Prediction: the assertion by MSP “Ash Regan” that the next GE or Holyrood election will be a de facto plebiscite, with 50% for Indy parties meaning independence must happen, will not withstand a week of scrutiny
What happens if the Indy parties don’t get 50%, is Indy then abandoned? For how long? Who decides how long? If it’s not abandoned then this just means the Nits can call a referendum, ie an election, whenever they like, for as long as they like, every year if needs be. They could have two “de facto referendums” a month, and the rest of the UK, destabilized by this, can go fuck itself
I kind of hope she wins so we can see this idiocy collide with legal and constitutional reality. It will not be pretty
It's not especially difficult to understand. If the threshold isn't reached then it's not taken as a mandate for independence. But that doesn't stop a future election being run on the same principle. It's not like the SNP hasn't already run on every election since the year dot as a pro-independence party. There's nothing really changed in that sense.
You can put whatever you want in your manifesto when your party stands for election. Whether anyone buys it is for the electorate to decide.
In this case the obvious question would be "sure, the principle is sound. What happens when you enact it and invite Westminster to the negotiation table and they just say 'nah, not today mate'. What will you do then"?
She seems to be claiming this will be a lot more than a normal election. It will be a de facto referendum
As I say, it won’t withstand scrutiny. She surely knows this and is bidding to be the Indy hardcore candidate
What if she won the leadership, called an election on this basis, and unionists boycotted it? What then?
it’s a recipe for getting Indy bogged down in decades of legal bickering
It's not as if Farage was only allowed to stand for election on the principle of getting the UK out of the EU for one election cycle. If I put in my manifesto that I want to introduce a universal basic income and don't win the election then I can't propose it next time round because it's been rejected for an indeterminate period of time? If I'm in opposition and say I want to improve the NHS two, three electoral cycles running then I'm trying to browbeat the nation into agreeing with the principle?
As I say the problem isn't the principle. On any given election you stand on and for what you believe, regardless of previous electoral cycles. You put what you'd do in your manifesto if you win. If no-one wants that then you don't win. It's pretty simple.
As I say in this instance the issue is more in the substance of what you actually do after you win and enact your manifesto. The SNP can put whatever they like in their election manifesto. Whether anyone else actually recognises that if the SNP win is a totally separate issue.
If Westminster want to actually properly clarify the circumstances in which Section 30 orders would be granted if requested, then perhaps the discussion would be different, but otherwise I see no particular problem here.
So the 50+1 vow is legally, practically, constitutionally and technically meaningless? It’s pure gesture, and its main consequence will be to make the Nat leader look stupid?
As I said, it won’t survive scrutiny. It hasn’t survived 5 minutes on PB
PMSL, a bunch of hysterical Tory halfwits pontificate on something they know nothing of, so we better just accept being a colony then.
Prediction: the assertion by MSP “Ash Regan” that the next GE or Holyrood election will be a de facto plebiscite, with 50% for Indy parties meaning independence must happen, will not withstand a week of scrutiny
What happens if the Indy parties don’t get 50%, is Indy then abandoned? For how long? Who decides how long? If it’s not abandoned then this just means the Nits can call a referendum, ie an election, whenever they like, for as long as they like, every year if needs be. They could have two “de facto referendums” a month, and the rest of the UK, destabilized by this, can go fuck itself
I kind of hope she wins so we can see this idiocy collide with legal and constitutional reality. It will not be pretty
It's not especially difficult to understand. If the threshold isn't reached then it's not taken as a mandate for independence. But that doesn't stop a future election being run on the same principle. It's not like the SNP hasn't already run on every election since the year dot as a pro-independence party. There's nothing really changed in that sense.
You can put whatever you want in your manifesto when your party stands for election. Whether anyone buys it is for the electorate to decide.
In this case the obvious question would be "sure, the principle is sound. What happens when you enact it and invite Westminster to the negotiation table and they just say 'nah, not today mate'. What will you do then"?
She seems to be claiming this will be a lot more than a normal election. It will be a de facto referendum
As I say, it won’t withstand scrutiny. She surely knows this and is bidding to be the Indy hardcore candidate
What if she won the leadership, called an election on this basis, and unionists boycotted it? What then?
it’s a recipe for getting Indy bogged down in decades of legal bickering
Unionists aren't going to boycott a Parliamentary election, regardless of what anyone else says about it being a de facto referendum. That would then sign a blank cheque for any and all other policies to be enacted without opposition.
Bit of a rough choice for a voter like me, who'd like to vote Green, on the basis that there are pressing environmental problems, but doesn't want my vote counted as one for a unilateral declaration of independence.
You need the Greens to split into a Green Party and a Rainbow Party.
Good afternoon all! I have been catching up on the previous thread. The effect of Kate Forbes’ religious affiliations on future SNP policies seems to be exercising many. Have I missed all the posts similarly querying the effect of Humza Yousaf’s religious affiliations?
I suppose the assumption is that Kate Forbes may stay true to her principles whereas we all know Yousaf doesn't have any.
I didn't think Yousaf stood a chance.
At the moment it’s only Yousaf and Regan. If they are the only two candidates, the Sturgeon supporters will support Yousaf. Therefore he would stand a very good chance.
If Robertson doesn't stand but Forbes does, and it's Forbes, Yousaf and Regan, that could be interesting.
Mr. Battery, there was a case in Australia of a toddler (or maybe baby) grabbed by dingos. The mother was deemed not sufficiently mournful (not enough tears) and convicted. She was later released when evidence of the child was found, I think in a dingo's stomach or in a den.
The casting of judgement on how someone either grieves or copes (or not) in very high stress/sad situations is particularly distasteful. It's also not very illuminating. Not that that will stop some on social media and elsewhere weighing in.
Prediction: the assertion by MSP “Ash Regan” that the next GE or Holyrood election will be a de facto plebiscite, with 50% for Indy parties meaning independence must happen, will not withstand a week of scrutiny
What happens if the Indy parties don’t get 50%, is Indy then abandoned? For how long? Who decides how long? If it’s not abandoned then this just means the Nits can call a referendum, ie an election, whenever they like, for as long as they like, every year if needs be. They could have two “de facto referendums” a month, and the rest of the UK, destabilized by this, can go fuck itself
I kind of hope she wins so we can see this idiocy collide with legal and constitutional reality. It will not be pretty
It's not especially difficult to understand. If the threshold isn't reached then it's not taken as a mandate for independence. But that doesn't stop a future election being run on the same principle. It's not like the SNP hasn't already run on every election since the year dot as a pro-independence party. There's nothing really changed in that sense.
