Blow for Nicola Sturgeon as study shows even Yes voters want to KEEP majority of UK state Polling suggests even Yes voters want to keep the British welfare system, armed forces and pensions while also following the same path on international diplomacy
Tendentious interpretation of the question. It's like claiming that the need for a health service in Scotland means that independence is impossible becauise NHS. Which is a separate organization already.
The armed forces don't have that many personnel left, and AIUI the rank-and-file grunts are paid even less on average than the striking NHS workers - as well as having no labour rights to speak of, of course. It's small wonder that the admiral sounds peeved.
Blow for Nicola Sturgeon as study shows even Yes voters want to KEEP majority of UK state Polling suggests even Yes voters want to keep the British welfare system, armed forces and pensions while also following the same path on international diplomacy
Dominic Raab misses the point, perhaps deliberately. What we want are fewer murders, not more gimmicks. The scandals about the Zara Aleena murder are, first, yet another lone woman was attacked, raped and murdered, and second that her killer had already been recalled to prison for breaching his parole terms, but he was out when the police popped round to pick him up. That he declined to stand in the dock to be sentenced is neither here nor there, except it will give Raab the appearance of action.
Not a big surprise; good news for England, I feel.
England will fail at the next European championship, of course, but it'd be churlish to blame that on Southgate. He's done a credible job of trying to manufacture a silk purse from the sow's ear of the biggest underachievers in the international game, but he's not the second coming of Christ. Miracles cannot be expected of him.
The 2018-2021 period seems to me to have been one of substantial overachievement relative to the established norm, whereas more recent form - the dreadful Nations' League campaign and the failure against the French - merely represents a reassertion of sporting gravity. England specialise in reasonably consistent mediocrity (as evidenced by their holding the record for World Cup quarter final exits, now at seven,) punctuated by the occasional horror show: a top ten side, some distance behind the front rank and lacking sufficient quality or consistency to have any realistic chance of ever winning anything. That is, if you could fast forward another couple of centuries then you might find that they finally, at some point, won another major tournament once, through the monkeys-typewriters principle. But the chances of any of us alive today being witness to such an event are surely slim?
Perhaps someone who understands football much better than I do can explain how it is that the women's team finally found a way to win a tournament, whereas the men always find a way to faceplant? What's wrong with them?
What's wrong with them? There are better teams, that's all.
That's no answer to anything. Why are there always better teams?
Well for most major footballing countries there are.
I’d say England are bang on what you’d expect. To be, on average, in the top 8 of the world in world cups isn’t bad at all.
Since 1966 Germany have won three times, Italy and France twice each and England have done no better than fourth place. It's mediocrity. Deep mediocrity. Why are they so mediocre? It's a simple enough question.
Because we’re not as good as Germany, Italy of France and have no god given right to be?
There’s this assumption that this country should rule the world and if it doesn’t that’s a tragedy.
Regularly getting into the knockout stages of major tournaments is OK. More would be nice, but it’s not our entitlement.
I never suggested that it was an "entitlement." The women's team weren't "entitled" to win their European championship but they found a way to do it regardless, whereas the men faceplanted. Again. I asked why they seem never to be good enough when broadly comparable neighbours sometimes actually are.
Look at it another way: Croatia - less than half the population of London, only started entering the World Cup in 1998 - has so far managed one 2nd and two 3rd places; England, which has been trying since 1950, won once, 56 years ago, and hasn't come close since. Two fourth places and a dozen assorted flops, mostly quarter final faceplants or failing even to qualify. It's just so meh. Beige. The kit ought not to be white or red, it should be beige. Fawn. Rental magnolia. Especially when you think of the vast resources at the command of the FA - football attracts more money, attention and participation than every other sport put together - it's all just so very underwhelming and poor, really.
England is actually the cricket sibling of the "flat track bully" - -consistently beats worse teams in qualifying and championships (yes you have to do this of course ) but fails miserably when up against any team "its own size" .
League football - and Premier League football especially - is what matters most in England. The media cares about the national side far more than most regular fans do. Until that changes, England will usually under-perform. And it won’t change. So England’s only realistic hope is a group of world class players in all key positions, who all get on well enough to put club rivalries aside, that makes it next to impossible to fail. That has not yet happened, though it’s getting closer.
Blow for Nicola Sturgeon as study shows even Yes voters want to KEEP majority of UK state Polling suggests even Yes voters want to keep the British welfare system, armed forces and pensions while also following the same path on international diplomacy
Tendentious interpretation of the question. It's like claiming that the need for a health service in Scotland means that independence is impossible becauise NHS. Which is a separate organization already.
"Access to a UK passport and citizenship" 47% hahahaha
I do wonder if much of this Yes support won't survive an initial brush with reality. All the campaign needs to do is say stuff like:
"Like Brexit..." "During the negotiations..." "State pension payments will cease 6 months after the referendum" "People born in Scotland who have lived in England, Wales and Northern Ireland for over 5 years...." "Major arterial routes will remain open, like the M74 and A1, but..."
Blow for Nicola Sturgeon as study shows even Yes voters want to KEEP majority of UK state Polling suggests even Yes voters want to keep the British welfare system, armed forces and pensions while also following the same path on international diplomacy
It's a wholly predictable ordering or priorities. The average Scottish voter wants the cheap finery of a state - a president, sports teams, as many opportunities as possible to repudiate the English, flag shagging basically - whilst continuing to depend on the neighbours for all the boring and expensive stuff, e.g. the upkeep of all their clapped out sick old folk and an army.
I think that's right. It's about Scottish self-respect and pride.
Which is why a clever Unionist politician should be able to work with that to flip the SNP on its head.
The armed forces don't have that many personnel left, and AIUI the rank-and-file grunts are paid even less on average than the striking NHS workers - as well as having no labour rights to speak of, of course. It's small wonder that the admiral sounds peeved.
Not to mention that the squaddies got a substantial real terms pay cut themselves this year.
The "independent" pay bodies based their awards on inflation as it was at the beginning of the year, a few percent. The government could announce that the 2023 awards will be based on inflation at the beginning of 2023 and will be funded in full. That would be a face saving way to back down.
One interesting twist from the legislation over strikes is that the threshold in a postal ballot is so high that when it is exceeded the strike has overwhelming support and is harder to defeat. The timetable also means that strikes drag on interminably. We are currently arguing about pay awards for a financial year with only 3 1/2 months left, we should really be talking about the ones for 2023.
Blow for Nicola Sturgeon as study shows even Yes voters want to KEEP majority of UK state Polling suggests even Yes voters want to keep the British welfare system, armed forces and pensions while also following the same path on international diplomacy
‘Labour’s run to the right is pushing Scotland towards independence’
The last month has been the first sustained period of British history in which Yes has led in the Scottish independence polls at the same time that Labour has led in the Westminster polls.
This isn’t just some geeky psephological detail. It is a disaster for Unionists – a disaster made by Keir Starmer and the Labour right that has captured his ear.
To understand why, we have to understand who the swing voters are in Scottish constitutional politics. Because, broadly, there are two ways people approach the independence question.
One is about national identity: do people feel more Scottish or more British?
The second way is to see it as a choice between states: is Holyrood or Westminster more likely to deliver the outcomes they want?
Blow for Nicola Sturgeon as study shows even Yes voters want to KEEP majority of UK state Polling suggests even Yes voters want to keep the British welfare system, armed forces and pensions while also following the same path on international diplomacy
Tendentious interpretation of the question. It's like claiming that the need for a health service in Scotland means that independence is impossible becauise NHS. Which is a separate organization already.
"Access to a UK passport and citizenship" 47% hahahaha
I do wonder if much of this Yes support won't survive an initial brush with reality. All the campaign needs to do is say stuff like:
"Like Brexit..." "During the negotiations..." "State pension payments will cease 6 months after the referendum" "People born in Scotland who have lived in England, Wales and Northern Ireland for over 5 years...." "Major arterial routes will remain open, like the M74 and A1, but..."
A Tory government, or a Starmer one, would be hard pushed to take the line that "Sindy would be a mess and disaster, just like Brexit" even if it is true. Neither Tories nor Labour can face that truth yet.
Blow for Nicola Sturgeon as study shows even Yes voters want to KEEP majority of UK state Polling suggests even Yes voters want to keep the British welfare system, armed forces and pensions while also following the same path on international diplomacy
Tendentious interpretation of the question. It's like claiming that the need for a health service in Scotland means that independence is impossible becauise NHS. Which is a separate organization already.
These numpties will clutch at any straw or lie Carnyx. You have to laugh at their stupidity, how dumb do you need to be to come up with this rubbish. A 5 year old would know what it means.
The Sunday Rawnsley: A year of cascading scandals and whipsawing policies has also been 12 months in which vital public services have come dangerously close to collapse and food banks haven’t been able to cope with the demand for their help. The serial debauchery of the king of rogues was followed by the ruinous reign of the mad queen. Financial markets started applying a “moron premium” to the price of lending to Britain.
It’s not disruption by the opposition parties that has destabilised the governance of Britain but the Conservative party itself.
No explanation can overlook Brexit, a rupture unique to this country and one that has left Britons poorer than they need have been, while scrambling the synapses of the Conservative party responsible for it.
A sequence of successively worse prime ministers has crashed and burned because they promised things they couldn’t deliver. This cycle of leadership boom and bust has been accompanied by vicious purges as the so-called Brexit revolution devoured itself. The pool of Tory talent has been drained, especially of Conservatives of more decent and sensible character, many of whom have been ejected from the party or abandoned it in despair.
So 2022 has been a year of extreme misgovernance, but it is best interpreted not as a shockingly unexpected aberration, but the culmination of forces unleashed since 2016.
Mutinous Conservative MPs are already chuntering that, if their prospects aren’t looking up by the spring, Mr Sunak will find himself putsched out of Downing Street next year. And the name you are most likely to hear bandied about as his replacement? Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson.
That this is even being talked about tells us that the dementia of the Conservative party has reached a very advanced stage.
Britain is unlucky. Not only did we suffer from Covid and Putin, on top of that we suffered from this bizarre flavour of the Conservative Party who gave us hard Brexit, Truss-o-nomics and a myriad of corrupt and crazy schemes that mean today we can’t afford nurses.
Blow for Nicola Sturgeon as study shows even Yes voters want to KEEP majority of UK state Polling suggests even Yes voters want to keep the British welfare system, armed forces and pensions while also following the same path on international diplomacy
It's a wholly predictable ordering or priorities. The average Scottish voter wants the cheap finery of a state - a president, sports teams, as many opportunities as possible to repudiate the English, flag shagging basically - whilst continuing to depend on the neighbours for all the boring and expensive stuff, e.g. the upkeep of all their clapped out sick old folk and an army.
I think that's right. It's about Scottish self-respect and pride.
Which is why a clever Unionist politician should be able to work with that to flip the SNP on its head.
LOL, clever and "unionist politician" are oxymorons or perhaps just morons.
Blow for Nicola Sturgeon as study shows even Yes voters want to KEEP majority of UK state Polling suggests even Yes voters want to keep the British welfare system, armed forces and pensions while also following the same path on international diplomacy
Tendentious interpretation of the question. It's like claiming that the need for a health service in Scotland means that independence is impossible becauise NHS. Which is a separate organization already.
"Access to a UK passport and citizenship" 47% hahahaha
I do wonder if much of this Yes support won't survive an initial brush with reality. All the campaign needs to do is say stuff like:
"Like Brexit..." "During the negotiations..." "State pension payments will cease 6 months after the referendum" "People born in Scotland who have lived in England, Wales and Northern Ireland for over 5 years...." "Major arterial routes will remain open, like the M74 and A1, but..."
