar because the noise pollution rules apply to all including residential neighbours too.
    In what ways are planning rules any more anti-libertarian than the rules you have just suggested? Keep the planning laws, by all means reform, but no planning is about as silly as removing the restrictions you just mentioned. Good attempt though "Bart", but nil points for debate!
    Because rules on pollution are about protecting others from the harm of pollution and setting standards that anyone can operate by, so long as they don't pollute.

    Restrictions in order to inflate certain people's assets and take away the rights of others to act, even if they're not harming others, is not the same thing.

    As you've said, you don't want housing assets to fall in value. That's just protectionism and market rigging - let the free market determine the fair free value of housing, the state shouldn't be involved in price gouging.
    There are potential benefits of house prices falling. From a selfish point of view, that could be good for me, I could buy more property, but I wouldn't wish for it. It would be a disaster for many families that might find themselves in negative equity, and maybe be victims of repossession. But you wouldn't care about them. For people like you they are just a statistic as long as you are not one of the stats yourself. Having seen it happen to people in the 80s and 90s, I wouldn't wish it on anyone, even on an opinionated selfish oaf like yourself.
    Caveat emptor.

    Whatever happened to the warning "all investments can go down in value as well as up?" Pretty sure that warning was in very big print when we got our mortgage.

    A one-way ratchet on prices escalating ever further out of the reach of the working young is not healthy either. Even if opinionated selfish oafs like yourself want to protect the value of your "investments".
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 1,955
    Carnyx said:

    Cookie said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Selebian said:

    FPT:

    I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.

    I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.

    Where to go?

    Bled (Slovenia) if you like chilling by a lake and/or a bit of walking - easy to get out of the main touristy bit, even on foot. Cheap transfer from Ljubljana.

    Aeolian islands, but likely too much faff to get to - don't know whether there are diect flights to Sicily, but you still have to cross Sicily and then get a boat.

    Edit: And second? Love and peaceful thoughts to all :kissing_heart:
    How recent is the Slovenia tip? Cos tourism there just exploded 2016-18

    Personally I am going riding in Sicily for a week in June and then want to spend a week there with a car. If I want to start in Syracuse and end up at Palermo do PBers recommend driving round the bottom, round the top or across the middle? bearing in mind I will have seen a bit of the interior (Madonie to Etna) from my horse.
    On a similar question, by youngest daughter has recently got a real bee in her bonnet about going to Scotland. She wants to see a mountain and a castle and a Highland Cow. Which is all very nice, but she is only seven and too small for munro bagging or too much history all in one go. Still, I'd like to take her (and her sisters, 10 and 12, and my wife) to Scotland in October. Somewhere with things to do for moderately active pre-teen girls, and somewhere where they can take in the scale of the place and be suitably awestruck. Any thoughts?
    A seven year old she will have heard the story of the Loch Ness monster so I would go Nessie spotting.
    Maybe a cruise from Inverness, if going that way, visiting Urquhart castgle for a break ashore.
    The cruises from Fort Augustus are quite good fun on a nice day, and it's a pleasant little village. I used to spend a day doing the circuit - inverness to Drumnadrochit and Urquhart, then on to Fort Augustus and back round to Inverness via Foyers and the falls there. Always a fun day.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 17,745
    For all of the "Labour did badly" spin it was clear they had made good progress in chunks of the wall.

    Their problem - like the Tories - is that you can't win voters in the red wall and outside the red wall who want different things and think differently.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 21,151

    RobD said:

    Edinburgh appears to be edging towards a minority SNP-Green coalition running the city after Scottish Labour bosses made clear they would block a continuation of the SNP-Labour partnership which has been in power for the past five years.

    Sources said the Capital's Labour group leader Cammy Day had been in talks with Scottish party headquarters about the possibility of renewing the SNP-Labour coalition, but it was made clear such a move would be vetoed.

    Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar said ahead of last week's elections he did not want formal council coalitions between Labour and other parties, especially the Tories or SNP. But it is understood Councillor Day was keen to see if there could be some flexibility. However, a source said: “The message he got back was No.”

    The SNP won 19 seats at the election, Labour 13, the Lib Dems 12, Greens 10 and Tories nine.

    Other potential combinations which have been floated include a Labour, Lib Dem, Green coalition, which would add up to a majority or a Labour-Lib Dem minority coalition, but it has not been clear whether such arrangements would also fall foul of Labour’s coalition ban.

    https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/politics/council/edinburgh-council-coalition-talks-snp-green-coalition-appears-to-be-moving-closer-3688670

    Refusing to work with opposition parties at the local level is dumb, especially in Scotland where a large proportion of councils are NOC.
    I can understand the non-Tory parties vetoing any coalitions with the Tories: it is after all the national Zeitgeist. But the 4 main centre-left parties are just being childish if they refuse to work together at local level. Predictably, Labour are being the most childish. It’ll seriously piss off their grassroots activists, locking them out of power in most areas.
    Remember when Slab would veto their own proposals at Holyrood and collapse the budget just because the SNP administration had put them in the budget at their request?
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 1,350

    RobD said:

    Edinburgh appears to be edging towards a minority SNP-Green coalition running the city after Scottish Labour bosses made clear they would block a continuation of the SNP-Labour partnership which has been in power for the past five years.

    Sources said the Capital's Labour group leader Cammy Day had been in talks with Scottish party headquarters about the possibility of renewing the SNP-Labour coalition, but it was made clear such a move would be vetoed.

    Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar said ahead of last week's elections he did not want formal council coalitions between Labour and other parties, especially the Tories or SNP. But it is understood Councillor Day was keen to see if there could be some flexibility. However, a source said: “The message he got back was No.”

    The SNP won 19 seats at the election, Labour 13, the Lib Dems 12, Greens 10 and Tories nine.

    Other potential combinations which have been floated include a Labour, Lib Dem, Green coalition, which would add up to a majority or a Labour-Lib Dem minority coalition, but it has not been clear whether such arrangements would also fall foul of Labour’s coalition ban.

    https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/politics/council/edinburgh-council-coalition-talks-snp-green-coalition-appears-to-be-moving-closer-3688670

    Refusing to work with opposition parties at the local level is dumb, especially in Scotland where a large proportion of councils are NOC.
    I can understand the non-Tory parties vetoing any coalitions with the Tories: it is after all the national Zeitgeist. But the 4 main centre-left parties are just being childish if they refuse to work together at local level. Predictably, Labour are being the most childish. It’ll seriously piss off their grassroots activists, locking them out of power in most areas.
    It’s a nonsense isn’t it? Whether you believe in independence or not is irrelevant to running a council well. Should be more than possible to work together locally and leave that argument for the national level.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 18,903
    Getting better at Wordle...