You can put whatever you want in your manifesto when your party stands for election. Whether anyone buys it is for the electorate to decide.
In this case the obvious question would be "sure, the principle is sound. What happens when you enact it and invite Westminster to the negotiation table and they just say 'nah, not today mate'. What will you do then"?
She seems to be claiming this will be a lot more than a normal election. It will be a de facto referendum
As I say, it won’t withstand scrutiny. She surely knows this and is bidding to be the Indy hardcore candidate
What if she won the leadership, called an election on this basis, and unionists boycotted it? What then?
it’s a recipe for getting Indy bogged down in decades of legal bickering
It's not as if Farage was only allowed to stand for election on the principle of getting the UK out of the EU for one election cycle. If I put in my manifesto that I want to introduce a universal basic income and don't win the election then I can't propose it next time round because it's been rejected for an indeterminate period of time? If I'm in opposition and say I want to improve the NHS two, three electoral cycles running then I'm trying to browbeat the nation into agreeing with the principle?
As I say the problem isn't the principle. On any given election you stand on and for what you believe, regardless of previous electoral cycles. You put what you'd do in your manifesto if you win. If no-one wants that then you don't win. It's pretty simple.
As I say in this instance the issue is more in the substance of what you actually do after you win and enact your manifesto. The SNP can put whatever they like in their election manifesto. Whether anyone else actually recognises that if the SNP win is a totally separate issue.
If Westminster want to actually properly clarify the circumstances in which Section 30 orders would be granted if requested, then perhaps the discussion would be different, but otherwise I see no particular problem here.
So the 50+1 vow is legally, practically, constitutionally and technically meaningless? It’s pure gesture, and its main consequence will be to make the Nat leader look stupid?
As I said, it won’t survive scrutiny. It hasn’t survived 5 minutes on PB
Regan is saying next time if they win an election and break 50% they won't be asking for a S30. They'll basically say they have a mandate to negotiate independence, not a mandate to ask WM politely if they'd ever so kindly mind granting the powers for a referendum to see if anyone wants independence.
From a Scotland Act position I suspect WM will be legally as able to say "fuck off" to that as they are to a S30 request. But they will have proven once and for all that the UK isn't a voluntary union.
As I say the question at that point is "what does First Minister Ash Regan do when WM just ignore that anyway"? But that's a separate discussion to the actual premise of the manifesto.
The obvious next step is to go down the Sinn Fein route of 1918. Declare independence unilaterally, convene the Holyrood Parliament as the legislature of an independent state, instruct civil servants to separate ties with UK institutions, collect and retain tax revenue in Scotland, instruct the military commanders of barracks, ports and airbases in Scotland that they are now to take orders from a Scottish Ministry of Defence, and then see how many people follow those orders, what the UK authorities do to assert continuing UK control, and how the public reacts to those actions.
It could go either way. Might see support rally to Scottish independence if the UK response is seen as heavy-handed, or it might discredit the cause of Scottish independence in the eyes of some of its less committed supporters who would recoil from the chaos, confusion and divisiveness.
Many fine words are being written about Sturgeon as a communicator and campaigner, but her most damaging legacy for the country has been her lack of succession management. She departs abruptly with mounting problems and with no obvious leader-in-waiting. That is truly a mark of poor leadership.
Resigning, she said she was freeing her party to make its own decision on the best strategy for the next independence referendum. For some of the deeper thinkers in the SNP, that might mean putting independence on the backburner and returning to building a reputation for competent government.
Intyeresting. Yet we are always being told [edit] by PBers of a certain mentality how much we have in common with Australia. And they have compulsory voting (with cerftain exemptions, e.g. illness or seasonal workers).
Are you literally trying to claim that saying “the British are like the Aussies” is some kind of Britnat delusion?
Have you been to Australia? I have. A dozen times. I have a daughter growing up there. The British are more like the Aussies than probably any other nation on earth, including Ireland (I have not been to NZ, so that’s the one exception whereof I cannot speak)
This is hardly surprising given the overwhelmingly British origins - for good and bad - of modern Oz
Poor old Australia to have that hanging round your neck, we are like the most despised people in the world.
Good afternoon all! I have been catching up on the previous thread. The effect of Kate Forbes’ religious affiliations on future SNP policies seems to be exercising many. Have I missed all the posts similarly querying the effect of Humza Yousaf’s religious affiliations?
I suppose the assumption is that Kate Forbes may stay true to her principles whereas we all know Yousaf doesn't have any.
I didn't think Yousaf stood a chance.
At the moment it’s only Yousaf and Regan. If they are the only two candidates, the Sturgeon supporters will support Yousaf. Therefore he would stand a very good chance.
Has he actually entered the race. Good Lord.
In his own words "You've got to put yourself forward if you think you're the best person for the job. And I do. This is the top job in the country, and it needs somebody who has experience."
Prediction: the assertion by MSP “Ash Regan” that the next GE or Holyrood election will be a de facto plebiscite, with 50% for Indy parties meaning independence must happen, will not withstand a week of scrutiny
What happens if the Indy parties don’t get 50%, is Indy then abandoned? For how long? Who decides how long? If it’s not abandoned then this just means the Nits can call a referendum, ie an election, whenever they like, for as long as they like, every year if needs be. They could have two “de facto referendums” a month, and the rest of the UK, destabilized by this, can go fuck itself
I kind of hope she wins so we can see this idiocy collide with legal and constitutional reality. It will not be pretty
It's not especially difficult to understand. If the threshold isn't reached then it's not taken as a mandate for independence. But that doesn't stop a future election being run on the same principle. It's not like the SNP hasn't already run on every election since the year dot as a pro-independence party. There's nothing really changed in that sense.
You can put whatever you want in your manifesto when your party stands for election. Whether anyone buys it is for the electorate to decide.
In this case the obvious question would be "sure, the principle is sound. What happens when you enact it and invite Westminster to the negotiation table and they just say 'nah, not today mate'. What will you do then"?