A Tory government, or a Starmer one, would be hard pushed to take the line that "Sindy would be a mess and disaster, just like Brexit" even if it is true. Neither Tories nor Labour can face that truth yet.
I suppose they could do it implicitly. Particularly that no one knows what it actually is.
Blow for Nicola Sturgeon as study shows even Yes voters want to KEEP majority of UK state Polling suggests even Yes voters want to keep the British welfare system, armed forces and pensions while also following the same path on international diplomacy
Tendentious interpretation of the question. It's like claiming that the need for a health service in Scotland means that independence is impossible becauise NHS. Which is a separate organization already.
"Access to a UK passport and citizenship" 47% hahahaha
I do wonder if much of this Yes support won't survive an initial brush with reality. All the campaign needs to do is say stuff like:
"Like Brexit..." "During the negotiations..." "State pension payments will cease 6 months after the referendum" "People born in Scotland who have lived in England, Wales and Northern Ireland for over 5 years...." "Major arterial routes will remain open, like the M74 and A1, but..."
Blow for Nicola Sturgeon as study shows even Yes voters want to KEEP majority of UK state Polling suggests even Yes voters want to keep the British welfare system, armed forces and pensions while also following the same path on international diplomacy
Blow for Nicola Sturgeon as study shows even Yes voters want to KEEP majority of UK state Polling suggests even Yes voters want to keep the British welfare system, armed forces and pensions while also following the same path on international diplomacy
Tendentious interpretation of the question. It's like claiming that the need for a health service in Scotland means that independence is impossible becauise NHS. Which is a separate organization already.
"Access to a UK passport and citizenship" 47% hahahaha
I do wonder if much of this Yes support won't survive an initial brush with reality. All the campaign needs to do is say stuff like:
"Like Brexit..." "During the negotiations..." "State pension payments will cease 6 months after the referendum" "People born in Scotland who have lived in England, Wales and Northern Ireland for over 5 years...." "Major arterial routes will remain open, like the M74 and A1, but..."
A Tory government, or a Starmer one, would be hard pushed to take the line that "Sindy would be a mess and disaster, just like Brexit" even if it is true. Neither Tories nor Labour can face that truth yet.
Particularly “Sindy would be a mess and disaster, just like Brexit which we are insisting on keeping”.
I do wonder if Starmer has the necessary rhetorical deftness to manage the inevitable reverse ferret on Brexit. Actually I don’t; he doesn’t.
Not a big surprise; good news for England, I feel.
England will fail at the next European championship, of course, but it'd be churlish to blame that on Southgate. He's done a credible job of trying to manufacture a silk purse from the sow's ear of the biggest underachievers in the international game, but he's not the second coming of Christ. Miracles cannot be expected of him.
The 2018-2021 period seems to me to have been one of substantial overachievement relative to the established norm, whereas more recent form - the dreadful Nations' League campaign and the failure against the French - merely represents a reassertion of sporting gravity. England specialise in reasonably consistent mediocrity (as evidenced by their holding the record for World Cup quarter final exits, now at seven,) punctuated by the occasional horror show: a top ten side, some distance behind the front rank and lacking sufficient quality or consistency to have any realistic chance of ever winning anything. That is, if you could fast forward another couple of centuries then you might find that they finally, at some point, won another major tournament once, through the monkeys-typewriters principle. But the chances of any of us alive today being witness to such an event are surely slim?
Perhaps someone who understands football much better than I do can explain how it is that the women's team finally found a way to win a tournament, whereas the men always find a way to faceplant? What's wrong with them?
What's wrong with them? There are better teams, that's all.
That's no answer to anything. Why are there always better teams?
Well for most major footballing countries there are.
I’d say England are bang on what you’d expect. To be, on average, in the top 8 of the world in world cups isn’t bad at all.
Since 1966 Germany have won three times, Italy and France twice each and England have done no better than fourth place. It's mediocrity. Deep mediocrity. Why are they so mediocre? It's a simple enough question.
Because we’re not as good as Germany, Italy of France and have no god given right to be?
There’s this assumption that this country should rule the world and if it doesn’t that’s a tragedy.
Regularly getting into the knockout stages of major tournaments is OK. More would be nice, but it’s not our entitlement.
I never suggested that it was an "entitlement." The women's team weren't "entitled" to win their European championship but they found a way to do it regardless, whereas the men faceplanted. Again. I asked why they seem never to be good enough when broadly comparable neighbours sometimes actually are.
Look at it another way: Croatia - less than half the population of London, only started entering the World Cup in 1998 - has so far managed one 2nd and two 3rd places; England, which has been trying since 1950, won once, 56 years ago, and hasn't come close since. Two fourth places and a dozen assorted flops, mostly quarter final faceplants or failing even to qualify. It's just so meh. Beige. The kit ought not to be white or red, it should be beige. Fawn. Rental magnolia. Especially when you think of the vast resources at the command of the FA - football attracts more money, attention and participation than every other sport put together - it's all just so very underwhelming and poor, really.
England is actually the cricket sibling of the "flat track bully" - -consistently beats worse teams in qualifying and championships (yes you have to do this of course ) but fails miserably when up against any team "its own size" .
League football - and Premier League football especially - is what matters most in England. The media cares about the national side far more than most regular fans do. Until that changes, England will usually under-perform. And it won’t change. So England’s only realistic hope is a group of world class players in all key positions, who all get on well enough to put club rivalries aside, that makes it next to impossible to fail. That has not yet happened, though it’s getting closer.
Similarly, the majority of active cricket fans still care far more for their county side than for the national side. It's one reason why England were never a very good cricket side.
What I don't think Strauss and the ECB have grasped is that most active fans would accept an Ashes defeat if it meant their side winning the county championship. The former is a nice to have, the other is greedily desired. Therefore the Strauss review (and the Hundred) had the priorities of their owners exactly backwards.
The issue is that casual cricket fans probably have their priorities the other way around, partly because that includes most journalists.
Not a big surprise; good news for England, I feel.
England will fail at the next European championship, of course, but it'd be churlish to blame that on Southgate. He's done a credible job of trying to manufacture a silk purse from the sow's ear of the biggest underachievers in the international game, but he's not the second coming of Christ. Miracles cannot be expected of him.
The 2018-2021 period seems to me to have been one of substantial overachievement relative to the established norm, whereas more recent form - the dreadful Nations' League campaign and the failure against the French - merely represents a reassertion of sporting gravity. England specialise in reasonably consistent mediocrity (as evidenced by their holding the record for World Cup quarter final exits, now at seven,) punctuated by the occasional horror show: a top ten side, some distance behind the front rank and lacking sufficient quality or consistency to have any realistic chance of ever winning anything. That is, if you could fast forward another couple of centuries then you might find that they finally, at some point, won another major tournament once, through the monkeys-typewriters principle. But the chances of any of us alive today being witness to such an event are surely slim?
Perhaps someone who understands football much better than I do can explain how it is that the women's team finally found a way to win a tournament, whereas the men always find a way to faceplant? What's wrong with them?
What's wrong with them? There are better teams, that's all.
That's no answer to anything. Why are there always better teams?
Well for most major footballing countries there are.
I’d say England are bang on what you’d expect. To be, on average, in the top 8 of the world in world cups isn’t bad at all.
Since 1966 Germany have won three times, Italy and France twice each and England have done no better than fourth place. It's mediocrity. Deep mediocrity. Why are they so mediocre? It's a simple enough question.
Because we’re not as good as Germany, Italy of France and have no god given right to be?
There’s this assumption that this country should rule the world and if it doesn’t that’s a tragedy.
Regularly getting into the knockout stages of major tournaments is OK. More would be nice, but it’s not our entitlement.
I never suggested that it was an "entitlement." The women's team weren't "entitled" to win their European championship but they found a way to do it regardless, whereas the men faceplanted. Again. I asked why they seem never to be good enough when broadly comparable neighbours sometimes actually are.
Look at it another way: Croatia - less than half the population of London, only started entering the World Cup in 1998 - has so far managed one 2nd and two 3rd places; England, which has been trying since 1950, won once, 56 years ago, and hasn't come close since. Two fourth places and a dozen assorted flops, mostly quarter final faceplants or failing even to qualify. It's just so meh. Beige. The kit ought not to be white or red, it should be beige. Fawn. Rental magnolia. Especially when you think of the vast resources at the command of the FA - football attracts more money, attention and participation than every other sport put together - it's all just so very underwhelming and poor, really.
England is actually the cricket sibling of the "flat track bully" - -consistently beats worse teams in qualifying and championships (yes you have to do this of course ) but fails miserably when up against any team "its own size" .
League football - and Premier League football especially - is what matters most in England. The media cares about the national side far more than most regular fans do. Until that changes, England will usually under-perform. And it won’t change. So England’s only realistic hope is a group of world class players in all key positions, who all get on well enough to put club rivalries aside, that makes it next to impossible to fail. That has not yet happened, though it’s getting closer.
It may be coincidence, but the French national team generally does very well and their league isn't up to much.
But more generally (and drawing threads together) how well should England be doing? A Euro final and World Cup QF is somewhere between about right and a bit better than we might expect... A big European nation but not obviously the biggest.
Echoes of the UK's wider status. A substantial country amongst other substantial countries. Prone to seeing itself as (still) Top Nation. Some of the discontent coming from not having come to terms with its true potential status, possibly underachieving because of a refusal, like faded gentry, to inhabit the current reality.
Blow for Nicola Sturgeon as study shows even Yes voters want to KEEP majority of UK state Polling suggests even Yes voters want to keep the British welfare system, armed forces and pensions while also following the same path on international diplomacy
Tendentious interpretation of the question. It's like claiming that the need for a health service in Scotland means that independence is impossible becauise NHS. Which is a separate organization already.
"Access to a UK passport and citizenship" 47% hahahaha
I do wonder if much of this Yes support won't survive an initial brush with reality. All the campaign needs to do is say stuff like:
"Like Brexit..." "During the negotiations..." "State pension payments will cease 6 months after the referendum" "People born in Scotland who have lived in England, Wales and Northern Ireland for over 5 years...." "Major arterial routes will remain open, like the M74 and A1, but..."
A Tory government, or a Starmer one, would be hard pushed to take the line that "Sindy would be a mess and disaster, just like Brexit" even if it is true. Neither Tories nor Labour can face that truth yet.
Particularly “Sindy would be a mess and disaster, just like Brexit which we are insisting on keeping”.
I do wonder if Starmer has the necessary rhetorical deftness to manage the inevitable reverse ferret on Brexit. Actually I don’t; he doesn’t.
'Sindy would be a mess and disaster, far more so than Brexit which we are now trying to limit the damage from' would be a very effective slogan. And would have the merit of being true.
Blow for Nicola Sturgeon as study shows even Yes voters want to KEEP majority of UK state Polling suggests even Yes voters want to keep the British welfare system, armed forces and pensions while also following the same path on international diplomacy
The Sunday Rawnsley: A year of cascading scandals and whipsawing policies has also been 12 months in which vital public services have come dangerously close to collapse and food banks haven’t been able to cope with the demand for their help. The serial debauchery of the king of rogues was followed by the ruinous reign of the mad queen. Financial markets started applying a “moron premium” to the price of lending to Britain.
It’s not disruption by the opposition parties that has destabilised the governance of Britain but the Conservative party itself.
No explanation can overlook Brexit, a rupture unique to this country and one that has left Britons poorer than they need have been, while scrambling the synapses of the Conservative party responsible for it.
A sequence of successively worse prime ministers has crashed and burned because they promised things they couldn’t deliver. This cycle of leadership boom and bust has been accompanied by vicious purges as the so-called Brexit revolution devoured itself. The pool of Tory talent has been drained, especially of Conservatives of more decent and sensible character, many of whom have been ejected from the party or abandoned it in despair.