    Wordle 326 3/6

    🟨⬜⬜🟨⬜
    🟩🟨🟨🟨⬜
    🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
  • LeonLeon Posts: 19,362
    mwadams said:

    Leon said:

    mwadams said:

    Cookie said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Selebian said:

    FPT:

    I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.

    I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.

    Where to go?

    Bled (Slovenia) if you like chilling by a lake and/or a bit of walking - easy to get out of the main touristy bit, even on foot. Cheap transfer from Ljubljana.

    Aeolian islands, but likely too much faff to get to - don't know whether there are diect flights to Sicily, but you still have to cross Sicily and then get a boat.

    Edit: And second? Love and peaceful thoughts to all :kissing_heart:
    How recent is the Slovenia tip? Cos tourism there just exploded 2016-18

    Personally I am going riding in Sicily for a week in June and then want to spend a week there with a car. If I want to start in Syracuse and end up at Palermo do PBers recommend driving round the bottom, round the top or across the middle? bearing in mind I will have seen a bit of the interior (Madonie to Etna) from my horse.
    On a similar question, by youngest daughter has recently got a real bee in her bonnet about going to Scotland. She wants to see a mountain and a castle and a Highland Cow. Which is all very nice, but she is only seven and too small for munro bagging or too much history all in one go. Still, I'd like to take her (and her sisters, 10 and 12, and my wife) to Scotland in October. Somewhere with things to do for moderately active pre-teen girls, and somewhere where they can take in the scale of the place and be suitably awestruck. Any thoughts?
    The difficulty is the balance between things to do, and "things to do". If "moderately active" and great scenery is the goal, can I recommend a trip up to the Black Isle - loads of great walks but not mountains. And you can have a stop-off in e.g. Edinburgh on the way up and back, and do "City things" (museums, galleries, etc.) for a change in pace.
    It surely has to be Skye

    Mountains: the Cuillins, some of the most impressive in Europe, despite their small size

    Highland cattle: everywhere

    Awesomeness: lochs and forests and sea and the old man of Storr

    Castles: Dunvegan! (And others)

    I took my older daughter there when she was about 8 and she adored it

    We had good weather tho…

    That is a very good call.

    That said, next on my list is to take the 8yo to Orkney as soon as I can find some time. (On which neolithic note, I'm just about to have another quick potter round the BM Stonehenge exhibition.)
    I did the Orkneys with my same older daughter (now 15) last summer. It was fab. But we stayed in john o groats so we could also tour the mainland

    It’s a cliche but that drive around the top of Scotland is truly amazing (again we got lucky with the weather)

    John o groats itself is so hideous it’s funny. Likewise Wick and the flow country. But that makes it quite a cheap place to stay….
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 10,465
    Dura_Ace said:

    A creature of habit.


    Can you photoshop a copy of "Gay Times" or "Attitude" in there especially for our resident homophobe?
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 6,304
    Carnyx said:

    Cookie said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Selebian said:

    FPT:

    I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.

    I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.

    Where to go?

    Bled (Slovenia) if you like chilling by a lake and/or a bit of walking - easy to get out of the main touristy bit, even on foot. Cheap transfer from Ljubljana.

    Aeolian islands, but likely too much faff to get to - don't know whether there are diect flights to Sicily, but you still have to cross Sicily and then get a boat.

    Edit: And second? Love and peaceful thoughts to all :kissing_heart:
    How recent is the Slovenia tip? Cos tourism there just exploded 2016-18

    Personally I am going riding in Sicily for a week in June and then want to spend a week there with a car. If I want to start in Syracuse and end up at Palermo do PBers recommend driving round the bottom, round the top or across the middle? bearing in mind I will have seen a bit of the interior (Madonie to Etna) from my horse.
    On a similar question, by youngest daughter has recently got a real bee in her bonnet about going to Scotland. She wants to see a mountain and a castle and a Highland Cow. Which is all very nice, but she is only seven and too small for munro bagging or too much history all in one go. Still, I'd like to take her (and her sisters, 10 and 12, and my wife) to Scotland in October. Somewhere with things to do for moderately active pre-teen girls, and somewhere where they can take in the scale of the place and be suitably awestruck. Any thoughts?
    Not an expert on preteens of any gender, but ...

    Thinjk about taking in Stirling for a couple of days at least - great castle, real scenery, nice town, cattle too in field or in nearby attractions. Wallace Monument, of course, and near the Trossachs for some Highland scenery. Access by train easy if that helps. That would tick the daughterly boxes pdq.

    https://www.visitscotland.com/blog/holiday-ideas/great-places-to-see-highland-cows-in-scotland/

    Maybe look at Oban for a cruise around Mull, if available?

    The Highlands can be quite a big place in terms of driving but the Trossachs should give some heather and bumps. Train/A9 to Aviemore if you want more?

    I'm tempted to say forget Ben Nevis/Fort William - not my fave area. BN is far too high/lethal for many.

    Lothians and east Borders do have plenty of castles and walks and beaches and things to do. And Edinburgh as well.

    Look at Historic Scotland and National Trust for Scotland websites.

    Possibly also National Museum of Rural Life or whatever it is called at East Kilbride - more over to the Glasgow side but still accessible enough.

    But avoid midge season in Highlands!

    BN in good weather is fine but the bit you have to watch out for is the Red Burn crossing. If that's frozen over it's really quite dangerous. If you're up the mountain in summer season on a weekend, even when the clouds come in there are so many people up there it's possible to navigate just by sheer numbers of people. The same does not apply during quieter times and getting lost up there is remarkably easy.
    It's a gruelling climb and for the safest experience go there late in the summer when you're less likely to have much snow up top. I've seen very young children with no experience manage the whole climb, but 7 really on the young side of it.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 4,263
    Applicant said:

    I thought I'd escape the hilarious acrimony of the last thread by switching on PMQs for some sweetness and light.
    But there's no PMQs. Why's that?

    There's never PMQs until the Queen's Speech debate is finished, IIRC.

    I guess because technically there's a chance it could be defeated, in which case there would be a new PM to face the Qs. Or an election.
    Thanks.