She seems to be claiming this will be a lot more than a normal election. It will be a de facto referendum
As I say, it won’t withstand scrutiny. She surely knows this and is bidding to be the Indy hardcore candidate
What if she won the leadership, called an election on this basis, and unionists boycotted it? What then?
it’s a recipe for getting Indy bogged down in decades of legal bickering
It's not as if Farage was only allowed to stand for election on the principle of getting the UK out of the EU for one election cycle. If I put in my manifesto that I want to introduce a universal basic income and don't win the election then I can't propose it next time round because it's been rejected for an indeterminate period of time? If I'm in opposition and say I want to improve the NHS two, three electoral cycles running then I'm trying to browbeat the nation into agreeing with the principle?
As I say the problem isn't the principle. On any given election you stand on and for what you believe, regardless of previous electoral cycles. You put what you'd do in your manifesto if you win. If no-one wants that then you don't win. It's pretty simple.
As I say in this instance the issue is more in the substance of what you actually do after you win and enact your manifesto. The SNP can put whatever they like in their election manifesto. Whether anyone else actually recognises that if the SNP win is a totally separate issue.
If Westminster want to actually properly clarify the circumstances in which Section 30 orders would be granted if requested, then perhaps the discussion would be different, but otherwise I see no particular problem here.
So the 50+1 vow is legally, practically, constitutionally and technically meaningless? It’s pure gesture, and its main consequence will be to make the Nat leader look stupid?
As I said, it won’t survive scrutiny. It hasn’t survived 5 minutes on PB
Regan is saying next time if they win an election and break 50% they won't be asking for a S30. They'll basically say they have a mandate to negotiate independence, not a mandate to ask WM politely if they'd ever so kindly mind granting the powers for a referendum to see if anyone wants independence.
From a Scotland Act position I suspect WM will be legally as able to say "fuck off" to that as they are to a S30 request. But they will have proven once and for all that the UK isn't a voluntary union.
As I say the question at that point is "what does First Minister Ash Regan do when WM just ignore that anyway"? But that's a separate discussion to the actual premise of the manifesto.
The obvious next step is to go down the Sinn Fein route of 1918. Declare independence unilaterally, convene the Holyrood Parliament as the legislature of an independent state, instruct civil servants to separate ties with UK institutions, collect and retain tax revenue in Scotland, instruct the military commanders of barracks, ports and airbases in Scotland that they are now to take orders from a Scottish Ministry of Defence, and then see how many people follow those orders, what the UK authorities do to assert continuing UK control, and how the public reacts to those actions.
It could go either way. Might see support rally to Scottish independence if the UK response is seen as heavy-handed, or it might discredit the cause of Scottish independence in the eyes of some of its less committed supporters who would recoil from the chaos, confusion and divisiveness.
Well, that would seem to be one of the obvious conclusions. Though for equally obvious reasons I doubt Regan wants to specifically call that out!
Very strange if it is Nicola Bulley they’ve found this is one mile from where she disappeared. Why on earth has it taken three weeks to find her?
Assuming she's been there for three weeks. May have been weighted of course. We simply don't know. But seems implausible she fell in and only drifted a mile without being seen by any of the hordes of journalists and assorted ghouls and Plod.
All interesting @theSNP leadership speculation & all names being mentioned have different attributes but despite what some are saying, Angus Robertson, while having longest experience in politics, actually has least experience in government - nine months - if that’s important.
Prediction: the assertion by MSP “Ash Regan” that the next GE or Holyrood election will be a de facto plebiscite, with 50% for Indy parties meaning independence must happen, will not withstand a week of scrutiny
What happens if the Indy parties don’t get 50%, is Indy then abandoned? For how long? Who decides how long? If it’s not abandoned then this just means the Nits can call a referendum, ie an election, whenever they like, for as long as they like, every year if needs be. They could have two “de facto referendums” a month, and the rest of the UK, destabilized by this, can go fuck itself
I kind of hope she wins so we can see this idiocy collide with legal and constitutional reality. It will not be pretty
It's not especially difficult to understand. If the threshold isn't reached then it's not taken as a mandate for independence. But that doesn't stop a future election being run on the same principle. It's not like the SNP hasn't already run on every election since the year dot as a pro-independence party. There's nothing really changed in that sense.
You can put whatever you want in your manifesto when your party stands for election. Whether anyone buys it is for the electorate to decide.
In this case the obvious question would be "sure, the principle is sound. What happens when you enact it and invite Westminster to the negotiation table and they just say 'nah, not today mate'. What will you do then"?
She seems to be claiming this will be a lot more than a normal election. It will be a de facto referendum
As I say, it won’t withstand scrutiny. She surely knows this and is bidding to be the Indy hardcore candidate
What if she won the leadership, called an election on this basis, and unionists boycotted it? What then?
it’s a recipe for getting Indy bogged down in decades of legal bickering
Unionists aren't going to boycott a Parliamentary election, regardless of what anyone else says about it being a de facto referendum. That would then sign a blank cheque for any and all other policies to be enacted without opposition.
Bit of a rough choice for a voter like me, who'd like to vote Green, on the basis that there are pressing environmental problems, but doesn't want my vote counted as one for a unilateral declaration of independence.
You need the Greens to split into a Green Party and a Rainbow Party.
Would make life simpler. As it is, they've ended up having Andy Wightman resign, just the sort of chap they badly need to take a broad approach to the issues of land ownership and policy.
Good afternoon all! I have been catching up on the previous thread. The effect of Kate Forbes’ religious affiliations on future SNP policies seems to be exercising many. Have I missed all the posts similarly querying the effect of Humza Yousaf’s religious affiliations?
I suppose the assumption is that Kate Forbes may stay true to her principles whereas we all know Yousaf doesn't have any.
I didn't think Yousaf stood a chance.
At the moment it’s only Yousaf and Regan. If they are the only two candidates, the Sturgeon supporters will support Yousaf. Therefore he would stand a very good chance.
Has he actually entered the race. Good Lord.
In his own words "You've got to put yourself forward if you think you're the best person for the job. And I do. This is the top job in the country, and it needs somebody who has experience."
Well he isn't short of self-confidence, you have to give him that.
Twitter rumour that the current FAV Angus Robertson (5/4) will not be a candidate.