So 2022 has been a year of extreme misgovernance, but it is best interpreted not as a shockingly unexpected aberration, but the culmination of forces unleashed since 2016.
Mutinous Conservative MPs are already chuntering that, if their prospects aren’t looking up by the spring, Mr Sunak will find himself putsched out of Downing Street next year. And the name you are most likely to hear bandied about as his replacement? Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson.
That this is even being talked about tells us that the dementia of the Conservative party has reached a very advanced stage.
Britain is unlucky. Not only did we suffer from Covid and Putin, on top of that we suffered from this bizarre flavour of the Conservative Party who gave us hard Brexit, Truss-o-nomics and a myriad of corrupt and crazy schemes that mean today we can’t afford nurses.
Meanwhile, SKS Labour thinks overseas nurses should only be allowed to enter the UK to work in the NHS if they can negotiate a dedicated military assault course with live ammunition.
Blow for Nicola Sturgeon as study shows even Yes voters want to KEEP majority of UK state Polling suggests even Yes voters want to keep the British welfare system, armed forces and pensions while also following the same path on international diplomacy
The Sunday Rawnsley: A year of cascading scandals and whipsawing policies has also been 12 months in which vital public services have come dangerously close to collapse and food banks haven’t been able to cope with the demand for their help. The serial debauchery of the king of rogues was followed by the ruinous reign of the mad queen. Financial markets started applying a “moron premium” to the price of lending to Britain.
It’s not disruption by the opposition parties that has destabilised the governance of Britain but the Conservative party itself.
No explanation can overlook Brexit, a rupture unique to this country and one that has left Britons poorer than they need have been, while scrambling the synapses of the Conservative party responsible for it.
A sequence of successively worse prime ministers has crashed and burned because they promised things they couldn’t deliver. This cycle of leadership boom and bust has been accompanied by vicious purges as the so-called Brexit revolution devoured itself. The pool of Tory talent has been drained, especially of Conservatives of more decent and sensible character, many of whom have been ejected from the party or abandoned it in despair.
So 2022 has been a year of extreme misgovernance, but it is best interpreted not as a shockingly unexpected aberration, but the culmination of forces unleashed since 2016.
Mutinous Conservative MPs are already chuntering that, if their prospects aren’t looking up by the spring, Mr Sunak will find himself putsched out of Downing Street next year. And the name you are most likely to hear bandied about as his replacement? Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson.
That this is even being talked about tells us that the dementia of the Conservative party has reached a very advanced stage.
Britain is unlucky. Not only did we suffer from Covid and Putin, on top of that we suffered from this bizarre flavour of the Conservative Party who gave us hard Brexit, Truss-o-nomics and a myriad of corrupt and crazy schemes that mean today we can’t afford nurses.
Britain made its own luck, by voting for the Conservatives!
Not a big surprise; good news for England, I feel.
England will fail at the next European championship, of course, but it'd be churlish to blame that on Southgate. He's done a credible job of trying to manufacture a silk purse from the sow's ear of the biggest underachievers in the international game, but he's not the second coming of Christ. Miracles cannot be expected of him.
The 2018-2021 period seems to me to have been one of substantial overachievement relative to the established norm, whereas more recent form - the dreadful Nations' League campaign and the failure against the French - merely represents a reassertion of sporting gravity. England specialise in reasonably consistent mediocrity (as evidenced by their holding the record for World Cup quarter final exits, now at seven,) punctuated by the occasional horror show: a top ten side, some distance behind the front rank and lacking sufficient quality or consistency to have any realistic chance of ever winning anything. That is, if you could fast forward another couple of centuries then you might find that they finally, at some point, won another major tournament once, through the monkeys-typewriters principle. But the chances of any of us alive today being witness to such an event are surely slim?
Perhaps someone who understands football much better than I do can explain how it is that the women's team finally found a way to win a tournament, whereas the men always find a way to faceplant? What's wrong with them?
What's wrong with them? There are better teams, that's all.
That's no answer to anything. Why are there always better teams?
Well for most major footballing countries there are.
I’d say England are bang on what you’d expect. To be, on average, in the top 8 of the world in world cups isn’t bad at all.
Since 1966 Germany have won three times, Italy and France twice each and England have done no better than fourth place. It's mediocrity. Deep mediocrity. Why are they so mediocre? It's a simple enough question.
Because we’re not as good as Germany, Italy of France and have no god given right to be?
There’s this assumption that this country should rule the world and if it doesn’t that’s a tragedy.
Regularly getting into the knockout stages of major tournaments is OK. More would be nice, but it’s not our entitlement.
I never suggested that it was an "entitlement." The women's team weren't "entitled" to win their European championship but they found a way to do it regardless, whereas the men faceplanted. Again. I asked why they seem never to be good enough when broadly comparable neighbours sometimes actually are.
Look at it another way: Croatia - less than half the population of London, only started entering the World Cup in 1998 - has so far managed one 2nd and two 3rd places; England, which has been trying since 1950, won once, 56 years ago, and hasn't come close since. Two fourth places and a dozen assorted flops, mostly quarter final faceplants or failing even to qualify. It's just so meh. Beige. The kit ought not to be white or red, it should be beige. Fawn. Rental magnolia. Especially when you think of the vast resources at the command of the FA - football attracts more money, attention and participation than every other sport put together - it's all just so very underwhelming and poor, really.
England is actually the cricket sibling of the "flat track bully" - -consistently beats worse teams in qualifying and championships (yes you have to do this of course ) but fails miserably when up against any team "its own size" .
League football - and Premier League football especially - is what matters most in England. The media cares about the national side far more than most regular fans do. Until that changes, England will usually under-perform. And it won’t change. So England’s only realistic hope is a group of world class players in all key positions, who all get on well enough to put club rivalries aside, that makes it next to impossible to fail. That has not yet happened, though it’s getting closer.
Yes, I support England, but mainly Leicester. I really struggle to support a diver like Grealish for England just weeks after booing him for tripping over thin air against my own team, to take one example.
Blow for Nicola Sturgeon as study shows even Yes voters want to KEEP majority of UK state Polling suggests even Yes voters want to keep the British welfare system, armed forces and pensions while also following the same path on international diplomacy
Tendentious interpretation of the question. It's like claiming that the need for a health service in Scotland means that independence is impossible becauise NHS. Which is a separate organization already.
"Access to a UK passport and citizenship" 47% hahahaha
I do wonder if much of this Yes support won't survive an initial brush with reality. All the campaign needs to do is say stuff like:
"Like Brexit..." "During the negotiations..." "State pension payments will cease 6 months after the referendum" "People born in Scotland who have lived in England, Wales and Northern Ireland for over 5 years...." "Major arterial routes will remain open, like the M74 and A1, but..."
A Tory government, or a Starmer one, would be hard pushed to take the line that "Sindy would be a mess and disaster, just like Brexit" even if it is true. Neither Tories nor Labour can face that truth yet.
Particularly “Sindy would be a mess and disaster, just like Brexit which we are insisting on keeping”.
I do wonder if Starmer has the necessary rhetorical deftness to manage the inevitable reverse ferret on Brexit. Actually I don’t; he doesn’t.
'Sindy would be a mess and disaster, far more so than Brexit which we are now trying to limit the damage from' would be a very effective slogan. And would have the merit of being true.
Let me know when the damage limitation starts.
‘So let me be very clear: with Labour the UK will not go back into the EU. We will not be joining the single market. We will not be joining a customs union.’
Blow for Nicola Sturgeon as study shows even Yes voters want to KEEP majority of UK state Polling suggests even Yes voters want to keep the British welfare system, armed forces and pensions while also following the same path on international diplomacy
Tendentious interpretation of the question. It's like claiming that the need for a health service in Scotland means that independence is impossible becauise NHS. Which is a separate organization already.
"Access to a UK passport and citizenship" 47% hahahaha
I do wonder if much of this Yes support won't survive an initial brush with reality. All the campaign needs to do is say stuff like:
"Like Brexit..." "During the negotiations..." "State pension payments will cease 6 months after the referendum" "People born in Scotland who have lived in England, Wales and Northern Ireland for over 5 years...." "Major arterial routes will remain open, like the M74 and A1, but..."
A Tory government, or a Starmer one, would be hard pushed to take the line that "Sindy would be a mess and disaster, just like Brexit" even if it is true. Neither Tories nor Labour can face that truth yet.
Particularly “Sindy would be a mess and disaster, just like Brexit which we are insisting on keeping”.
I do wonder if Starmer has the necessary rhetorical deftness to manage the inevitable reverse ferret on Brexit. Actually I don’t; he doesn’t.
'Sindy would be a mess and disaster, far more so than Brexit which we are now trying to limit the damage from' would be a very effective slogan. And would have the merit of being true.
That being said, I have always been sceptical that threats are effective in votes like this. Nobody believed the predictions of the Remain campaign, and since they've proven to be grossly exaggerated (planes won't fly, emergency budget, no food on the shelves) it's going to be harder to do it again. The fact that Brexit has been disruptive is to an extent overlooked because it's less disruptive than was claimed. Similarly, Scotland leaving the UK would be highly disruptive for it but it could certainly be done and Scotland wouldn't be a failed state as a result.
The interesting thing about that article (which is in the Express so treat with caution) is it did make the point if Scotland is to stay in the Union long term it needs more than a transactional arrangement. It needs to feel part of the UK and value that.
This is of course why Sturgeon's been putting forward a load of mad and bad policies designed not to help the people of Scotland but to emphasise a divide with the rest of the country. And similarly the government in London who are very similar in outlook have been coming up with daft ideas like flags on every building.
Blow for Nicola Sturgeon as study shows even Yes voters want to KEEP majority of UK state Polling suggests even Yes voters want to keep the British welfare system, armed forces and pensions while also following the same path on international diplomacy
Tendentious interpretation of the question. It's like claiming that the need for a health service in Scotland means that independence is impossible becauise NHS. Which is a separate organization already.
"Access to a UK passport and citizenship" 47% hahahaha
I do wonder if much of this Yes support won't survive an initial brush with reality. All the campaign needs to do is say stuff like:
"Like Brexit..." "During the negotiations..." "State pension payments will cease 6 months after the referendum" "People born in Scotland who have lived in England, Wales and Northern Ireland for over 5 years...." "Major arterial routes will remain open, like the M74 and A1, but..."
A Tory government, or a Starmer one, would be hard pushed to take the line that "Sindy would be a mess and disaster, just like Brexit" even if it is true. Neither Tories nor Labour can face that truth yet.
Particularly “Sindy would be a mess and disaster, just like Brexit which we are insisting on keeping”.
I do wonder if Starmer has the necessary rhetorical deftness to manage the inevitable reverse ferret on Brexit. Actually I don’t; he doesn’t.
I don’t think rhetorical deftness will be needed beyond: “We knew the deal was bad, but now we’ve seen the real numbers it’s much worse than we thought.” No-one beyond the loons on the right will care and if the Tories lose power they won’t matter anymore.
Not a big surprise; good news for England, I feel.
England will fail at the next European championship, of course, but it'd be churlish to blame that on Southgate. He's done a credible job of trying to manufacture a silk purse from the sow's ear of the biggest underachievers in the international game, but he's not the second coming of Christ. Miracles cannot be expected of him.
The 2018-2021 period seems to me to have been one of substantial overachievement relative to the established norm, whereas more recent form - the dreadful Nations' League campaign and the failure against the French - merely represents a reassertion of sporting gravity. England specialise in reasonably consistent mediocrity (as evidenced by their holding the record for World Cup quarter final exits, now at seven,) punctuated by the occasional horror show: a top ten side, some distance behind the front rank and lacking sufficient quality or consistency to have any realistic chance of ever winning anything. That is, if you could fast forward another couple of centuries then you might find that they finally, at some point, won another major tournament once, through the monkeys-typewriters principle. But the chances of any of us alive today being witness to such an event are surely slim?