    The Queen's Speech really was a damp squib, wasn't it? Nothing new. No coherent vision of the future. I've never known a QS attract so little attention on here or elsewhere.

    People often, justifiably, comment on Labour's apparent policy void ( a windfall tax - is that it?). But I'm beginning to think Labour may well present a more coherent narrative for government than the Tories in time for the next GE. They're certainly working on it behind the scenes, though keeping it under wraps for now (they know the Tories will nick the tasty bits).
  • LeonLeon Posts: 19,362
    edited May 11
    IshmaelZ said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Selebian said:

    FPT:

    I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.

    I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.

    Where to go?

    Bled (Slovenia) if you like chilling by a lake and/or a bit of walking - easy to get out of the main touristy bit, even on foot. Cheap transfer from Ljubljana.

    Aeolian islands, but likely too much faff to get to - don't know whether there are diect flights to Sicily, but you still have to cross Sicily and then get a boat.

    Edit: And second? Love and peaceful thoughts to all :kissing_heart:
    How recent is the Slovenia tip? Cos tourism there just exploded 2016-18

    Personally I am going riding in Sicily for a week in June and then want to spend a week there with a car. If I want to start in Syracuse and end up at Palermo do PBers recommend driving round the bottom, round the top or across the middle? bearing in mind I will have seen a bit of the interior (Madonie to Etna) from my horse.
    This place is worth a look:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scopello,_Trapani

    A post-industrial tuna factory, re-purposed as a small-scale resort.
    thank you that does look good
    Don’t miss Trapani itself. A gem of a city. Soaked in mafia myth (and reality). But quite safe for tourists. Properly Authentic
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 1,955

    Getting better at Wordle...

    Wordle 326 3/6

    🟨⬜⬜🟨⬜
    🟩🟨🟨🟨⬜
    🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩

    Counting to 5 and knowing words in your own language are impressive skills certainly
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 4,989
    Polling either side of last weeks votes and last weeks votes themselves speak as one - Red Wall looking shaky, blue wall pile of rubble, the Tories have lost a blue wall and not gained a red wall. “THIS” is the emerging electoral reality for the Conservative vote in new Brexit Britain.

    In politics You don’t make changes as “courageous” as Brexit unless it’s for the better. You don’t boast “GOT BREXIT DONE” unless you are delivering better to peoples lives now.

    Partygate? Nah. What I said in paragraphs above is reason for what happens in coming elections.

    2019? Hollowed out Corbyn factor, as Mike Smithson often tells an unlistening PB.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 10,465

    .

    boulay said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Which part of "control our borders" included "zero border checks" ?

    Brexit is a shitshow, and will remain so long after those who voted for it are dead.

    “Control our borders” including having “zero border checks” is by definition controlling our borders.

    We control whether we check or don’t. Not a complicated concept.

    You control your front door - you can choose to lock it or leave the door swinging open - whatever option you choose based on what’s best for your family - you are controlling it - your neighbour isn’t.
    This is true enough. However, I am pretty sure that "wide open with no checks" was neither what the Vote Leave campaign were proposing nor what leave voters believed they would get.

    If we choose to maintain the same control of our borders (none) but suffer greatly from the other side controlling their border (goods and people) then what have we gained? Brexit was supposed to make people's lived experience better, not worse.
    Vote Leave and Boris Johnson specifically proposed shedding the EU's protectionism.

    http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/vote_leave_to_create_300_000_british_jobs.html

    We're doing exactly that in dropping the EU's checks with non-EU produce, where its not necessary. Something we couldn't do as EU members. This is exactly what I voted for and what swung me from Remain to Leave.

    Vote Leave to create 300,000 British jobs
    May 12, 2016
    In the last few years, the EU has sought to complete five key trade deals, with the USA, Japan, ASEAN, India and Mercosur. Because of protectionism in other European countries, the EU has failed to get a trade deal with any of these countries.
    When we Vote Leave we will be able to do trade deals with all of these countries much more quickly. According to the EU’s own figures this will create 284,000 new jobs in the UK.
    Commenting, Boris Johnson said:

    'If we Vote Leave we will be able to forge bold new trade deals with growing economies around the world. These are deals that the EU has tried and failed to achieve due to protectionist forces in Europe.

    ‘After we liberate ourselves from the shackles of Brussels we will be able to create hundreds of thousands of new jobs right across the UK.

    ‘Predictably the gloomsters want to do down Britain - they claim we are not strong enough to stand on our own two feet. What total tosh. There is a huge world of opportunity and prosperity out there if we take this opportunity to take back control.’
    Oh do stop it. Brexit was pointless. There are no upsides unless you are Boris Johnson, Boris Johnson's band of hopeless-cases-who-wouldn't-be-appointed-by-anyone-else, and a few hedge funds. I know you don't want to accept you were gulled, but you were.

    We all now have to live with it, but trying to invent "benefits of Brexit" is about as absurd as Putin trying to invent benefits from his invasion.
    Oh give over.

    We already have a trade deal agreed with the country I grew up in. That didn't exist pre-Brexit and wasn't possible as an EU member. That is a real benefit, right there.
    Its certainly a benefit to New Zealand! Or will be in a decade when it comes into effect. Less of a benefit for British farmers though, which is who the government claimed to be helping by quitting the (massively flawed) CAP.
    Bart doesn't like farmers or anyone else that isn't like him (a very small clique), so he doesn't care.
    You're kind of right actually.

    Why should I like farmers? Or anyone else I don't know, whether they're like me or not?

    I neither like nor dislike farmers, I am entirely agnostic to them and everyone else I don't know. If farmers do well then great, good for them. If they don't, then that's OK too, let them get out of business and let a more productive farmer use the land or find an alternative use for the land instead.

    I don't care about farmers any more than I would have cared about miners had I not been a baby when that was happening. We needed coal for electricity for three decades after the miners lost their jobs - did you care about them enough to think we should have prevented the closure of the mines?
    You prove my point; you are like a stereotype of an extreme left winger; completely devoid of empathy for anyone, unless you feel that they are a bit like you. You are in favour of all sorts of privilege unless they are privileges you can't access yourself. Pretty sad outlook on life really.
    I have empathy for others, I just don't cherrypick farmers (or any other self-interested group) over others.

    Were we wrong to let the mines close in the 80s?

    Was it wrong to let British Leyland ultimately fail?

    Was it wrong to allow the Luddites not to succeed in blocking new technology that put them out of work?