Some of his close allies have backed Yousaf. Not sure why, I would've thought he'd be the unexciting, continuity candidate to hold things together until the likes of Mairi McAllan are ready.
Skeletons? He was aware of the Edinburgh Airport incident.
Hmmm only that , sure he would be aware of a few other matters ?
Good afternoon all! I have been catching up on the previous thread. The effect of Kate Forbes’ religious affiliations on future SNP policies seems to be exercising many. Have I missed all the posts similarly querying the effect of Humza Yousaf’s religious affiliations?
I suppose the assumption is that Kate Forbes may stay true to her principles whereas we all know Yousaf doesn't have any.
I didn't think Yousaf stood a chance.
At the moment it’s only Yousaf and Regan. If they are the only two candidates, the Sturgeon supporters will support Yousaf. Therefore he would stand a very good chance.
Has he actually entered the race. Good Lord.
In his own words "You've got to put yourself forward if you think you're the best person for the job. And I do. This is the top job in the country, and it needs somebody who has experience."
Intyeresting. Yet we are always being told [edit] by PBers of a certain mentality how much we have in common with Australia. And they have compulsory voting (with cerftain exemptions, e.g. illness or seasonal workers).
Are you literally trying to claim that saying “the British are like the Aussies” is some kind of Britnat delusion?
Have you been to Australia? I have. A dozen times. I have a daughter growing up there. The British are more like the Aussies than probably any other nation on earth, including Ireland (I have not been to NZ, so that’s the one exception whereof I cannot speak)
This is hardly surprising given the overwhelmingly British origins - for good and bad - of modern Oz
Poor old Australia to have that hanging round your neck, we are like the most despised people in the world.
Good afternoon all! I have been catching up on the previous thread. The effect of Kate Forbes’ religious affiliations on future SNP policies seems to be exercising many. Have I missed all the posts similarly querying the effect of Humza Yousaf’s religious affiliations?
I suppose the assumption is that Kate Forbes may stay true to her principles whereas we all know Yousaf doesn't have any.
I didn't think Yousaf stood a chance.
At the moment it’s only Yousaf and Regan. If they are the only two candidates, the Sturgeon supporters will support Yousaf. Therefore he would stand a very good chance.
Has he actually entered the race. Good Lord.
In his own words "You've got to put yourself forward if you think you're the best person for the job. And I do. This is the top job in the country, and it needs somebody who has experience."
Prediction: the assertion by MSP “Ash Regan” that the next GE or Holyrood election will be a de facto plebiscite, with 50% for Indy parties meaning independence must happen, will not withstand a week of scrutiny
What happens if the Indy parties don’t get 50%, is Indy then abandoned? For how long? Who decides how long? If it’s not abandoned then this just means the Nits can call a referendum, ie an election, whenever they like, for as long as they like, every year if needs be. They could have two “de facto referendums” a month, and the rest of the UK, destabilized by this, can go fuck itself
I kind of hope she wins so we can see this idiocy collide with legal and constitutional reality. It will not be pretty
If we end up with Regan v Yousaf, there is plenty of room for an unknown to come through the middle.
If we end up with Yousaf-v-Regan there will be plenty of room for absolute despair.
I know very little about Regan, but if she's not significantly better than that idiot Yousaf she must be Boris Johnson levels of bad.
I have now discovered that the position she resigned from was Minister for Community Safety. No, me neither.
Nobody on the planet could be that useless. If she was dead she would be more useful than Useless. Not to Southern tastes though as she actually wants independence.
Good afternoon all! I have been catching up on the previous thread. The effect of Kate Forbes’ religious affiliations on future SNP policies seems to be exercising many. Have I missed all the posts similarly querying the effect of Humza Yousaf’s religious affiliations?
I suppose the assumption is that Kate Forbes may stay true to her principles whereas we all know Yousaf doesn't have any.
I didn't think Yousaf stood a chance.
At the moment it’s only Yousaf and Regan. If they are the only two candidates, the Sturgeon supporters will support Yousaf. Therefore he would stand a very good chance.
Has he actually entered the race. Good Lord.
In his own words "You've got to put yourself forward if you think you're the best person for the job. And I do. This is the top job in the country, and it needs somebody who has experience."
Every other MSP should sue him for libel.
No such thing in Scotland. It's defamation, and some wouldn't win.
Many fine words are being written about Sturgeon as a communicator and campaigner, but her most damaging legacy for the country has been her lack of succession management. She departs abruptly with mounting problems and with no obvious leader-in-waiting. That is truly a mark of poor leadership.
Resigning, she said she was freeing her party to make its own decision on the best strategy for the next independence referendum. For some of the deeper thinkers in the SNP, that might mean putting independence on the backburner and returning to building a reputation for competent government.
In fairness Sturgeon was grooming a successor, but he was grooming a teenage boy…..
Pundits bang on about succession management but what has their been nationwide? From Cameron to May to Boris to Liz Truss to Rishi, who has been a designated and groomed successor?
Prediction: the assertion by MSP “Ash Regan” that the next GE or Holyrood election will be a de facto plebiscite, with 50% for Indy parties meaning independence must happen, will not withstand a week of scrutiny
What happens if the Indy parties don’t get 50%, is Indy then abandoned? For how long? Who decides how long? If it’s not abandoned then this just means the Nits can call a referendum, ie an election, whenever they like, for as long as they like, every year if needs be. They could have two “de facto referendums” a month, and the rest of the UK, destabilized by this, can go fuck itself
I kind of hope she wins so we can see this idiocy collide with legal and constitutional reality. It will not be pretty
It's not especially difficult to understand. If the threshold isn't reached then it's not taken as a mandate for independence. But that doesn't stop a future election being run on the same principle. It's not like the SNP hasn't already run on every election since the year dot as a pro-independence party. There's nothing really changed in that sense.
You can put whatever you want in your manifesto when your party stands for election. Whether anyone buys it is for the electorate to decide.
In this case the obvious question would be "sure, the principle is sound. What happens when you enact it and invite Westminster to the negotiation table and they just say 'nah, not today mate'. What will you do then"?