Perhaps someone who understands football much better than I do can explain how it is that the women's team finally found a way to win a tournament, whereas the men always find a way to faceplant? What's wrong with them?
What's wrong with them? There are better teams, that's all.
That's no answer to anything. Why are there always better teams?
Well for most major footballing countries there are.
I’d say England are bang on what you’d expect. To be, on average, in the top 8 of the world in world cups isn’t bad at all.
Since 1966 Germany have won three times, Italy and France twice each and England have done no better than fourth place. It's mediocrity. Deep mediocrity. Why are they so mediocre? It's a simple enough question.
Because we’re not as good as Germany, Italy of France and have no god given right to be?
There’s this assumption that this country should rule the world and if it doesn’t that’s a tragedy.
Regularly getting into the knockout stages of major tournaments is OK. More would be nice, but it’s not our entitlement.
I never suggested that it was an "entitlement." The women's team weren't "entitled" to win their European championship but they found a way to do it regardless, whereas the men faceplanted. Again. I asked why they seem never to be good enough when broadly comparable neighbours sometimes actually are.
Look at it another way: Croatia - less than half the population of London, only started entering the World Cup in 1998 - has so far managed one 2nd and two 3rd places; England, which has been trying since 1950, won once, 56 years ago, and hasn't come close since. Two fourth places and a dozen assorted flops, mostly quarter final faceplants or failing even to qualify. It's just so meh. Beige. The kit ought not to be white or red, it should be beige. Fawn. Rental magnolia. Especially when you think of the vast resources at the command of the FA - football attracts more money, attention and participation than every other sport put together - it's all just so very underwhelming and poor, really.
Looking at the England squad, I genuinely think it is probably second or third best in the world behind France and possibly Brazil. Southgate has done a decent job but I think we could do probably do better with someone else. So make the change.
What is strange to me is the failure of English players in management. Lampard maybe the only English man to have got a top job managing top players, and that was surely mainly sentiment...
Blow for Nicola Sturgeon as study shows even Yes voters want to KEEP majority of UK state Polling suggests even Yes voters want to keep the British welfare system, armed forces and pensions while also following the same path on international diplomacy
By rough sums, only 57% of Unionist Scots must support retaining the Monarchy.
I think we’re still seeing the fall out from ‘he’s not his mum, is he?’ May take a while.
A new King for a new age, but I think all the pantomime of the coronation will look increasingly archaic and backward looking in May, raising a lot of questions along the lines of "should we really be still doing this?".
I am mildly pro keeping the Monarchy, but a rather petulant King and a "nice but dim" heir is not a very sound foundation for an institution with more than its share of skeletons in closets.
Blow for Nicola Sturgeon as study shows even Yes voters want to KEEP majority of UK state Polling suggests even Yes voters want to keep the British welfare system, armed forces and pensions while also following the same path on international diplomacy
Tendentious interpretation of the question. It's like claiming that the need for a health service in Scotland means that independence is impossible becauise NHS. Which is a separate organization already.
"Access to a UK passport and citizenship" 47% hahahaha
I do wonder if much of this Yes support won't survive an initial brush with reality. All the campaign needs to do is say stuff like:
"Like Brexit..." "During the negotiations..." "State pension payments will cease 6 months after the referendum" "People born in Scotland who have lived in England, Wales and Northern Ireland for over 5 years...." "Major arterial routes will remain open, like the M74 and A1, but..."
A Tory government, or a Starmer one, would be hard pushed to take the line that "Sindy would be a mess and disaster, just like Brexit" even if it is true. Neither Tories nor Labour can face that truth yet.
Particularly “Sindy would be a mess and disaster, just like Brexit which we are insisting on keeping”.
I do wonder if Starmer has the necessary rhetorical deftness to manage the inevitable reverse ferret on Brexit. Actually I don’t; he doesn’t.
I don’t think rhetorical deftness will be needed beyond: “We knew the deal was bad, but now we’ve seen the real numbers it’s much worse than we thought.” No-one beyond the loons on the right will care and if the Tories lose power they won’t matter anymore.
The Tories can't lose power ad both potential winners are Tories. SKS Tories being slightly more right wing and hating Socialism a lot more.
Neo Liberalism rools OK despite the fact it has completely fooked over the UK since 1979
Blow for Nicola Sturgeon as study shows even Yes voters want to KEEP majority of UK state Polling suggests even Yes voters want to keep the British welfare system, armed forces and pensions while also following the same path on international diplomacy
Tendentious interpretation of the question. It's like claiming that the need for a health service in Scotland means that independence is impossible becauise NHS. Which is a separate organization already.
"Access to a UK passport and citizenship" 47% hahahaha
I do wonder if much of this Yes support won't survive an initial brush with reality. All the campaign needs to do is say stuff like:
"Like Brexit..." "During the negotiations..." "State pension payments will cease 6 months after the referendum" "People born in Scotland who have lived in England, Wales and Northern Ireland for over 5 years...." "Major arterial routes will remain open, like the M74 and A1, but..."
A Tory government, or a Starmer one, would be hard pushed to take the line that "Sindy would be a mess and disaster, just like Brexit" even if it is true. Neither Tories nor Labour can face that truth yet.
Particularly “Sindy would be a mess and disaster, just like Brexit which we are insisting on keeping”.
I do wonder if Starmer has the necessary rhetorical deftness to manage the inevitable reverse ferret on Brexit. Actually I don’t; he doesn’t.
I don’t think rhetorical deftness will be needed beyond: “We knew the deal was bad, but now we’ve seen the real numbers it’s much worse than we thought.” No-one beyond the loons on the right will care and if the Tories lose power they won’t matter anymore.
The Tories can't lose power ad both potential winners are Tories. SKS Tories being slightly more right wing and hating Socialism a lot more.
Neo Liberalism rools OK despite the fact it has completely fooked over the UK since 1979
Blow for Nicola Sturgeon as study shows even Yes voters want to KEEP majority of UK state Polling suggests even Yes voters want to keep the British welfare system, armed forces and pensions while also following the same path on international diplomacy
By rough sums, only 57% of Unionist Scots must support retaining the Monarchy.
I think we’re still seeing the fall out from ‘he’s not his mum, is he?’ May take a while.
A new King for a new age, but I think all the pantomime of the coronation will look increasingly archaic and backward looking in May, raising a lot of questions along the lines of "should we really be still doing this?".
I am mildly pro keeping the Monarchy, but a rather petulant King and a "nice but dim" heir is not a very sound foundation for an institution with more than its share of skeletons in closets.
Rubbish and Kate combines Diana’s glamour with the Queen Mother’s ruthlessness and will keep the show on the road. We also don’t want President Johnson or President Blair.
The coronation will be a great show after a winter of misery and bring in tourist revenue.
Blow for Nicola Sturgeon as study shows even Yes voters want to KEEP majority of UK state Polling suggests even Yes voters want to keep the British welfare system, armed forces and pensions while also following the same path on international diplomacy
Tendentious interpretation of the question. It's like claiming that the need for a health service in Scotland means that independence is impossible becauise NHS. Which is a separate organization already.
"Access to a UK passport and citizenship" 47% hahahaha
I do wonder if much of this Yes support won't survive an initial brush with reality. All the campaign needs to do is say stuff like:
"Like Brexit..." "During the negotiations..." "State pension payments will cease 6 months after the referendum" "People born in Scotland who have lived in England, Wales and Northern Ireland for over 5 years...." "Major arterial routes will remain open, like the M74 and A1, but..."
Bellend
You might disagree with that, but you've got to be aware that those are the lines that Better Together 2 will take and they'll be effective.
Tom Lehrer has decided to give away his copyright and songs for free. I have long been a fan of his witty satire, albeit much of it relating to 1950s and 60s America.
Blow for Nicola Sturgeon as study shows even Yes voters want to KEEP majority of UK state Polling suggests even Yes voters want to keep the British welfare system, armed forces and pensions while also following the same path on international diplomacy
Tendentious interpretation of the question. It's like claiming that the need for a health service in Scotland means that independence is impossible becauise NHS. Which is a separate organization already.
How does that even follow? No one is saying it’s “impossible” merely that many Scots might be suffering from cakism. That’s it.
Blow for Nicola Sturgeon as study shows even Yes voters want to KEEP majority of UK state Polling suggests even Yes voters want to keep the British welfare system, armed forces and pensions while also following the same path on international diplomacy
Tendentious interpretation of the question. It's like claiming that the need for a health service in Scotland means that independence is impossible becauise NHS. Which is a separate organization already.
"Access to a UK passport and citizenship" 47% hahahaha
I do wonder if much of this Yes support won't survive an initial brush with reality. All the campaign needs to do is say stuff like:
"Like Brexit..." "During the negotiations..." "State pension payments will cease 6 months after the referendum" "People born in Scotland who have lived in England, Wales and Northern Ireland for over 5 years...." "Major arterial routes will remain open, like the M74 and A1, but..."
Bellend
You might disagree with that, but you've got to be aware that those are the lines that Better Together 2 will take and they'll be effective.
How can a majority of “Yes” voters possibly believe there can be a common UK pension?
Maybe. Maybe they'll be able to rejoin while England continue floating down the toilet?
If they did rejoin I'd be first in the queue for a Scottish passport
You can already get an EU passport - as former Lord Puttnam has - by taking up residence in Ireland. You've chosen not to do so. I call cobblers that you would do so in an independent Scotland.
Maybe. Maybe they'll be able to rejoin while England continue floating down the toilet?
If they did rejoin I'd be first in the queue for a Scottish passport
While England would of course build the border posts and hard border from Cumbria to Northumberland the next day. Plus cut off the Treasury spending taps immediately.
Not that any UK government is going to allow indyref2 after the SC ruling anytime soon
Not a big surprise; good news for England, I feel.
England will fail at the next European championship, of course, but it'd be churlish to blame that on Southgate. He's done a credible job of trying to manufacture a silk purse from the sow's ear of the biggest underachievers in the international game, but he's not the second coming of Christ. Miracles cannot be expected of him.
The 2018-2021 period seems to me to have been one of substantial overachievement relative to the established norm, whereas more recent form - the dreadful Nations' League campaign and the failure against the French - merely represents a reassertion of sporting gravity. England specialise in reasonably consistent mediocrity (as evidenced by their holding the record for World Cup quarter final exits, now at seven,) punctuated by the occasional horror show: a top ten side, some distance behind the front rank and lacking sufficient quality or consistency to have any realistic chance of ever winning anything. That is, if you could fast forward another couple of centuries then you might find that they finally, at some point, won another major tournament once, through the monkeys-typewriters principle. But the chances of any of us alive today being witness to such an event are surely slim?
Perhaps someone who understands football much better than I do can explain how it is that the women's team finally found a way to win a tournament, whereas the men always find a way to faceplant? What's wrong with them?
What's wrong with them? There are better teams, that's all.
That's no answer to anything. Why are there always better teams?
Well for most major footballing countries there are.
I’d say England are bang on what you’d expect. To be, on average, in the top 8 of the world in world cups isn’t bad at all.
Since 1966 Germany have won three times, Italy and France twice each and England have done no better than fourth place. It's mediocrity. Deep mediocrity. Why are they so mediocre? It's a simple enough question.
Because we’re not as good as Germany, Italy of France and have no god given right to be?
There’s this assumption that this country should rule the world and if it doesn’t that’s a tragedy.
Regularly getting into the knockout stages of major tournaments is OK. More would be nice, but it’s not our entitlement.