    I don't believe in Ludditism. I believe that chaotic evolution and the free market allows the best for all in the long run - and that support should be offered as a safety net for those who struggle as opposed to a way of life or "picking winners".
    Lol. You will soon be bleating about house prices or some other thing that "is not fair", and how the state should intervene on your behalf to redress the balance. Good post though, almost made you sound pseudo-intellectual, even though it was all bollox that will change with the wind no doubt.
    My objection is to the state interfering in the market preventing people building homes.

    I extend my belief in the free market to land. Anyone should be able to use their own land for whatever they choose, including constructing homes, if they prefer that, within reason.

    I don't want the state interfering getting into construction or anything else. I want deregulation and the state to get out of the way.
    You want something that you think might benefit you personally. Pure and simple.
    No, I'm consistent. I don't believe the state should be telling us how to run our lives, or the economy.

    If someone wants a home, they should be able to build one, wherever they want if the land is theirs.

    If someone wants to sleep with a consenting adult, they should be able to do so, so long as both consent.

    Etc etc - its not the state's business what adults do with their own property or their own lives.
    Thankfully for the rest of us we are happy to delegate a certain amount of freedom so that our next door neighbour on one side doesn't decide it is their right to build a glue factory next to our garden and the neighbour on the other side set up a 24 hour brothel with outdoor music venue.

    There are reasons why your simplistic views tend to be regarded as a bit silly.
    I'd have no objection to a 24 hour brothel opening near me, so long as everyone there is a consenting adult, but there are noise pollution regulations regarding outdoor music which are regulated by the Environmental Health Agency. I've never proposed getting rid of anti-pollution regulations.

    So long as the brothel, or the glue factory, aren't polluting absolutely holding back development is a bad thing. If they are polluting, then special zoning and regulations for polluting industries makes a lot of sense.

    If your residential next door neighbour is a twat who makes a lot of outdoor noise 24/7 they'll swiftly get visited by the Police or similar because the noise pollution rules apply to all including residential neighbours too.
    In what ways are planning rules any more anti-libertarian than the rules you have just suggested? Keep the planning laws, by all means reform, but no planning is about as silly as removing the restrictions you just mentioned. Good attempt though "Bart", but nil points for debate!
    Because rules on pollution are about protecting others from the harm of pollution and setting standards that anyone can operate by, so long as they don't pollute.

    Restrictions in order to inflate certain people's assets and take away the rights of others to act, even if they're not harming others, is not the same thing.

    As you've said, you don't want housing assets to fall in value. That's just protectionism and market rigging - let the free market determine the fair free value of housing, the state shouldn't be involved in price gouging.
    There are potential benefits of house prices falling. From a selfish point of view, that could be good for me, I could buy more property, but I wouldn't wish for it. It would be a disaster for many families that might find themselves in negative equity, and maybe be victims of repossession. But you wouldn't care about them. For people like you they are just a statistic as long as you are not one of the stats yourself. Having seen it happen to people in the 80s and 90s, I wouldn't wish it on anyone, even on an opinionated selfish oaf like yourself.
    Caveat emptor.

    Whatever happened to the warning "all investments can go down in value as well as up?" Pretty sure that warning was in very big print when we got our mortgage.

    A one-way ratchet on prices escalating ever further out of the reach of the working young is not healthy either. Even if opinionated selfish oafs like yourself want to protect the value of your "investments".
    I hope it doesn't happen to you. You really do get extreme right wingers a bad name. Oh, hang on...
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 13,878

    boulay said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Which part of "control our borders" included "zero border checks" ?

    Brexit is a shitshow, and will remain so long after those who voted for it are dead.

    “Control our borders” including having “zero border checks” is by definition controlling our borders.

    We control whether we check or don’t. Not a complicated concept.

    You control your front door - you can choose to lock it or leave the door swinging open - whatever option you choose based on what’s best for your family - you are controlling it - your neighbour isn’t.
    This is true enough. However, I am pretty sure that "wide open with no checks" was neither what the Vote Leave campaign were proposing nor what leave voters believed they would get.

    If we choose to maintain the same control of our borders (none) but suffer greatly from the other side controlling their border (goods and people) then what have we gained? Brexit was supposed to make people's lived experience better, not worse.
    Vote Leave and Boris Johnson specifically proposed shedding the EU's protectionism.

    http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/vote_leave_to_create_300_000_british_jobs.html

    We're doing exactly that in dropping the EU's checks with non-EU produce, where its not necessary. Something we couldn't do as EU members. This is exactly what I voted for and what swung me from Remain to Leave.

    Vote Leave to create 300,000 British jobs
    May 12, 2016
    In the last few years, the EU has sought to complete five key trade deals, with the USA, Japan, ASEAN, India and Mercosur. Because of protectionism in other European countries, the EU has failed to get a trade deal with any of these countries.
    When we Vote Leave we will be able to do trade deals with all of these countries much more quickly. According to the EU’s own figures this will create 284,000 new jobs in the UK.
    Commenting, Boris Johnson said:

    'If we Vote Leave we will be able to forge bold new trade deals with growing economies around the world. These are deals that the EU has tried and failed to achieve due to protectionist forces in Europe.

    ‘After we liberate ourselves from the shackles of Brussels we will be able to create hundreds of thousands of new jobs right across the UK.

    ‘Predictably the gloomsters want to do down Britain - they claim we are not strong enough to stand on our own two feet. What total tosh. There is a huge world of opportunity and prosperity out there if we take this opportunity to take back control.’
    Oh do stop it. Brexit was pointless. There are no upsides unless you are Boris Johnson, Boris Johnson's band of hopeless-cases-who-wouldn't-be-appointed-by-anyone-else, and a few hedge funds. I know you don't want to accept you were gulled, but you were.

    We all now have to live with it, but trying to invent "benefits of Brexit" is about as absurd as Putin trying to invent benefits from his invasion.
    Oh give over.

    We already have a trade deal agreed with the country I grew up in. That didn't exist pre-Brexit and wasn't possible as an EU member. That is a real benefit, right there.
    Its certainly a benefit to New Zealand! Or will be in a decade when it comes into effect. Less of a benefit for British farmers though, which is who the government claimed to be helping by quitting the (massively flawed) CAP.
    Bart doesn't like farmers or anyone else that isn't like him (a very small clique), so he doesn't care.
    You're kind of right actually.