She seems to be claiming this will be a lot more than a normal election. It will be a de facto referendum
As I say, it won’t withstand scrutiny. She surely knows this and is bidding to be the Indy hardcore candidate
What if she won the leadership, called an election on this basis, and unionists boycotted it? What then?
it’s a recipe for getting Indy bogged down in decades of legal bickering
It's not as if Farage was only allowed to stand for election on the principle of getting the UK out of the EU for one election cycle. If I put in my manifesto that I want to introduce a universal basic income and don't win the election then I can't propose it next time round because it's been rejected for an indeterminate period of time? If I'm in opposition and say I want to improve the NHS two, three electoral cycles running then I'm trying to browbeat the nation into agreeing with the principle?
As I say the problem isn't the principle. On any given election you stand on and for what you believe, regardless of previous electoral cycles. You put what you'd do in your manifesto if you win. If no-one wants that then you don't win. It's pretty simple.
As I say in this instance the issue is more in the substance of what you actually do after you win and enact your manifesto. The SNP can put whatever they like in their election manifesto. Whether anyone else actually recognises that if the SNP win is a totally separate issue.
If Westminster want to actually properly clarify the circumstances in which Section 30 orders would be granted if requested, then perhaps the discussion would be different, but otherwise I see no particular problem here.
So the 50+1 vow is legally, practically, constitutionally and technically meaningless? It’s pure gesture, and its main consequence will be to make the Nat leader look stupid?
As I said, it won’t survive scrutiny. It hasn’t survived 5 minutes on PB
Regan is saying next time if they win an election and break 50% they won't be asking for a S30. They'll basically say they have a mandate to negotiate independence, not a mandate to ask WM politely if they'd ever so kindly mind granting the powers for a referendum to see if anyone wants independence.
From a Scotland Act position I suspect WM will be legally as able to say "fuck off" to that as they are to a S30 request. But they will have proven once and for all that the UK isn't a voluntary union.
As I say the question at that point is "what does First Minister Ash Regan do when WM just ignore that anyway"? But that's a separate discussion to the actual premise of the manifesto.
The obvious next step is to go down the Sinn Fein route of 1918. Declare independence unilaterally, convene the Holyrood Parliament as the legislature of an independent state, instruct civil servants to separate ties with UK institutions, collect and retain tax revenue in Scotland, instruct the military commanders of barracks, ports and airbases in Scotland that they are now to take orders from a Scottish Ministry of Defence, and then see how many people follow those orders, what the UK authorities do to assert continuing UK control, and how the public reacts to those actions.
It could go either way. Might see support rally to Scottish independence if the UK response is seen as heavy-handed, or it might discredit the cause of Scottish independence in the eyes of some of its less committed supporters who would recoil from the chaos, confusion and divisiveness.
Well, that would seem to be one of the obvious conclusions. Though for equally obvious reasons I doubt Regan wants to specifically call that out!
Oh certainly. The public position would have to be that you have no doubt that the government in Westminster would respect the democratic will of the Scottish people, and so there's no question but that they would start negotiations on independence. It simply wouldn't be possible for the Westminster government to do otherwise.
And then it would be very much a case of sadly, with regret, forced by the intransigence of Westminster, etc, etc.
Where it gets more murky in my view is what would happen if Westminster offered a referendum in the circumstance that the SNP won an election that they said was a referendum already.
Europe has four clear zones: A Latin zone, favouring Switzerland A Central and Balkan zone, favouring Germany. A Scandinavian zone, favouring Sweden. An Atlantic zone, favouring Anglo countries.
This maps vaguely onto economic models and maybe even defence constructs.
In Britain’s case it’s where Brits have actually gone - more in Australia than the entire EU.
Source? I heard approximately 1 million British born living in Australia and 1.2 million in EU-27, can't get source atm
And some people wonder whether the two of us exaggerate the current state of teaching...
"Not put off?" Well. Yes I am actually. Detention Saturday morning? Someone watched too much Breakfast Club in their youth.
Incidentally. We've now a majority of staff on supply. The only permanent appointment made this school year is of a fourth Deputy Head. 3 wasn't enough apparently.
I've just been offered a job on supply - similar sort of terms to yours but in a rather easier school! - and I was musing what I would do if I were offered a permanent contract.
And I concluded very swiftly I would refuse it, for all the reasons you have given. Directed time, admin, parents evenings etc. etc. I'd actually be being paid less. And the pension and job security simply don't compensate for it.
Plus the tutoring's going rather well at the moment.
Prediction: the assertion by MSP “Ash Regan” that the next GE or Holyrood election will be a de facto plebiscite, with 50% for Indy parties meaning independence must happen, will not withstand a week of scrutiny
What happens if the Indy parties don’t get 50%, is Indy then abandoned? For how long? Who decides how long? If it’s not abandoned then this just means the Nits can call a referendum, ie an election, whenever they like, for as long as they like, every year if needs be. They could have two “de facto referendums” a month, and the rest of the UK, destabilized by this, can go fuck itself
I kind of hope she wins so we can see this idiocy collide with legal and constitutional reality. It will not be pretty
It's not especially difficult to understand. If the threshold isn't reached then it's not taken as a mandate for independence. But that doesn't stop a future election being run on the same principle. It's not like the SNP hasn't already run on every election since the year dot as a pro-independence party. There's nothing really changed in that sense.
You can put whatever you want in your manifesto when your party stands for election. Whether anyone buys it is for the electorate to decide.
In this case the obvious question would be "sure, the principle is sound. What happens when you enact it and invite Westminster to the negotiation table and they just say 'nah, not today mate'. What will you do then"?
She seems to be claiming this will be a lot more than a normal election. It will be a de facto referendum
As I say, it won’t withstand scrutiny. She surely knows this and is bidding to be the Indy hardcore candidate
What if she won the leadership, called an election on this basis, and unionists boycotted it? What then?
it’s a recipe for getting Indy bogged down in decades of legal bickering
Unionists aren't going to boycott a Parliamentary election, regardless of what anyone else says about it being a de facto referendum. That would then sign a blank cheque for any and all other policies to be enacted without opposition.
Bit of a rough choice for a voter like me, who'd like to vote Green, on the basis that there are pressing environmental problems, but doesn't want my vote counted as one for a unilateral declaration of independence.
You need the Greens to split into a Green Party and a Rainbow Party.
Would make life simpler. As it is, they've ended up having Andy Wightman resign, just the sort of chap they badly need to take a broad approach to the issues of land ownership and policy.