I never suggested that it was an "entitlement." The women's team weren't "entitled" to win their European championship but they found a way to do it regardless, whereas the men faceplanted. Again. I asked why they seem never to be good enough when broadly comparable neighbours sometimes actually are.
Look at it another way: Croatia - less than half the population of London, only started entering the World Cup in 1998 - has so far managed one 2nd and two 3rd places; England, which has been trying since 1950, won once, 56 years ago, and hasn't come close since. Two fourth places and a dozen assorted flops, mostly quarter final faceplants or failing even to qualify. It's just so meh. Beige. The kit ought not to be white or red, it should be beige. Fawn. Rental magnolia. Especially when you think of the vast resources at the command of the FA - football attracts more money, attention and participation than every other sport put together - it's all just so very underwhelming and poor, really.
England is actually the cricket sibling of the "flat track bully" - -consistently beats worse teams in qualifying and championships (yes you have to do this of course ) but fails miserably when up against any team "its own size" .
League football - and Premier League football especially - is what matters most in England. The media cares about the national side far more than most regular fans do. Until that changes, England will usually under-perform. And it won’t change. So England’s only realistic hope is a group of world class players in all key positions, who all get on well enough to put club rivalries aside, that makes it next to impossible to fail. That has not yet happened, though it’s getting closer.
It may be coincidence, but the French national team generally does very well and their league isn't up to much.
But more generally (and drawing threads together) how well should England be doing? A Euro final and World Cup QF is somewhere between about right and a bit better than we might expect... A big European nation but not obviously the biggest.
Echoes of the UK's wider status. A substantial country amongst other substantial countries. Prone to seeing itself as (still) Top Nation. Some of the discontent coming from not having come to terms with its true potential status, possibly underachieving because of a refusal, like faded gentry, to inhabit the current reality.
Englands performances over the years have shown up our deficiencies based on how our league football has been played. Our players tended to be very fit but lacking in technical ability (with some exceptions). Other nations learnt to keep the ball, we favoured the ‘have it’ approach. I’d argue that until not that long ago our ‘professional’ football was rather amateur, and it took the introduction of foreign managers such as Wenger to change the culture. In addition to this world cups are played in summer, in hot weather, which is terrible for English players, more accustomed to the long, wet, winter slog. And then there is the number of games our players play(ed). Frankly our sides turned up knackered at world cups are euro tournaments. Things have changed. Our players are technically better than the giants of previous England teams. They are comfortable on the ball. They still play too many games, and the next WC is in the summer again, as is the Euros. As a result we reached the semis in 2018, the final of the Euros in 2021 and easily could have won, and have lost in the quarters to the reigning champions who have again reached the final in 2022. I was as disappointed as anyone last week, but to fail to see that things have changed is myopic in the extreme. And never forget, 31 teams failed at this tournament.
Blow for Nicola Sturgeon as study shows even Yes voters want to KEEP majority of UK state Polling suggests even Yes voters want to keep the British welfare system, armed forces and pensions while also following the same path on international diplomacy
Tendentious interpretation of the question. It's like claiming that the need for a health service in Scotland means that independence is impossible becauise NHS. Which is a separate organization already.
"Access to a UK passport and citizenship" 47% hahahaha
I do wonder if much of this Yes support won't survive an initial brush with reality. All the campaign needs to do is say stuff like:
"Like Brexit..." "During the negotiations..." "State pension payments will cease 6 months after the referendum" "People born in Scotland who have lived in England, Wales and Northern Ireland for over 5 years...." "Major arterial routes will remain open, like the M74 and A1, but..."
A Tory government, or a Starmer one, would be hard pushed to take the line that "Sindy would be a mess and disaster, just like Brexit" even if it is true. Neither Tories nor Labour can face that truth yet.
Particularly “Sindy would be a mess and disaster, just like Brexit which we are insisting on keeping”.
I do wonder if Starmer has the necessary rhetorical deftness to manage the inevitable reverse ferret on Brexit. Actually I don’t; he doesn’t.
I don’t think rhetorical deftness will be needed beyond: “We knew the deal was bad, but now we’ve seen the real numbers it’s much worse than we thought.” No-one beyond the loons on the right will care and if the Tories lose power they won’t matter anymore.
The Tories can't lose power ad both potential winners are Tories. SKS Tories being slightly more right wing and hating Socialism a lot more.
Neo Liberalism rools OK despite the fact it has completely fooked over the UK since 1979
And good morning to you!
Sun columnist Tory, SKS would disapprove of you wishing a Socialist good morning, unless you were beckoning him forward to shake hands via the strategically placed landmine!!
Mr. Seal, if/when there's a second Scottish separation referendum, the Better Together side would do well to simply pointing out the madness of a common UK pension (for Scotland, having left), and avoiding Remain's substantial failing of veering off into such prophetic doomsaying that it gets disbelieved and then diminishes the impact of more credible warnings.
Blow for Nicola Sturgeon as study shows even Yes voters want to KEEP majority of UK state Polling suggests even Yes voters want to keep the British welfare system, armed forces and pensions while also following the same path on international diplomacy
Tendentious interpretation of the question. It's like claiming that the need for a health service in Scotland means that independence is impossible becauise NHS. Which is a separate organization already.
"Access to a UK passport and citizenship" 47% hahahaha
I do wonder if much of this Yes support won't survive an initial brush with reality. All the campaign needs to do is say stuff like:
"Like Brexit..." "During the negotiations..." "State pension payments will cease 6 months after the referendum" "People born in Scotland who have lived in England, Wales and Northern Ireland for over 5 years...." "Major arterial routes will remain open, like the M74 and A1, but..."
If the initial brush with reality doesn't happen until after the YES vote them it won't matter. During the referendum campaign it will be diagnosed as Project Dear, doing Scotland down, and hand-waving about the situation in Northern Ireland.
People aren't happy with the status quo. There's a good chance they'll vote for Independence as a change in Scotland.
Blow for Nicola Sturgeon as study shows even Yes voters want to KEEP majority of UK state Polling suggests even Yes voters want to keep the British welfare system, armed forces and pensions while also following the same path on international diplomacy
Tendentious interpretation of the question. It's like claiming that the need for a health service in Scotland means that independence is impossible becauise NHS. Which is a separate organization already.
"Access to a UK passport and citizenship" 47% hahahaha
I do wonder if much of this Yes support won't survive an initial brush with reality. All the campaign needs to do is say stuff like:
"Like Brexit..." "During the negotiations..." "State pension payments will cease 6 months after the referendum" "People born in Scotland who have lived in England, Wales and Northern Ireland for over 5 years...." "Major arterial routes will remain open, like the M74 and A1, but..."
A Tory government, or a Starmer one, would be hard pushed to take the line that "Sindy would be a mess and disaster, just like Brexit" even if it is true. Neither Tories nor Labour can face that truth yet.
Particularly “Sindy would be a mess and disaster, just like Brexit which we are insisting on keeping”.
I do wonder if Starmer has the necessary rhetorical deftness to manage the inevitable reverse ferret on Brexit. Actually I don’t; he doesn’t.
I don’t think rhetorical deftness will be needed beyond: “We knew the deal was bad, but now we’ve seen the real numbers it’s much worse than we thought.” No-one beyond the loons on the right will care and if the Tories lose power they won’t matter anymore.
The Tories can't lose power ad both potential winners are Tories. SKS Tories being slightly more right wing and hating Socialism a lot more.
Neo Liberalism rools OK despite the fact it has completely fooked over the UK since 1979
And good morning to you!
Sun columnist Tory, SKS would disapprove of you wishing a Socialist good morning, unless you were beckoning him forward to shake hands via the strategically placed landmine!!
On Topic has SKS told striking nurses to get up and go home we don't support you yet?
Or are the SKS Tory party currently only picking on Dr's
SKS has called for negotiation with nurses, which is exactly what any responsible leader should do.
Your personal campaign does blind you from time to time. I do find it odd how you can criticise others as Tories when you’re a self proclaimed Tory supporter.
This is the kind of stuff that really could make a dent in productivity in the NHS - get the results of tests faster, get the right treatment going faster. Cure the patient faster with less side effects. Which gets them out of the hospital and home faster. Which in turn exposes them to less secondary stuff.
Win, win, win.
I’d be interested in Foxy’s views on this - particularly whether the account of resistance to change in the article is representative of his experience.
Modern sequencing kit, notably the new machines from Oxford Nanopore, is hugely cheaper, faster and easier to use than was the case even a few years back.
On Topic has SKS told striking nurses to get up and go home we don't support you yet?
Or are the SKS Tory party currently only picking on Dr's
SKS has called for negotiation with nurses, which is exactly what any responsible leader should do.
Your personal campaign does blind you from time to time. I do find it odd how you can criticise others as Tories when you’re a self proclaimed Tory supporter.
Never voted Tory.
He has also said we cannot afford an inflation matching pay award for nurses
The choice between 2 identical ideologies Tory neo Liberalism or Tory neoliberalism is not for me.
Why do you support immigrant hating, strike hating red Rosette wearing Tories over the same philosophy with a blue rosette, favourite colour?
This is the kind of stuff that really could make a dent in productivity in the NHS - get the results of tests faster, get the right treatment going faster. Cure the patient faster with less side effects. Which gets them out of the hospital and home faster. Which in turn exposes them to less secondary stuff.
Win, win, win.
I’d be interested in Foxy’s views on this - particularly whether the account of resistance to change in the article is representative of his experience.
Modern sequencing kit, notably the new machines from Oxford Nanopore, is hugely cheaper, faster and easier to use than was the case even a few years back.
The article seems to be American, so I imagine the resistance to change is not an NHS issue, so much as a problem of cost and infrastructure.
Blood cultures are imperfect, but fairly cheap to process, and use standard micro kit.
But yes, capital equipment budgets in the NHS are threadbare. I have to bid nearly a year in advance for new kit, and it often gets refused.
Blow for Nicola Sturgeon as study shows even Yes voters want to KEEP majority of UK state Polling suggests even Yes voters want to keep the British welfare system, armed forces and pensions while also following the same path on international diplomacy
Tendentious interpretation of the question. It's like claiming that the need for a health service in Scotland means that independence is impossible becauise NHS. Which is a separate organization already.
"Access to a UK passport and citizenship" 47% hahahaha
I do wonder if much of this Yes support won't survive an initial brush with reality. All the campaign needs to do is say stuff like:
"Like Brexit..." "During the negotiations..." "State pension payments will cease 6 months after the referendum" "People born in Scotland who have lived in England, Wales and Northern Ireland for over 5 years...." "Major arterial routes will remain open, like the M74 and A1, but..."
Bellend
You might disagree with that, but you've got to be aware that those are the lines that Better Together 2 will take and they'll be effective.
Only if youare blind , deaf and dumb or an idiot. They used all those lies last time and lo and behold they became true because we stayed as a colony. Surely the sheeple will waken up this time. England borrows money to waste and pretends it was all Scotland's fault , what kind of dummy believes that crap.
On Topic has SKS told striking nurses to get up and go home we don't support you yet?
Or are the SKS Tory party currently only picking on Dr's
SKS has called for negotiation with nurses, which is exactly what any responsible leader should do.
Your personal campaign does blind you from time to time. I do find it odd how you can criticise others as Tories when you’re a self proclaimed Tory supporter.
Never voted Tory.
He has also said we cannot afford an inflation matching pay award for nurses
The choice between 2 identical ideologies Tory neo Liberalism or Tory neoliberalism is not for me.
Why do you support immigrant hating, strike hating red Rosette wearing Tories over the same philosophy with a blue rosette, favourite colour?
You publicly back Boris. The most Tory Tory of them all. You’re a Tory supporter.