    Why should I like farmers? Or anyone else I don't know, whether they're like me or not?

    I neither like nor dislike farmers, I am entirely agnostic to them and everyone else I don't know. If farmers do well then great, good for them. If they don't, then that's OK too, let them get out of business and let a more productive farmer use the land or find an alternative use for the land instead.

    I don't care about farmers any more than I would have cared about miners had I not been a baby when that was happening. We needed coal for electricity for three decades after the miners lost their jobs - did you care about them enough to think we should have prevented the closure of the mines?
    You prove my point; you are like a stereotype of an extreme left winger; completely devoid of empathy for anyone, unless you feel that they are a bit like you. You are in favour of all sorts of privilege unless they are privileges you can't access yourself. Pretty sad outlook on life really.
    I have empathy for others, I just don't cherrypick farmers (or any other self-interested group) over others.

    Were we wrong to let the mines close in the 80s?

    Was it wrong to let British Leyland ultimately fail?

    Was it wrong to allow the Luddites not to succeed in blocking new technology that put them out of work?

    I don't believe in Ludditism. I believe that chaotic evolution and the free market allows the best for all in the long run - and that support should be offered as a safety net for those who struggle as opposed to a way of life or "picking winners".
    Lol. You will soon be bleating about house prices or some other thing that "is not fair", and how the state should intervene on your behalf to redress the balance. Good post though, almost made you sound pseudo-intellectual, even though it was all bollox that will change with the wind no doubt.
    My objection is to the state interfering in the market preventing people building homes.

    I extend my belief in the free market to land. Anyone should be able to use their own land for whatever they choose, including constructing homes, if they prefer that, within reason.

    I don't want the state interfering getting into construction or anything else. I want deregulation and the state to get out of the way.
    You want something that you think might benefit you personally. Pure and simple.
    No, I'm consistent. I don't believe the state should be telling us how to run our lives, or the economy.

    If someone wants a home, they should be able to build one, wherever they want if the land is theirs.

    If someone wants to sleep with a consenting adult, they should be able to do so, so long as both consent.

    Etc etc - its not the state's business what adults do with their own property or their own lives.
    Thankfully for the rest of us we are happy to delegate a certain amount of freedom so that our next door neighbour on one side doesn't decide it is their right to build a glue factory next to our garden and the neighbour on the other side set up a 24 hour brothel with outdoor music venue.

    There are reasons why your simplistic views tend to be regarded as a bit silly.
    I'd have no objection to a 24 hour brothel opening near me, so long as everyone there is a consenting adult, but there are noise pollution regulations regarding outdoor music which are regulated by the Environmental Health Agency. I've never proposed getting rid of anti-pollution regulations.

    So long as the brothel, or the glue factory, aren't polluting absolutely holding back development is a bad thing. If they are polluting, then special zoning and regulations for polluting industries makes a lot of sense.

    If your residential next door neighbour is a twat who makes a lot of outdoor noise 24/7 they'll swiftly get visited by the Police or similar because the noise pollution rules apply to all including residential neighbours too.
    In what ways are planning rules any more anti-libertarian than the rules you have just suggested? Keep the planning laws, by all means reform, but no planning is about as silly as removing the restrictions you just mentioned. Good attempt though "Bart", but nil points for debate!
    Because rules on pollution are about protecting others from the harm of pollution and setting standards that anyone can operate by, so long as they don't pollute.

    Restrictions in order to inflate certain people's assets and take away the rights of others to act, even if they're not harming others, is not the same thing.

    As you've said, you don't want housing assets to fall in value. That's just protectionism and market rigging - let the free market determine the fair free value of housing, the state shouldn't be involved in price gouging.
    There are potential benefits of house prices falling. From a selfish point of view, that could be good for me, I could buy more property, but I wouldn't wish for it. It would be a disaster for many families that might find themselves in negative equity, and maybe be victims of repossession. But you wouldn't care about them. For people like you they are just a statistic as long as you are not one of the stats yourself. Having seen it happen to people in the 80s and 90s, I wouldn't wish it on anyone, even on an opinionated selfish oaf like yourself.
    65% of households are homeowners. Another 20% want to be.

    1. For those who aren't planning to move and have paid off their mortgage it makes little difference.
    2. Those with a manageable mortgage and looking to upsize benefit from lower prices.
    3. Potential first time buyers gain from lower prices.
    4. Those who have a maxed out mortgage lose out from lower prices.
    5. Those with multiple properties lose out.

    Group 1 is quite large. It would be surprising if groups 2 and 3 are not bigger than group 4. Group 5 deserve no sympathy if prices fall.
  • AlistairMAlistairM Posts: 872
    Seen this article on the BBC about how Russia has so far managed to soften the impact of sanctions: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-61381241

    One of the things I have noticed is that Russian airlines are still flying around in their Boeings and Airbuses. I thought that they were not going to be able to repair them due to lack of spare parts? Or are they just running through what they have left and slowly they will have to be taken out of service? Interested if anyone has any ideas on this.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 9,198
    Leon said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    A creature of habit.


    Lol

    Your photoshopping skills are impressive
    Comes from doctoring V5Cs and MOT certificates.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 29,334
    Carnyx said:

    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    Cookie said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Selebian said:

    FPT:

    I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.

    I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.

    Where to go?

    Bled (Slovenia) if you like chilling by a lake and/or a bit of walking - easy to get out of the main touristy bit, even on foot. Cheap transfer from Ljubljana.

    Aeolian islands, but likely too much faff to get to - don't know whether there are diect flights to Sicily, but you still have to cross Sicily and then get a boat.

    Edit: And second? Love and peaceful thoughts to all :kissing_heart:
    How recent is the Slovenia tip? Cos tourism there just exploded 2016-18

    Personally I am going riding in Sicily for a week in June and then want to spend a week there with a car. If I want to start in Syracuse and end up at Palermo do PBers recommend driving round the bottom, round the top or across the middle? bearing in mind I will have seen a bit of the interior (Madonie to Etna) from my horse.
    On a similar question, by youngest daughter has recently got a real bee in her bonnet about going to Scotland. She wants to see a mountain and a castle and a Highland Cow. Which is all very nice, but she is only seven and too small for munro bagging or too much history all in one go. Still, I'd like to take her (and her sisters, 10 and 12, and my wife) to Scotland in October. Somewhere with things to do for moderately active pre-teen girls, and somewhere where they can take in the scale of the place and be suitably awestruck. Any thoughts?
    A small herd of Highland coos are to be seen roaming around the north Pentlands, accessible from Swanston. You can sometimes get quite close to them, unfenced, which is a thrill.
    There's also a dry ski slope very close to that but I don't know the details for getting on the slope. It looks kid friendly, though, judging by the young families I've seen there. You can get up the northern peaks of the Pentlands quite easily but they aren't proper mountains.