The soldiers rushed about the Med in Churchill's desperate attempt to save Crete used to say 'never in the whole field of human conflict have so many been been buggered about by so much by so few.'
Freiburg was an idiot. He was given the Germans exact plans. Including the massive advantage defenders has over German paratroopers immediately after they landed - they landed almost completely unarmed.
He doubted the intelligence. Then, after the initial landings proved it to be exactly accurate, still didn’t use it.
Good afternoon all! I have been catching up on the previous thread. The effect of Kate Forbes’ religious affiliations on future SNP policies seems to be exercising many. Have I missed all the posts similarly querying the effect of Humza Yousaf’s religious affiliations?
I suppose the assumption is that Kate Forbes may stay true to her principles whereas we all know Yousaf doesn't have any.
I didn't think Yousaf stood a chance.
At the moment it’s only Yousaf and Regan. If they are the only two candidates, the Sturgeon supporters will support Yousaf. Therefore he would stand a very good chance.
Has he actually entered the race. Good Lord.
In his own words "You've got to put yourself forward if you think you're the best person for the job. And I do. This is the top job in the country, and it needs somebody who has experience."
Well he isn't short of self-confidence, you have to give him that.
That is stupidity , pur eand simple he is so dumb he does not realise how crap he actually is despite overwhelming daily evidence. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eVsD7mKHlDM
Let me extend what Morris_Dancer said. I agree that if you have compulsory voting (something I am not in favor of), you should definitely have a write-in choice on the ballot. But I would go further and say that it is, on the whole, write-in choices on the ballot are a good thing, even when you don't have compulsory voting.
The famous case of Lisa Murkowski's 2010 win shows how that can work: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisa_Murkowski There's a detail in her win that I learned just recently: Her last name is not the easiest to spell for most Americans, and Alaskan rules do not allow electioneering at the polls, so her voters could not come in with visible signs with her name on them. So her campaign provided them with bracelets -- with her name on the inside of the bracelet.
But even in the far more common cases where a write-in candidate loses, write-ins provide important feedback to the parties.
(I will admit that having a write-in choice on the ballot made it easier for me to vote in the last two presidential elections here.)
Just back from a most pleasant walk round East Ham and Barking (contradiction in terms though it may sound)and more than a hint of spring in the air. Tomorrow, I'm off to Lingfield to lose some money at the couse's final jumps card which will be run on watered good ground.
On topic, no, you can't make voting compulsory - the right not to vote is as essential as the right to vote. The only way in which I would even contemplate compulsory voting is if every ballot paper carried a NOTA box.
The 15.5 million who didn't vote at the last election outpoll the nearly 14 million who voted Conservative so there's a thought and you could perhaps force a re-run in any seat where NOTA gets above 50% and perhaps offer a no-deposit run off to encourage a wider spread of candidates.
I was musing on political parties and moral questions on my perambulation. You could argue successful parties have relied on internal discipline and cohesion and that's true. Where you have parties with prescribed aim such as the SNP or UKIP, as long as each member supports the prescribed aim, their view on other issues is irrelevant.
The problem for individuals holding a strong principled objection to an item of Party policy is how to express that view without weakening the Party. Internal private argument is one thing - open public dissent is another. It would be incompatible with being a member of the SNP not to support Scottish Independence but to be a Conservative or Liberal and be, for example, opposed to abortion or in favour of the death penalty shouldn't be an issue.
It's not even as though consistency can be a problem - Blair stood as a candidate on Foot's 1983 Manifesto but does anyone seriously think Blair at that time supported EU and NATO withdrawal for example? Starmer was a candidate on Corbyn's 2019 Manifesto - do we think he supported every aspect of that? Clearly not but as a member of a political party emphasising collective responsibility, you go along with what the Party decides as policy.
On the Conservative side, we saw in 1997 how when candidates go their own way on a key issue o policy it makes the Party leader's impossible job even less possible or more impossible if you prefer.
Many fine words are being written about Sturgeon as a communicator and campaigner, but her most damaging legacy for the country has been her lack of succession management. She departs abruptly with mounting problems and with no obvious leader-in-waiting. That is truly a mark of poor leadership.
Resigning, she said she was freeing her party to make its own decision on the best strategy for the next independence referendum. For some of the deeper thinkers in the SNP, that might mean putting independence on the backburner and returning to building a reputation for competent government.
In fairness Sturgeon was grooming a successor, but he was grooming a teenage boy…..
Pundits bang on about succession management but what has their been nationwide? From Cameron to May to Boris to Liz Truss to Rishi, who has been a designated and groomed successor?
I think the question arises in this case only because (a) Sturgeon herself was the designated and groomed successor to Salmond, and, (b) unlike at Westminster, the journalists asking the question haven't been running the interminable soap opera of, "who will replace the current leader?" So they really don't have a clue. And it's easier to blame Sturgeon for that then their own ignorance.
And some people wonder whether the two of us exaggerate the current state of teaching...
"Not put off?" Well. Yes I am actually. Detention Saturday morning? Someone watched too much Breakfast Club in their youth.
Incidentally. We've now a majority of staff on supply. The only permanent appointment made this school year is of a fourth Deputy Head. 3 wasn't enough apparently.
I've just been offered a job on supply - similar sort of terms to yours but in a rather easier school! - and I was musing what I would do if I were offered a permanent contract.
And I concluded very swiftly I would refuse it, for all the reasons you have given. Directed time, admin, parents evenings etc. etc. I'd actually be being paid less. And the pension and job security simply don't compensate for it.
Plus the tutoring's going rather well at the moment.
A lady of my acquaintance started a primary school from scratch. Many of those working for her would describe the above as not inaccurate.
But, according to the teachers (who I got to know), she was inspirational - among other things she had a simple policy of being first in and last out. And it wasn’t presentee’ism - real work all the way.
🧵 My biggest surprise from our focus group in Leigh on Friday was quite how ridiculous/infuriating participants thought Lee Anderson’s comments about food-bank users were. Everyone (Tory and Labour voting alike) thought the person saying them was on a different planet. (1/6)
Twitter rumour that the current FAV Angus Robertson (5/4) will not be a candidate.