I know it’s not ideal, but I find your opinion on Labour difficult to take seriously as a result.
Blow for Nicola Sturgeon as study shows even Yes voters want to KEEP majority of UK state Polling suggests even Yes voters want to keep the British welfare system, armed forces and pensions while also following the same path on international diplomacy
Tendentious interpretation of the question. It's like claiming that the need for a health service in Scotland means that independence is impossible becauise NHS. Which is a separate organization already.
"Access to a UK passport and citizenship" 47% hahahaha
I do wonder if much of this Yes support won't survive an initial brush with reality. All the campaign needs to do is say stuff like:
"Like Brexit..." "During the negotiations..." "State pension payments will cease 6 months after the referendum" "People born in Scotland who have lived in England, Wales and Northern Ireland for over 5 years...." "Major arterial routes will remain open, like the M74 and A1, but..."
A Tory government, or a Starmer one, would be hard pushed to take the line that "Sindy would be a mess and disaster, just like Brexit" even if it is true. Neither Tories nor Labour can face that truth yet.
Particularly “Sindy would be a mess and disaster, just like Brexit which we are insisting on keeping”.
I do wonder if Starmer has the necessary rhetorical deftness to manage the inevitable reverse ferret on Brexit. Actually I don’t; he doesn’t.
I don’t think rhetorical deftness will be needed beyond: “We knew the deal was bad, but now we’ve seen the real numbers it’s much worse than we thought.” No-one beyond the loons on the right will care and if the Tories lose power they won’t matter anymore.
The Tories can't lose power ad both potential winners are Tories. SKS Tories being slightly more right wing and hating Socialism a lot more.
Neo Liberalism rools OK despite the fact it has completely fooked over the UK since 1979
And good morning to you!
Sun columnist Tory, SKS would disapprove of you wishing a Socialist good morning, unless you were beckoning him forward to shake hands via the strategically placed landmine!!
You need help. Badly.
Yep as do many working people.
It's not currently on offer by either Tory Parties
Maybe. Maybe they'll be able to rejoin while England continue floating down the toilet?
If they did rejoin I'd be first in the queue for a Scottish passport
While England would of course build the border posts and hard border from Cumbria to Northumberland the next day. Plus cut off the Treasury spending taps immediately.
Not that any UK government is going to allow indyref2 after the SC ruling anytime soon
Is that a bit like how they stop the boats arriving.
They are however the 2 that attempted redistribution a bit
Corbyn certainly wasn’t but was trounced. However peak neoliberalism here was the Coalition, neither Starmer nor Sunak are as neoliberal as Cameron, Osborne and Clegg
Blow for Nicola Sturgeon as study shows even Yes voters want to KEEP majority of UK state Polling suggests even Yes voters want to keep the British welfare system, armed forces and pensions while also following the same path on international diplomacy
Tendentious interpretation of the question. It's like claiming that the need for a health service in Scotland means that independence is impossible becauise NHS. Which is a separate organization already.
How does that even follow? No one is saying it’s “impossible” merely that many Scots might be suffering from cakism. That’s it.
Bit like English are suffering from kidnapism, bunch of cowards unwilling to stand on their own two feet, prefer to be parasites. Grow a backbone England
Blow for Nicola Sturgeon as study shows even Yes voters want to KEEP majority of UK state Polling suggests even Yes voters want to keep the British welfare system, armed forces and pensions while also following the same path on international diplomacy
Not a big surprise; good news for England, I feel.
England will fail at the next European championship, of course, but it'd be churlish to blame that on Southgate. He's done a credible job of trying to manufacture a silk purse from the sow's ear of the biggest underachievers in the international game, but he's not the second coming of Christ. Miracles cannot be expected of him.
The 2018-2021 period seems to me to have been one of substantial overachievement relative to the established norm, whereas more recent form - the dreadful Nations' League campaign and the failure against the French - merely represents a reassertion of sporting gravity. England specialise in reasonably consistent mediocrity (as evidenced by their holding the record for World Cup quarter final exits, now at seven,) punctuated by the occasional horror show: a top ten side, some distance behind the front rank and lacking sufficient quality or consistency to have any realistic chance of ever winning anything. That is, if you could fast forward another couple of centuries then you might find that they finally, at some point, won another major tournament once, through the monkeys-typewriters principle. But the chances of any of us alive today being witness to such an event are surely slim?
Perhaps someone who understands football much better than I do can explain how it is that the women's team finally found a way to win a tournament, whereas the men always find a way to faceplant? What's wrong with them?
What's wrong with them? There are better teams, that's all.
That's no answer to anything. Why are there always better teams?
Well for most major footballing countries there are.
I’d say England are bang on what you’d expect. To be, on average, in the top 8 of the world in world cups isn’t bad at all.
Since 1966 Germany have won three times, Italy and France twice each and England have done no better than fourth place. It's mediocrity. Deep mediocrity. Why are they so mediocre? It's a simple enough question.
Because we’re not as good as Germany, Italy of France and have no god given right to be?
There’s this assumption that this country should rule the world and if it doesn’t that’s a tragedy.
Regularly getting into the knockout stages of major tournaments is OK. More would be nice, but it’s not our entitlement.
I never suggested that it was an "entitlement." The women's team weren't "entitled" to win their European championship but they found a way to do it regardless, whereas the men faceplanted. Again. I asked why they seem never to be good enough when broadly comparable neighbours sometimes actually are.
Look at it another way: Croatia - less than half the population of London, only started entering the World Cup in 1998 - has so far managed one 2nd and two 3rd places; England, which has been trying since 1950, won once, 56 years ago, and hasn't come close since. Two fourth places and a dozen assorted flops, mostly quarter final faceplants or failing even to qualify. It's just so meh. Beige. The kit ought not to be white or red, it should be beige. Fawn. Rental magnolia. Especially when you think of the vast resources at the command of the FA - football attracts more money, attention and participation than every other sport put together - it's all just so very underwhelming and poor, really.
England is actually the cricket sibling of the "flat track bully" - -consistently beats worse teams in qualifying and championships (yes you have to do this of course ) but fails miserably when up against any team "its own size" .
League football - and Premier League football especially - is what matters most in England. The media cares about the national side far more than most regular fans do. Until that changes, England will usually under-perform. And it won’t change. So England’s only realistic hope is a group of world class players in all key positions, who all get on well enough to put club rivalries aside, that makes it next to impossible to fail. That has not yet happened, though it’s getting closer.
It may be coincidence, but the French national team generally does very well and their league isn't up to much.
But more generally (and drawing threads together) how well should England be doing? A Euro final and World Cup QF is somewhere between about right and a bit better than we might expect... A big European nation but not obviously the biggest.
Echoes of the UK's wider status. A substantial country amongst other substantial countries. Prone to seeing itself as (still) Top Nation. Some of the discontent coming from not having come to terms with its true potential status, possibly underachieving because of a refusal, like faded gentry, to inhabit the current reality.
Englands performances over the years have shown up our deficiencies based on how our league football has been played. Our players tended to be very fit but lacking in technical ability (with some exceptions). Other nations learnt to keep the ball, we favoured the ‘have it’ approach. I’d argue that until not that long ago our ‘professional’ football was rather amateur, and it took the introduction of foreign managers such as Wenger to change the culture. In addition to this world cups are played in summer, in hot weather, which is terrible for English players, more accustomed to the long, wet, winter slog. And then there is the number of games our players play(ed). Frankly our sides turned up knackered at world cups are euro tournaments. Things have changed. Our players are technically better than the giants of previous England teams. They are comfortable on the ball. They still play too many games, and the next WC is in the summer again, as is the Euros. As a result we reached the semis in 2018, the final of the Euros in 2021 and easily could have won, and have lost in the quarters to the reigning champions who have again reached the final in 2022. I was as disappointed as anyone last week, but to fail to see that things have changed is myopic in the extreme. And never forget, 31 teams failed at this tournament.
High temperatures is a big factor imo, and not just for England. We might have won in Germany but for unusually hot weather. Even in this World Cup in Qatar, I have made money by betting against visibly knackered teams in the final stages of each match.
Maybe. Maybe they'll be able to rejoin while England continue floating down the toilet?
If they did rejoin I'd be first in the queue for a Scottish passport
While England would of course build the border posts and hard border from Cumbria to Northumberland the next day. Plus cut off the Treasury spending taps immediately.
Not that any UK government is going to allow indyref2 after the SC ruling anytime soon
Maybe cutting off the 'Treasury spending taps' would be the best thing for Scotland.
Is there any particular reason why an independent Scotland should be any poorer than those other northern European nations of circa 5 million people? Any reason why Scotland wouldn't be as wealthy as Norway, Finland, Denmark or Ireland in time?
On Topic has SKS told striking nurses to get up and go home we don't support you yet?
Or are the SKS Tory party currently only picking on Dr's
SKS has called for negotiation with nurses, which is exactly what any responsible leader should do.
Your personal campaign does blind you from time to time. I do find it odd how you can criticise others as Tories when you’re a self proclaimed Tory supporter.
Never voted Tory.
He has also said we cannot afford an inflation matching pay award for nurses
The choice between 2 identical ideologies Tory neo Liberalism or Tory neoliberalism is not for me.
Why do you support immigrant hating, strike hating red Rosette wearing Tories over the same philosophy with a blue rosette, favourite colour?
You publicly back Boris. The most Tory Tory of them all. You’re a Tory supporter.
I know it’s not ideal, but I find your opinion on Labour difficult to take seriously as a result.
I backed levelling up,.and will always support redistribution and Socialism
You back immigrant hating, climate change protestor hating, can't afford a decent wage supporting, can't afford nationalisation supporting, army strike break supporting SKS.
"Not ideal" you are right on that front.
Anyway I am out of here for today. Daughters birthday party to attend.
Blow for Nicola Sturgeon as study shows even Yes voters want to KEEP majority of UK state Polling suggests even Yes voters want to keep the British welfare system, armed forces and pensions while also following the same path on international diplomacy
Tendentious interpretation of the question. It's like claiming that the need for a health service in Scotland means that independence is impossible becauise NHS. Which is a separate organization already.
An exaggerated claim, but one not wholly without validity. Ireland is brought up frequently as a successful example of leaving the British state - but they don't have an NHS, and indeed people injured near the border usually 'go north' for that reason. I believe that indy Scotland can work as a lean, mean, independent state (I just think it would be unecessary, damaging and sad) - but there's no doubt that some some luxuries would have to go, and the NHS in its present form is one of them.
Personally I think that's a bonus, but I don't think many Scots agree with me, especially not independence-leaning ones.
Maybe. Maybe they'll be able to rejoin while England continue floating down the toilet?
If they did rejoin I'd be first in the queue for a Scottish passport
While England would of course build the border posts and hard border from Cumbria to Northumberland the next day. Plus cut off the Treasury spending taps immediately.
Not that any UK government is going to allow indyref2 after the SC ruling anytime soon
Maybe. Maybe they'll be able to rejoin while England continue floating down the toilet?
If they did rejoin I'd be first in the queue for a Scottish passport
While England would of course build the border posts and hard border from Cumbria to Northumberland the next day. Plus cut off the Treasury spending taps immediately.
Not that any UK government is going to allow indyref2 after the SC ruling anytime soon
Maybe cutting off the 'Treasury spending taps' would be the best thing for Scotland?
Is there any particular reason why an independent Scotland should be any poorer than those other northern European nations of circa 5 million people? Any reason why Scotland wouldn't be as wealthy as Norway, Finland, Denmark or Ireland in time?
I think it would be, but like Ireland (or for that matter Norway and Finland) the first years of independence would be hard.
Scottish politics has been logjammed for too long over the issue of independence, and that is a real drag on other aspects of Scottish life and economy.