    Munro bagging is possible even with small legs. The ski centre at the Spittal of Glenshee has several very accessible Munros, and even a 7-year old will make it to the top of Carn Aosda or Cairnwell. It's about 300m climb from the car park, and it's proper mountains up there.
    EDIT: the Swanston coos roam a large area, so it's not guaranteed
    Arthuir's Seat a definite if in Edinburgh.
    I was startled to find out the other day that Radical Road is closed. The best way to climb Arthur's Seat IMO. The news actually upset me, and I haven't been to Edinburgh for years.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 6,304
    Carnyx said:

    Farooq said:

    Farooq said:

    Cookie said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Selebian said:

    FPT:

    I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.

    I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.

    Where to go?

    Bled (Slovenia) if you like chilling by a lake and/or a bit of walking - easy to get out of the main touristy bit, even on foot. Cheap transfer from Ljubljana.

    Aeolian islands, but likely too much faff to get to - don't know whether there are diect flights to Sicily, but you still have to cross Sicily and then get a boat.

    Edit: And second? Love and peaceful thoughts to all :kissing_heart:
    How recent is the Slovenia tip? Cos tourism there just exploded 2016-18

    Personally I am going riding in Sicily for a week in June and then want to spend a week there with a car. If I want to start in Syracuse and end up at Palermo do PBers recommend driving round the bottom, round the top or across the middle? bearing in mind I will have seen a bit of the interior (Madonie to Etna) from my horse.
    On a similar question, by youngest daughter has recently got a real bee in her bonnet about going to Scotland. She wants to see a mountain and a castle and a Highland Cow. Which is all very nice, but she is only seven and too small for munro bagging or too much history all in one go. Still, I'd like to take her (and her sisters, 10 and 12, and my wife) to Scotland in October. Somewhere with things to do for moderately active pre-teen girls, and somewhere where they can take in the scale of the place and be suitably awestruck. Any thoughts?
    A small herd of Highland coos are to be seen roaming around the north Pentlands, accessible from Swanston. You can sometimes get quite close to them, unfenced, which is a thrill.
    There's also a dry ski slope very close to that but I don't know the details for getting on the slope. It looks kid friendly, though, judging by the young families I've seen there. You can get up the northern peaks of the Pentlands quite easily but they aren't proper mountains.

    Munro bagging is possible even with small legs. The ski centre at the Spittal of Glenshee has several very accessible Munros, and even a 7-year old will make it to the top of Carn Aosda or Cairnwell. It's about 300m climb from the car park, and it's proper mountains up there.
    EDIT: the Swanston coos roam a large area, so it's not guaranteed
    Arthuir's Seat a definite if in Edinburgh.
    Yes, it looks much worse than it is. An adult can jog up in 20 minutes flat from the car park at Holyrood, and in the summer get an icecream from the ever-present van in said car park. Are there coos in HP though? I don't remember seeing any.

    If you go up Arthur's Seat, take the path from Holyrood, not the steps from the south. The steps are brutal to climb and it's no fun at all.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 19,362

    Dura_Ace said:

    A creature of habit.


    Can you photoshop a copy of "Gay Times" or "Attitude" in there especially for our resident homophobe?
    Are you for some obscure reason accusing me of “homophobia”?!

    I will admit to many vices - nearly all of them - but that isn’t one. I actually tried being gay once. Didn’t like it, not for me, but I certainly don’t go around “hating” people that do like it

    It’s like hating someone for having red hair or being tall. Ridiculous
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 70,830
    AlistairM said:

    Seen this article on the BBC about how Russia has so far managed to soften the impact of sanctions: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-61381241

    One of the things I have noticed is that Russian airlines are still flying around in their Boeings and Airbuses. I thought that they were not going to be able to repair them due to lack of spare parts? Or are they just running through what they have left and slowly they will have to be taken out of service? Interested if anyone has any ideas on this.

    They seized all the leased international aircraft that were stranded in Russia, so they can steal the parts off them.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 4,989
    I do have one confession to make, now back in Gods Own Country accosted by my brother “fools who vote Libdem let labour make inroads is the fact of a wasted Libdem vote”

    I stayed awake 40 hours studying every minutiae of last weeks elections, yet somehow completely missed what was happening in North Yorkshire! 🤦‍♀️

    Have I slept through acrimony on the last thread? Oh goody I can now go and read it 😆
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 4,263
    Dura_Ace said:

    Leon said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    A creature of habit.


    Lol

    Your photoshopping skills are impressive
    Comes from doctoring V5Cs and MOT certificates.
    You really are a very naughty boy, aren't you?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 21,151
    Farooq said:

    Carnyx said:

    Cookie said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Selebian said:

    FPT:

    I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.

    I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.

    Where to go?

    Bled (Slovenia) if you like chilling by a lake and/or a bit of walking - easy to get out of the main touristy bit, even on foot. Cheap transfer from Ljubljana.

    Aeolian islands, but likely too much faff to get to - don't know whether there are diect flights to Sicily, but you still have to cross Sicily and then get a boat.

    Edit: And second? Love and peaceful thoughts to all :kissing_heart:
    How recent is the Slovenia tip? Cos tourism there just exploded 2016-18

    Personally I am going riding in Sicily for a week in June and then want to spend a week there with a car. If I want to start in Syracuse and end up at Palermo do PBers recommend driving round the bottom, round the top or across the middle? bearing in mind I will have seen a bit of the interior (Madonie to Etna) from my horse.
    On a similar question, by youngest daughter has recently got a real bee in her bonnet about going to Scotland. She wants to see a mountain and a castle and a Highland Cow. Which is all very nice, but she is only seven and too small for munro bagging or too much history all in one go. Still, I'd like to take her (and her sisters, 10 and 12, and my wife) to Scotland in October. Somewhere with things to do for moderately active pre-teen girls, and somewhere where they can take in the scale of the place and be suitably awestruck. Any thoughts?
    Not an expert on preteens of any gender, but ...