Some of his close allies have backed Yousaf. Not sure why, I would've thought he'd be the unexciting, continuity candidate to hold things together until the likes of Mairi McAllan are ready.
Skeletons? He was aware of the Edinburgh Airport incident.
Hmmm only that , sure he would be aware of a few other matters ?
Out of respect for OGH, thought I'd only reference stuff that has already been reported on.
All interesting @theSNP leadership speculation & all names being mentioned have different attributes but despite what some are saying, Angus Robertson, while having longest experience in politics, actually has least experience in government - nine months - if that’s important.
He is very quiet and given the acolytes have been pushing Useless today it looks like he may not want to feel the heat and the skeletons are rattling badly. One can only hope the truth about all Sturgeon's mob comes out soon.
Europe has four clear zones: A Latin zone, favouring Switzerland A Central and Balkan zone, favouring Germany. A Scandinavian zone, favouring Sweden. An Atlantic zone, favouring Anglo countries.
This maps vaguely onto economic models and maybe even defence constructs.
In Britain’s case it’s where Brits have actually gone - more in Australia than the entire EU.
Source? I heard approximately 1 million British born living in Australia and 1.2 million in EU-27, can't get source atm
If you exclude Ireland the EU total is around 1 million and Australia 1.2.
Starmer seems to have got to the place where he consistently makes good strategic decisions. It makes it so remarkable in retrospect that he made such poor ones in the Brexit aftermath.
"Freedom of choice is vital, and you *must* exercise it."
Not voting is also a choice.
The main advantage I think is that it denies politicians the choice of putting a finger on the scales by making it awkward for their opponents' supporters to vote, and it means they can't run campaigns that rely primarily on turnout or on differential turnout.
Personally I think we should introduce it here, but only if we also bring over the democracy sausage tradition from Australia at the same time.
And some people wonder whether the two of us exaggerate the current state of teaching...
"Not put off?" Well. Yes I am actually. Detention Saturday morning? Someone watched too much Breakfast Club in their youth.
Incidentally. We've now a majority of staff on supply. The only permanent appointment made this school year is of a fourth Deputy Head. 3 wasn't enough apparently.
I've just been offered a job on supply - similar sort of terms to yours but in a rather easier school! - and I was musing what I would do if I were offered a permanent contract.
And I concluded very swiftly I would refuse it, for all the reasons you have given. Directed time, admin, parents evenings etc. etc. I'd actually be being paid less. And the pension and job security simply don't compensate for it.
Plus the tutoring's going rather well at the moment.
We are now trying to cajole supply to stay till 4:30. The entire administration, information and safeguarding sharing, and well as planning and contact with parents, not to mention marking is breaking down, as the majority clock on at 8:30 and off at 3:30. Of course. The school is going to have to pay and staff hold all the cards. Meaning the supply bill is ballooning again.
Prediction: the assertion by MSP “Ash Regan” that the next GE or Holyrood election will be a de facto plebiscite, with 50% for Indy parties meaning independence must happen, will not withstand a week of scrutiny
What happens if the Indy parties don’t get 50%, is Indy then abandoned? For how long? Who decides how long? If it’s not abandoned then this just means the Nits can call a referendum, ie an election, whenever they like, for as long as they like, every year if needs be. They could have two “de facto referendums” a month, and the rest of the UK, destabilized by this, can go fuck itself
I kind of hope she wins so we can see this idiocy collide with legal and constitutional reality. It will not be pretty
If we end up with Regan v Yousaf, there is plenty of room for an unknown to come through the middle.
If we end up with Yousaf-v-Regan there will be plenty of room for absolute despair.
I know very little about Regan, but if she's not significantly better than that idiot Yousaf she must be Boris Johnson levels of bad.
I have now discovered that the position she resigned from was Minister for Community Safety. No, me neither.
Nobody on the planet could be that useless. If she was dead she would be more useful than Useless. Not to Southern tastes though as she actually wants independence.
Twitter rumour that the current FAV Angus Robertson (5/4) will not be a candidate.
Some of his close allies have backed Yousaf. Not sure why, I would've thought he'd be the unexciting, continuity candidate to hold things together until the likes of Mairi McAllan are ready.
Skeletons? He was aware of the Edinburgh Airport incident.
Hmmm only that , sure he would be aware of a few other matters ?
Out of respect for OGH, thought I'd only reference stuff that has already been reported on.
Plus you would not be wanting a long holiday, wise man.
Another point: having a legal requirement to vote would clash with current Conservative Party policies to disenfranchise people on the sly.
They’d only make it compulsory for Conservatives….
Who exactly are the Conservatives disenfranchising? They won't even do the eminently sensible thing of stopping foreigners voting in national elections.
Starmer seems to have got to the place where he consistently makes good strategic decisions. It makes it so remarkable in retrospect that he made such poor ones in the Brexit aftermath.
It's exactly what he's been saying for years, after a brief period when he began as leader. Fundamental given the nature of elections in England and the X in the pocket of Y posters. Though this time round the Tories will have difficulty as (with the possibleand partial exception of Mr Robertson) none of the new SNP leader candidates are half as familiar across the UK as the current FM and her predecessor. Edit: Or indeed his predecessors. I mean, if you had a poster about (say) London Labour in the pocket of Henry McLeish, the reaction would be, who he?
All interesting @theSNP leadership speculation & all names being mentioned have different attributes but despite what some are saying, Angus Robertson, while having longest experience in politics, actually has least experience in government - nine months - if that’s important.
He is very quiet and given the acolytes have been pushing Useless today it looks like he may not want to feel the heat and the skeletons are rattling badly. One can only hope the truth about all Sturgeon's mob comes out soon.
Prediction: the assertion by MSP “Ash Regan” that the next GE or Holyrood election will be a de facto plebiscite, with 50% for Indy parties meaning independence must happen, will not withstand a week of scrutiny
What happens if the Indy parties don’t get 50%, is Indy then abandoned? For how long? Who decides how long? If it’s not abandoned then this just means the Nits can call a referendum, ie an election, whenever they like, for as long as they like, every year if needs be. They could have two “de facto referendums” a month, and the rest of the UK, destabilized by this, can go fuck itself
I kind of hope she wins so we can see this idiocy collide with legal and constitutional reality. It will not be pretty
If we end up with Regan v Yousaf, there is plenty of room for an unknown to come through the middle.