The only way to resolve the log-jam is either for independence to happen, or for the SNP to lose a Holyrood election by a landslide. Neither looks likely to happen any time soon, so Scotland remains trapped in stagnation, as indeed does much of the rest of the UK.
This is the kind of stuff that really could make a dent in productivity in the NHS - get the results of tests faster, get the right treatment going faster. Cure the patient faster with less side effects. Which gets them out of the hospital and home faster. Which in turn exposes them to less secondary stuff.
Win, win, win.
I’d be interested in Foxy’s views on this - particularly whether the account of resistance to change in the article is representative of his experience.
Modern sequencing kit, notably the new machines from Oxford Nanopore, is hugely cheaper, faster and easier to use than was the case even a few years back.
The article seems to be American, so I imagine the resistance to change is not an NHS issue, so much as a problem of cost and infrastructure.
Blood cultures are imperfect, but fairly cheap to process, and use standard micro kit.
But yes, capital equipment budgets in the NHS are threadbare. I have to bid nearly a year in advance for new kit, and it often gets refused.
You are right in making the distinction; the economic incentives are very different in the US.
Table top sequencing costs have come down quite a long way, though. A lab machine can be somewhere around £10k. I would guess that the individual sequencing cost is still quite a bit too high to compete directly with blood cultures, but if speed and specificity is important, then it’s still likely worthwhile.
Blow for Nicola Sturgeon as study shows even Yes voters want to KEEP majority of UK state Polling suggests even Yes voters want to keep the British welfare system, armed forces and pensions while also following the same path on international diplomacy
Tendentious interpretation of the question. It's like claiming that the need for a health service in Scotland means that independence is impossible becauise NHS. Which is a separate organization already.
An exaggerated claim, but one not wholly without validity. Ireland is brought up frequently as a successful example of leaving the British state - but they don't have an NHS, and indeed people injured near the border usually 'go north' for that reason. I believe that indy Scotland can work as a lean, mean, independent state (I just think it would be unecessary, damaging and sad) - but there's no doubt that some some luxuries would have to go, and the NHS in its present form is one of them.
Personally I think that's a bonus, but I don't think many Scots agree with me, especially not independence-leaning ones.
There's a cross-party consensus to move towards something a lot more like the NHS than the status quo in Ireland, but for some reason it never happens.
Fairly certain one reason for the consensus is a recognition that the NHS would be an issue in any border poll, and that Ireland's health service is in many respects in worse shape than Britain's.
Blow for Nicola Sturgeon as study shows even Yes voters want to KEEP majority of UK state Polling suggests even Yes voters want to keep the British welfare system, armed forces and pensions while also following the same path on international diplomacy
Tendentious interpretation of the question. It's like claiming that the need for a health service in Scotland means that independence is impossible becauise NHS. Which is a separate organization already.
An exaggerated claim, but one not wholly without validity. Ireland is brought up frequently as a successful example of leaving the British state - but they don't have an NHS, and indeed people injured near the border usually 'go north' for that reason. I believe that indy Scotland can work as a lean, mean, independent state (I just think it would be unecessary, damaging and sad) - but there's no doubt that some some luxuries would have to go, and the NHS in its present form is one of them.
Personally I think that's a bonus, but I don't think many Scots agree with me, especially not independence-leaning ones.
There's a cross-party consensus to move towards something a lot more like the NHS than the status quo in Ireland, but for some reason it never happens.
Fairly certain one reason for the consensus is a recognition that the NHS would be an issue in any border poll, and that Ireland's health service is in many respects in worse shape than Britain's.
I think they're quite wise. It would pull in money like a black hole and never be right.
This is the kind of stuff that really could make a dent in productivity in the NHS - get the results of tests faster, get the right treatment going faster. Cure the patient faster with less side effects. Which gets them out of the hospital and home faster. Which in turn exposes them to less secondary stuff.
Win, win, win.
I’d be interested in Foxy’s views on this - particularly whether the account of resistance to change in the article is representative of his experience.
Modern sequencing kit, notably the new machines from Oxford Nanopore, is hugely cheaper, faster and easier to use than was the case even a few years back.
The article seems to be American, so I imagine the resistance to change is not an NHS issue, so much as a problem of cost and infrastructure.
Blood cultures are imperfect, but fairly cheap to process, and use standard micro kit.
But yes, capital equipment budgets in the NHS are threadbare. I have to bid nearly a year in advance for new kit, and it often gets refused.
You are right in making the distinction; the economic incentives are very different in the US.
Table top sequencing costs have come down quite a long way, though. A lab machine can be somewhere around £10k. I would guess that the individual sequencing cost is still quite a bit too high to compete directly with blood cultures, but if speed and specificity is important, then it’s still likely worthwhile.
Whole genomic sequencing of a person is now down to a little over £100, so when we want to test for a genetic cause of disease, we do that rather than test the specific gene in a dedicated assay. It is quicker too.
There are a number of ethical and medico-legal issues over what we should do with all the leftover genetic data. If we look at it we might find all sorts of nasties, if we ignore it we may be open to legal challenge when something surfaces in time.
Maybe. Maybe they'll be able to rejoin while England continue floating down the toilet?
If they did rejoin I'd be first in the queue for a Scottish passport
While England would of course build the border posts and hard border from Cumbria to Northumberland the next day. Plus cut off the Treasury spending taps immediately.
Not that any UK government is going to allow indyref2 after the SC ruling anytime soon
Maybe cutting off the 'Treasury spending taps' would be the best thing for Scotland?
Is there any particular reason why an independent Scotland should be any poorer than those other northern European nations of circa 5 million people? Any reason why Scotland wouldn't be as wealthy as Norway, Finland, Denmark or Ireland in time?
Well, the main difference till now is that Scotland has had the good luck of being under the wise and beneficent oversight of the Union for 315 years. I’m looking forward to Bettertogether II majoring on that as a selling point.
On Topic has SKS told striking nurses to get up and go home we don't support you yet?
Or are the SKS Tory party currently only picking on Dr's
SKS has called for negotiation with nurses, which is exactly what any responsible leader should do.
Your personal campaign does blind you from time to time. I do find it odd how you can criticise others as Tories when you’re a self proclaimed Tory supporter.
Never voted Tory.
He has also said we cannot afford an inflation matching pay award for nurses
The choice between 2 identical ideologies Tory neo Liberalism or Tory neoliberalism is not for me.
Why do you support immigrant hating, strike hating red Rosette wearing Tories over the same philosophy with a blue rosette, favourite colour?
You publicly back Boris. The most Tory Tory of them all. You’re a Tory supporter.
I know it’s not ideal, but I find your opinion on Labour difficult to take seriously as a result.
I backed levelling up,.and will always support redistribution and Socialism
You back immigrant hating, climate change protestor hating, can't afford a decent wage supporting, can't afford nationalisation supporting, army strike break supporting SKS.
"Not ideal" you are right on that front.
Anyway I am out of here for today. Daughters birthday party to attend.
Have a lovely day. On the basis of what you described you’re still more of a Tory than Starmer.
Blow for Nicola Sturgeon as study shows even Yes voters want to KEEP majority of UK state Polling suggests even Yes voters want to keep the British welfare system, armed forces and pensions while also following the same path on international diplomacy
Tendentious interpretation of the question. It's like claiming that the need for a health service in Scotland means that independence is impossible becauise NHS. Which is a separate organization already.
An exaggerated claim, but one not wholly without validity. Ireland is brought up frequently as a successful example of leaving the British state - but they don't have an NHS, and indeed people injured near the border usually 'go north' for that reason. I believe that indy Scotland can work as a lean, mean, independent state (I just think it would be unecessary, damaging and sad) - but there's no doubt that some some luxuries would have to go, and the NHS in its present form is one of them.
Personally I think that's a bonus, but I don't think many Scots agree with me, especially not independence-leaning ones.
There's a cross-party consensus to move towards something a lot more like the NHS than the status quo in Ireland, but for some reason it never happens.
Fairly certain one reason for the consensus is a recognition that the NHS would be an issue in any border poll, and that Ireland's health service is in many respects in worse shape than Britain's.
The NHS NI stats are by far the worst of the UK countries, so to prefer there to ROI must be pretty desperate. Emergencies may work, but elective care, probably not.
On Topic has SKS told striking nurses to get up and go home we don't support you yet?
Or are the SKS Tory party currently only picking on Dr's
Just the usual fence sitting.
Basically Starmer proposes Toryism, but with a face like he has a pineapple stuck up his arse.
Is the NHS safe under SKS and Streeting?
This "radical reform" of which they speak?
Same shit different day. Milburn plans and the Iraq war were why I left Labour 20 years ago.
Looks like Starmer is going to skip straight to the unpopular bit of New Labour, bypassing the few enthusiastic years.
Where would you start if suddenly appointed Health Secretary, if you didn’t turn it down flat ? Solving the problems of the NHS is a bit much to ask, but what changes would have the biggest impact (assuming a bit of financial headroom to fund change) ?
I can see the war pestering out in a stalemate, with Russia unable to sustain a major campaign in the spring, but Ukraine struggling to dislodge the Russians from the remaining occupied territories.
Maybe. Maybe they'll be able to rejoin while England continue floating down the toilet?
If they did rejoin I'd be first in the queue for a Scottish passport
While England would of course build the border posts and hard border from Cumbria to Northumberland the next day. Plus cut off the Treasury spending taps immediately.
Not that any UK government is going to allow indyref2 after the SC ruling anytime soon
Maybe cutting off the 'Treasury spending taps' would be the best thing for Scotland?
Is there any particular reason why an independent Scotland should be any poorer than those other northern European nations of circa 5 million people? Any reason why Scotland wouldn't be as wealthy as Norway, Finland, Denmark or Ireland in time?
Well, the main difference till now is that Scotland has had the good luck of being under the wise and beneficent oversight of the Union for 315 years. I’m looking forward to Bettertogether II majoring on that as a selling point.
The Scottish Government has a lot of control over many aspects of Scottish life - why not start down this road of Singapore-on-Clyde now? Public services could be leaned out, taxes could be lowered significantly to attract investment, money could be diverted to a 'Scottish sovereign wealth fund', even the accoutrements of a digital invisible customs border with RUK could be built.
There's no move in any of these directions because remaining comfortably within the UK that has apparently subjected Scotland to 300 years of rape and plunder but complaining about it all the time is preferred. And those who actually do want independence want it to be not actual independence, but within the clammy embrace of the EU, so they can effectively replace the UK.
Maybe. Maybe they'll be able to rejoin while England continue floating down the toilet?
If they did rejoin I'd be first in the queue for a Scottish passport
While England would of course build the border posts and hard border from Cumbria to Northumberland the next day. Plus cut off the Treasury spending taps immediately.
Not that any UK government is going to allow indyref2 after the SC ruling anytime soon
Maybe cutting off the 'Treasury spending taps' would be the best thing for Scotland.
Is there any particular reason why an independent Scotland should be any poorer than those other northern European nations of circa 5 million people? Any reason why Scotland wouldn't be as wealthy as Norway, Finland, Denmark or Ireland in time?
The fact Scotland has a huge deficit, currently subsidised by Westminster.
It would either have to impose deep austerity to cut spending to Irish or Swiss levels or raise taxes on average and high earners far higher to Danish levels
Putin can keep fighting as long as he holds significant land in Ukraine. I think he will eventually fail to meet that contingency. If he loses the Crimea he has lost and will very likely be overthrown. Ukraine's economy is utterly devastated, it survives on the charity of friends and there is a possibility that we will weary but not as long as Ukraine continues to win, recover land and destroy the Russian army.
What Ukraine, and very probably the west, cannot tolerate is a prolonged stalemate. The 2 months since the fall of Kherson have been largely static. Ukraine need victories.