    Thinjk about taking in Stirling for a couple of days at least - great castle, real scenery, nice town, cattle too in field or in nearby attractions. Wallace Monument, of course, and near the Trossachs for some Highland scenery. Access by train easy if that helps. That would tick the daughterly boxes pdq.

    https://www.visitscotland.com/blog/holiday-ideas/great-places-to-see-highland-cows-in-scotland/

    Maybe look at Oban for a cruise around Mull, if available?

    The Highlands can be quite a big place in terms of driving but the Trossachs should give some heather and bumps. Train/A9 to Aviemore if you want more?

    I'm tempted to say forget Ben Nevis/Fort William - not my fave area. BN is far too high/lethal for many.

    Lothians and east Borders do have plenty of castles and walks and beaches and things to do. And Edinburgh as well.

    Look at Historic Scotland and National Trust for Scotland websites.

    Possibly also National Museum of Rural Life or whatever it is called at East Kilbride - more over to the Glasgow side but still accessible enough.

    But avoid midge season in Highlands!

    BN in good weather is fine but the bit you have to watch out for is the Red Burn crossing. If that's frozen over it's really quite dangerous. If you're up the mountain in summer season on a weekend, even when the clouds come in there are so many people up there it's possible to navigate just by sheer numbers of people. The same does not apply during quieter times and getting lost up there is remarkably easy.
    It's a gruelling climb and for the safest experience go there late in the summer when you're less likely to have much snow up top. I've seen very young children with no experience manage the whole climb, but 7 really on the young side of it.
    I'd feel safer to suggest a smaller climb somewhere fun and easier to get to - your suggestion of the Pentlands was an excellent one - the views of the Forth from the bridges to the open sea are great for a bairn. But even North Berwick Law or the coast walks would do well.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 1,955
    edited May 11
    AlistairM said:

    Cookie said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    Selebian said:

    FPT:

    I'm going to ask a totally OT travel advice question because everyone would rather talk about coffee machines and a very personal argument I'm not really following or basically anything except Andy Burnham.

    I've got a week free in Europe in September, Berlin at one end and Amsterdam at the other and just need to hang out somewhere in between. I'll mostly be working instead of running around committing tourism but I want somewhere that's just an interesting place to be for a week or so, preferably a single flight up to 3/4 hours long from both Berlin and Amsterdam and a few hours travel max from the airport (train or rentacar or whatever). UK/France/Belgium/Holland/Germany are out because I've been to them too much before. Somewhere that's kind of a bargain because it's a little bit out-of-season is also good.

    Where to go?

    Bled (Slovenia) if you like chilling by a lake and/or a bit of walking - easy to get out of the main touristy bit, even on foot. Cheap transfer from Ljubljana.

    Aeolian islands, but likely too much faff to get to - don't know whether there are diect flights to Sicily, but you still have to cross Sicily and then get a boat.

    Edit: And second? Love and peaceful thoughts to all :kissing_heart:
    How recent is the Slovenia tip? Cos tourism there just exploded 2016-18

    Personally I am going riding in Sicily for a week in June and then want to spend a week there with a car. If I want to start in Syracuse and end up at Palermo do PBers recommend driving round the bottom, round the top or across the middle? bearing in mind I will have seen a bit of the interior (Madonie to Etna) from my horse.
    On a similar question, by youngest daughter has recently got a real bee in her bonnet about going to Scotland. She wants to see a mountain and a castle and a Highland Cow. Which is all very nice, but she is only seven and too small for munro bagging or too much history all in one go. Still, I'd like to take her (and her sisters, 10 and 12, and my wife) to Scotland in October. Somewhere with things to do for moderately active pre-teen girls, and somewhere where they can take in the scale of the place and be suitably awestruck. Any thoughts?
    A seven year old she will have heard the story of the Loch Ness monster so I would go Nessie spotting.
    I thought it was going to be awful but the Loch Ness visitor centre is very good. It tells a story of Nessie and lets everyone make up their own minds.

    https://www.lochness.com/

    My 12yo, 8yo and 4yo (at the time) all very much enjoyed it. Beware of the almost never-ending gift shop at the end!

    Also nearby Urquhart Castle is very much worth a visit with a stunning location right on Loch Ness.
    I was in Drumnadrochit in late March. It's not come out of the pandemic too well, the lovely lodge hotel was shut as was nessieland next door but the other exhibition was open, it's a bit irritating though as Adrian Shine and co try to make it way too scientific and take the romance out of it.
    Now I'm not allowed to drive I had to get the bus there and back from Inverness which is sub optimal
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 34,650
    AlistairM said:

    Seen this article on the BBC about how Russia has so far managed to soften the impact of sanctions: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-61381241

    One of the things I have noticed is that Russian airlines are still flying around in their Boeings and Airbuses. I thought that they were not going to be able to repair them due to lack of spare parts? Or are they just running through what they have left and slowly they will have to be taken out of service? Interested if anyone has any ideas on this.

    Cannibalising parts.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 6,304


    2019? Hollowed out Corbyn factor, as Mike Smithson often tells an unlistening PB.

    We agree
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 10,465

    boulay said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Which part of "control our borders" included "zero border checks" ?

    Brexit is a shitshow, and will remain so long after those who voted for it are dead.

    “Control our borders” including having “zero border checks” is by definition controlling our borders.

    We control whether we check or don’t. Not a complicated concept.

    You control your front door - you can choose to lock it or leave the door swinging open - whatever option you choose based on what’s best for your family - you are controlling it - your neighbour isn’t.
    This is true enough. However, I am pretty sure that "wide open with no checks" was neither what the Vote Leave campaign were proposing nor what leave voters believed they would get.

    If we choose to maintain the same control of our borders (none) but suffer greatly from the other side controlling their border (goods and people) then what have we gained? Brexit was supposed to make people's lived experience better, not worse.
    Vote Leave and Boris Johnson specifically proposed shedding the EU's protectionism.

    http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/vote_leave_to_create_300_000_british_jobs.html

    We're doing exactly that in dropping the EU's checks with non-EU produce, where its not necessary. Something we couldn't do as EU members. This is exactly what I voted for and what swung me from Remain to Leave.

    Vote Leave to create 300,000 British jobs
    May 12, 2016
    In the last few years, the EU has sought to complete five key trade deals, with the USA, Japan, ASEAN, India and Mercosur. Because of protectionism in other European countries, the EU has failed to get a trade deal with any of these countries.
    When we Vote Leave we will be able to do trade deals with all of these countries much more quickly. According to the EU’s own figures this will create 284,000 new jobs in the UK.
    Commenting, Boris Johnson said:

    'If we Vote Leave we will be able to forge bold new trade deals with growing economies around the world. These are deals that the EU has tried and failed to achieve due to protectionist forces in Europe.