The Sunday Rawnsley: A year of cascading scandals and whipsawing policies has also been 12 months in which vital public services have come dangerously close to collapse and food banks haven’t been able to cope with the demand for their help. The serial debauchery of the king of rogues was followed by the ruinous reign of the mad queen. Financial markets started applying a “moron premium” to the price of lending to Britain.
It’s not disruption by the opposition parties that has destabilised the governance of Britain but the Conservative party itself.
No explanation can overlook Brexit, a rupture unique to this country and one that has left Britons poorer than they need have been, while scrambling the synapses of the Conservative party responsible for it.
A sequence of successively worse prime ministers has crashed and burned because they promised things they couldn’t deliver. This cycle of leadership boom and bust has been accompanied by vicious purges as the so-called Brexit revolution devoured itself. The pool of Tory talent has been drained, especially of Conservatives of more decent and sensible character, many of whom have been ejected from the party or abandoned it in despair.
So 2022 has been a year of extreme misgovernance, but it is best interpreted not as a shockingly unexpected aberration, but the culmination of forces unleashed since 2016.
Mutinous Conservative MPs are already chuntering that, if their prospects aren’t looking up by the spring, Mr Sunak will find himself putsched out of Downing Street next year. And the name you are most likely to hear bandied about as his replacement? Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson.
That this is even being talked about tells us that the dementia of the Conservative party has reached a very advanced stage.
Britain is unlucky. Not only did we suffer from Covid and Putin, on top of that we suffered from this bizarre flavour of the Conservative Party who gave us hard Brexit, Truss-o-nomics and a myriad of corrupt and crazy schemes that mean today we can’t afford nurses.
THIS might be one other reason we can’t afford nurses. A total non-job. Woke nonsense. £110,000 a year
On Topic has SKS told striking nurses to get up and go home we don't support you yet?
Or are the SKS Tory party currently only picking on Dr's
Just the usual fence sitting.
Basically Starmer proposes Toryism, but with a face like he has a pineapple stuck up his arse.
Is the NHS safe under SKS and Streeting?
This "radical reform" of which they speak?
Same shit different day. Milburn plans and the Iraq war were why I left Labour 20 years ago.
Looks like Starmer is going to skip straight to the unpopular bit of New Labour, bypassing the few enthusiastic years.
Where would you start if suddenly appointed Health Secretary, if you didn’t turn it down flat ? Solving the problems of the NHS is a bit much to ask, but what changes would have the biggest impact (assuming a bit of financial headroom to fund change) ?
If his answer isn't Bob Geldof's 'Gizz us all your money' I'll be shocked.
Comments
Dominic Raab plans to change the law so criminals would have to face victims’ relatives
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/why-did-zara-aleenas-killer-have-more-rights-than-she-did-family-asks-7sdk0frtd (£££)
Dominic Raab misses the point, perhaps deliberately. What we want are fewer murders, not more gimmicks. The scandals about the Zara Aleena murder are, first, yet another lone woman was attacked, raped and murdered, and second that her killer had already been recalled to prison for breaching his parole terms, but he was out when the police popped round to pick him up. That he declined to stand in the dock to be sentenced is neither here nor there, except it will give Raab the appearance of action.
I do wonder if much of this Yes support won't survive an initial brush with reality. All the campaign needs to do is say stuff like:
"Like Brexit..."
"During the negotiations..."
"State pension payments will cease 6 months after the referendum"
"People born in Scotland who have lived in England, Wales and Northern Ireland for over 5 years...."
"Major arterial routes will remain open, like the M74 and A1, but..."
Which is why a clever Unionist politician should be able to work with that to flip the SNP on its head.
The "independent" pay bodies based their awards on inflation as it was at the beginning of the year, a few percent. The government could announce that the 2023 awards will be based on inflation at the beginning of 2023 and will be funded in full. That would be a face saving way to back down.
One interesting twist from the legislation over strikes is that the threshold in a postal ballot is so high that when it is exceeded the strike has overwhelming support and is harder to defeat. The timetable also means that strikes drag on interminably. We are currently arguing about pay awards for a financial year with only 3 1/2 months left, we should really be talking about the ones for 2023.
Which is interesting given its roots are basically Scottish, the Queen was half-Scottish, and her son is very pro-Scottish.
I do wonder if Starmer has the necessary rhetorical deftness to manage the inevitable reverse ferret on Brexit.
Actually I don’t; he doesn’t.
What I don't think Strauss and the ECB have grasped is that most active fans would accept an Ashes defeat if it meant their side winning the county championship. The former is a nice to have, the other is greedily desired. Therefore the Strauss review (and the Hundred) had the priorities of their owners exactly backwards.
The issue is that casual cricket fans probably have their priorities the other way around, partly because that includes most journalists.
But more generally (and drawing threads together) how well should England be doing? A Euro final and World Cup QF is somewhere between about right and a bit better than we might expect... A big European nation but not obviously the biggest.
Echoes of the UK's wider status. A substantial country amongst other substantial countries. Prone to seeing itself as (still) Top Nation. Some of the discontent coming from not having come to terms with its true potential status, possibly underachieving because of a refusal, like faded gentry, to inhabit the current reality.
Gender reassignment.
Mr. Jonathan, intriguing as ever to consider what would've happened had Labour supported May's deal.
Probably would've required Corbyn not being leader. But, in that circumstance, Remain might have won anyway.
‘So let me be very clear: with Labour the UK will not go back into the EU. We will not be joining the single market. We will not be joining a customs union.’
https://mobile.twitter.com/BazakeMedia/status/1603798962867159040
The interesting thing about that article (which is in the Express so treat with caution) is it did make the point if Scotland is to stay in the Union long term it needs more than a transactional arrangement. It needs to feel part of the UK and value that.
This is of course why Sturgeon's been putting forward a load of mad and bad policies designed not to help the people of Scotland but to emphasise a divide with the rest of the country. And similarly the government in London who are very similar in outlook have been coming up with daft ideas like flags on every building.
What is strange to me is the failure of English players in management. Lampard maybe the only English man to have got a top job managing top players, and that was surely mainly sentiment...
I am mildly pro keeping the Monarchy, but a rather petulant King and a "nice but dim" heir is not a very sound foundation for an institution with more than its share of skeletons in closets.
Neo Liberalism rools OK despite the fact it has completely fooked over the UK since 1979
You're quick this morning.
The coronation will be a great show after a winter of misery and bring in tourist revenue.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2022/10/11/do-scots-want-keep-monarchy-independent-scotland
If they did rejoin I'd be first in the queue for a Scottish passport
https://tomlehrersongs.com/
Or are the SKS Tory party currently only picking on Dr's
Not that any UK government is going to allow indyref2 after the SC ruling anytime soon
In addition to this world cups are played in summer, in hot weather, which is terrible for English players, more accustomed to the long, wet, winter slog.
And then there is the number of games our players play(ed). Frankly our sides turned up knackered at world cups are euro tournaments.
Things have changed. Our players are technically better than the giants of previous England teams. They are comfortable on the ball. They still play too many games, and the next WC is in the summer again, as is the Euros.
As a result we reached the semis in 2018, the final of the Euros in 2021 and easily could have won, and have lost in the quarters to the reigning champions who have again reached the final in 2022.
I was as disappointed as anyone last week, but to fail to see that things have changed is myopic in the extreme.
And never forget, 31 teams failed at this tournament.
People aren't happy with the status quo. There's a good chance they'll vote for Independence as a change in Scotland.
Basically Starmer proposes Toryism, but with a face like he has a pineapple stuck up his arse.
Your personal campaign does blind you from time to time. I do find it odd how you can criticise others as Tories when you’re a self proclaimed Tory supporter.
They are however the 2 that attempted redistribution a bit
Modern sequencing kit, notably the new machines from Oxford Nanopore, is hugely cheaper, faster and easier to use than was the case even a few years back.
......Though you could have given a mention to Scotland and Wales
“Mild and loving” Trump is losing it.
https://twitter.com/RonFilipkowski/status/1604297482229383170
He has also said we cannot afford an inflation matching pay award for nurses
The choice between 2 identical ideologies Tory neo Liberalism or Tory neoliberalism is not for me.
Why do you support immigrant hating, strike hating red Rosette wearing Tories over the same philosophy with a blue rosette, favourite colour?
This "radical reform" of which they speak?
Blood cultures are imperfect, but fairly cheap to process, and use standard micro kit.
But yes, capital equipment budgets in the NHS are threadbare. I have to bid nearly a year in advance for new kit, and it often gets refused.
I know it’s not ideal, but I find your opinion on Labour difficult to take seriously as a result.
It's not currently on offer by either Tory Parties
Looks like Starmer is going to skip straight to the unpopular bit of New Labour, bypassing the few enthusiastic years.
Is there any particular reason why an independent Scotland should be any poorer than those other northern European nations of circa 5 million people? Any reason why Scotland wouldn't be as wealthy as Norway, Finland, Denmark or Ireland in time?
You back immigrant hating, climate change protestor hating, can't afford a decent wage supporting, can't afford nationalisation supporting, army strike break supporting SKS.
"Not ideal" you are right on that front.
Anyway I am out of here for today. Daughters birthday party to attend.
Personally I think that's a bonus, but I don't think many Scots agree with me, especially not independence-leaning ones.
Until Streeting, pretty sure he will be Milburn on steroids.
A hard border on the Tweed, but not on the Foyle.
Funny old world.
Scottish politics has been logjammed for too long over the issue of independence, and that is a real drag on other aspects of Scottish life and economy.
The only way to resolve the log-jam is either for independence to happen, or for the SNP to lose a Holyrood election by a landslide. Neither looks likely to happen any time soon, so Scotland remains trapped in stagnation, as indeed does much of the rest of the UK.
Table top sequencing costs have come down quite a long way, though. A lab machine can be somewhere around £10k.
I would guess that the individual sequencing cost is still quite a bit too high to compete directly with blood cultures, but if speed and specificity is important, then it’s still likely worthwhile.
Fairly certain one reason for the consensus is a recognition that the NHS would be an issue in any border poll, and that Ireland's health service is in many respects in worse shape than Britain's.
There are a number of ethical and medico-legal issues over what we should do with all the leftover genetic data. If we look at it we might find all sorts of nasties, if we ignore it we may be open to legal challenge when something surfaces in time.
https://twitter.com/drradchenko/status/1604411963446071297?s=61&t=gWZ2YcJAdHIpqzQ3gI-75Q
The NYT says the same. Brace
https://twitter.com/helenebismarck/status/1604418592107335682?s=61&t=gWZ2YcJAdHIpqzQ3gI-75Q
Solving the problems of the NHS is a bit much to ask, but what changes would have the biggest impact (assuming a bit of financial headroom to fund change) ?
https://twitter.com/NickCohen4/status/1603757120989827072?t=pCANSgnLS2QYmOMXz-cbWA&s=19
I can see the war pestering out in a stalemate, with Russia unable to sustain a major campaign in the spring, but Ukraine struggling to dislodge the Russians from the remaining occupied territories.
There's no move in any of these directions because remaining comfortably within the UK that has apparently subjected Scotland to 300 years of rape and plunder but complaining about it all the time is preferred. And those who actually do want independence want it to be not actual independence, but within the clammy embrace of the EU, so they can effectively replace the UK.
It would either have to impose deep austerity to cut spending to Irish or Swiss levels or raise taxes on average and high earners far higher to Danish levels
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/scotlands-record-high-deficit-puts-eu-entry-in-doubt-n767r2knn
What Ukraine, and very probably the west, cannot tolerate is a prolonged stalemate. The 2 months since the fall of Kherson have been largely static. Ukraine need victories.