    ‘After we liberate ourselves from the shackles of Brussels we will be able to create hundreds of thousands of new jobs right across the UK.

    ‘Predictably the gloomsters want to do down Britain - they claim we are not strong enough to stand on our own two feet. What total tosh. There is a huge world of opportunity and prosperity out there if we take this opportunity to take back control.’
    Oh do stop it. Brexit was pointless. There are no upsides unless you are Boris Johnson, Boris Johnson's band of hopeless-cases-who-wouldn't-be-appointed-by-anyone-else, and a few hedge funds. I know you don't want to accept you were gulled, but you were.

    We all now have to live with it, but trying to invent "benefits of Brexit" is about as absurd as Putin trying to invent benefits from his invasion.
    Oh give over.

    We already have a trade deal agreed with the country I grew up in. That didn't exist pre-Brexit and wasn't possible as an EU member. That is a real benefit, right there.
    Its certainly a benefit to New Zealand! Or will be in a decade when it comes into effect. Less of a benefit for British farmers though, which is who the government claimed to be helping by quitting the (massively flawed) CAP.
    Bart doesn't like farmers or anyone else that isn't like him (a very small clique), so he doesn't care.
    You're kind of right actually.

    Why should I like farmers? Or anyone else I don't know, whether they're like me or not?

    I neither like nor dislike farmers, I am entirely agnostic to them and everyone else I don't know. If farmers do well then great, good for them. If they don't, then that's OK too, let them get out of business and let a more productive farmer use the land or find an alternative use for the land instead.

    I don't care about farmers any more than I would have cared about miners had I not been a baby when that was happening. We needed coal for electricity for three decades after the miners lost their jobs - did you care about them enough to think we should have prevented the closure of the mines?
    You prove my point; you are like a stereotype of an extreme left winger; completely devoid of empathy for anyone, unless you feel that they are a bit like you. You are in favour of all sorts of privilege unless they are privileges you can't access yourself. Pretty sad outlook on life really.
    I have empathy for others, I just don't cherrypick farmers (or any other self-interested group) over others.

    Were we wrong to let the mines close in the 80s?

    Was it wrong to let British Leyland ultimately fail?

    Was it wrong to allow the Luddites not to succeed in blocking new technology that put them out of work?

    I don't believe in Ludditism. I believe that chaotic evolution and the free market allows the best for all in the long run - and that support should be offered as a safety net for those who struggle as opposed to a way of life or "picking winners".
    Lol. You will soon be bleating about house prices or some other thing that "is not fair", and how the state should intervene on your behalf to redress the balance. Good post though, almost made you sound pseudo-intellectual, even though it was all bollox that will change with the wind no doubt.
    My objection is to the state interfering in the market preventing people building homes.

    I extend my belief in the free market to land. Anyone should be able to use their own land for whatever they choose, including constructing homes, if they prefer that, within reason.

    I don't want the state interfering getting into construction or anything else. I want deregulation and the state to get out of the way.
    You want something that you think might benefit you personally. Pure and simple.
    No, I'm consistent. I don't believe the state should be telling us how to run our lives, or the economy.

    If someone wants a home, they should be able to build one, wherever they want if the land is theirs.

    If someone wants to sleep with a consenting adult, they should be able to do so, so long as both consent.

    Etc etc - its not the state's business what adults do with their own property or their own lives.
    Thankfully for the rest of us we are happy to delegate a certain amount of freedom so that our next door neighbour on one side doesn't decide it is their right to build a glue factory next to our garden and the neighbour on the other side set up a 24 hour brothel with outdoor music venue.

    There are reasons why your simplistic views tend to be regarded as a bit silly.
    I'd have no objection to a 24 hour brothel opening near me, so long as everyone there is a consenting adult, but there are noise pollution regulations regarding outdoor music which are regulated by the Environmental Health Agency. I've never proposed getting rid of anti-pollution regulations.

    So long as the brothel, or the glue factory, aren't polluting absolutely holding back development is a bad thing. If they are polluting, then special zoning and regulations for polluting industries makes a lot of sense.

    If your residential next door neighbour is a twat who makes a lot of outdoor noise 24/7 they'll swiftly get visited by the Police or similar because the noise pollution rules apply to all including residential neighbours too.
    In what ways are planning rules any more anti-libertarian than the rules you have just suggested? Keep the planning laws, by all means reform, but no planning is about as silly as removing the restrictions you just mentioned. Good attempt though "Bart", but nil points for debate!
    Because rules on pollution are about protecting others from the harm of pollution and setting standards that anyone can operate by, so long as they don't pollute.

    Restrictions in order to inflate certain people's assets and take away the rights of others to act, even if they're not harming others, is not the same thing.

    As you've said, you don't want housing assets to fall in value. That's just protectionism and market rigging - let the free market determine the fair free value of housing, the state shouldn't be involved in price gouging.
    There are potential benefits of house prices falling. From a selfish point of view, that could be good for me, I could buy more property, but I wouldn't wish for it. It would be a disaster for many families that might find themselves in negative equity, and maybe be victims of repossession. But you wouldn't care about them. For people like you they are just a statistic as long as you are not one of the stats yourself. Having seen it happen to people in the 80s and 90s, I wouldn't wish it on anyone, even on an opinionated selfish oaf like yourself.
    65% of households are homeowners. Another 20% want to be.

    1. For those who aren't planning to move and have paid off their mortgage it makes little difference.
    2. Those with a manageable mortgage and looking to upsize benefit from lower prices.
    3. Potential first time buyers gain from lower prices.
    4. Those who have a maxed out mortgage lose out from lower prices.
    5. Those with multiple properties lose out.

    Group 1 is quite large. It would be surprising if groups 2 and 3 are not bigger than group 4. Group 5 deserve no sympathy if prices fall.
    You might want to sell the benefits to those that were repossessed back in the day when it happened before.

    A large part of Group 5 does not lose, because they are often in group 1. They may use the situation to buy more property.

    The ideal situation would be house price stagnation, allowing salaries to catch up. House price collapse causes major disruption and stimulates recession. It is why successive governments desperately try to avoid it.
This discussion has been closed.