If we end up with Yousaf-v-Regan there will be plenty of room for absolute despair.
I know very little about Regan, but if she's not significantly better than that idiot Yousaf she must be Boris Johnson levels of bad.
I have now discovered that the position she resigned from was Minister for Community Safety. No, me neither.
Nobody on the planet could be that useless. If she was dead she would be more useful than Useless. Not to Southern tastes though as she actually wants independence.
Another point: having a legal requirement to vote would clash with current Conservative Party policies to disenfranchise people on the sly.
They’d only make it compulsory for Conservatives….
Well, one way to have quasi-compulsory voting would be to say that any abstentions are expressing contentment with the status quo, and so can be counted in the government's column.
Then everyone would have a vote counted at the election, but if you wanted to change your vote from the default of voting for the government you'd have to make the effort to turn up to the polling station.
You sometimes get people quite close to expressing that view when they talk about a silent majority, or manipulate opinion polls by adding don't knows to their preferred outcome.
Another point: having a legal requirement to vote would clash with current Conservative Party policies to disenfranchise people on the sly.
They’d only make it compulsory for Conservatives….
Well, one way to have quasi-compulsory voting would be to say that any abstentions are expressing contentment with the status quo, and so can be counted in the government's column.
Then everyone would have a vote counted at the election, but if you wanted to change your vote from the default of voting for the government you'd have to make the effort to turn up to the polling station.
You sometimes get people quite close to expressing that view when they talk about a silent majority, or manipulate opinion polls by adding don't knows to their preferred outcome.
Presumably they could run an experimental trial at Epping when the next election comes around.
Europe has four clear zones: A Latin zone, favouring Switzerland A Central and Balkan zone, favouring Germany. A Scandinavian zone, favouring Sweden. An Atlantic zone, favouring Anglo countries.
This maps vaguely onto economic models and maybe even defence constructs.
In Britain’s case it’s where Brits have actually gone - more in Australia than the entire EU.
Source? I heard approximately 1 million British born living in Australia and 1.2 million in EU-27, can't get source atm
If you exclude Ireland the EU total is around 1 million and Australia 1.2.
It shows what bollocks the "you are taking away our future horizons" guff was over freedom of movement. More people emigrate to a single country on the other side of the world than to the whole of continental Europe. A few visa qualifications make next to no difference.
🧵 My biggest surprise from our focus group in Leigh on Friday was quite how ridiculous/infuriating participants thought Lee Anderson’s comments about food-bank users were. Everyone (Tory and Labour voting alike) thought the person saying them was on a different planet. (1/6)
Red Wall folk don't comply with the stereotypical views projected onto them by outsiders. Not at all surprised.
For me 'Red Wall' is best understood as shorthand for a set of values/attitudes. So when something is said to be 'appealing to the Red Wall' it means it's pitched to those values/attitudes not to any specific place.
Are these attitudes/values particularly common in the north? Not necessarily. It's just that in the north they are more likely to be attached to people who are particularly important electorally given our current FPTP chemistry - ie voters in trad Labour seats who switched to the Cons last time because of Boris/Brexit/Corbyn and turned those seats blue.
All such seats are in truth Red Wall seats, regardless of where in the country they are. Because most happen to be oop north 'Red Wall' has become a geographic term - but this is wrong, it's values/attitudes.
If they made voting compulsory they should put in a "none of the above" option which is why they will never do it as NOTA would win by a landslide every time...
Roald Dahl's works might have been bowdlerised but he was lucky not to be cancelled for raging antisemitism.
Is it "raging" if its just a couple of comments? I feel like raging racists can't shut up about it because it is a central part of their identity.
Quite a few racists don’t bang on about it in everything they write.
In a complete set of the works of Rudyard Kipling I have, you have the following -
- a fictional story, written obviously for a real incident, where a Indian child are her actions are described with great sensitivity, compassion and kindness. She is seen as a person - and one of value to the world. Nor racism present.
- in the next section there is a journalistic account of encountering an white woman living with an Indian. The racist diatribe that followed was Der Sturmer grade - complete with a reference to “treason to the race”.
All interesting @theSNP leadership speculation & all names being mentioned have different attributes but despite what some are saying, Angus Robertson, while having longest experience in politics, actually has least experience in government - nine months - if that’s important.
He is very quiet and given the acolytes have been pushing Useless today it looks like he may not want to feel the heat and the skeletons are rattling badly. One can only hope the truth about all Sturgeon's mob comes out soon.
Roald Dahl's works might have been bowdlerised but he was lucky not to be cancelled for raging antisemitism.
Is it "raging" if its just a couple of comments? I feel like raging racists can't shut up about it because it is a central part of their identity.
Quite a few racists don’t bang on about it in everything they write.
In a complete set of the works of Rudyard Kipling I have, you have the following -
- a fictional story, written obviously for a real incident, where a Indian child are her actions are described with great sensitivity, compassion and kindness. She is seen as a person - and one of value to the world. Nor racism present.
- in the next section there is a journalistic account of encountering an white woman living with an Indian. The racist diatribe that followed was Der Sturmer grade - complete with a reference to “treason to the race”.
One of Kipling's poems ('If') is set for GCSE English.
Most pupils I teach don't see anything racist in it.
Then, when we've discussed it for a while, I let them read 'White Man's Burden.'
Suddenly they note a great deal more subtext to that line 'then yours is the Earth and everything that's in it!'
🧵 My biggest surprise from our focus group in Leigh on Friday was quite how ridiculous/infuriating participants thought Lee Anderson’s comments about food-bank users were. Everyone (Tory and Labour voting alike) thought the person saying them was on a different planet. (1/6)
Red Wall folk don't comply with the stereotypical views projected onto them by outsiders. Not at all surprised.
For me 'Red Wall' is best understood as shorthand for a set of values/attitudes. So when something is said to be 'appealing to the Red Wall' it means it's pitched to those values/attitudes not to any specific place.
Are these attitudes/values particularly common in the north? Not necessarily. It's just that in the north they are more likely to be attached to people who are particularly important electorally given our current FPTP chemistry - ie voters in trad Labour seats who switched to the Cons last time because of Boris/Brexit/Corbyn and turned those seats blue.
All such seats are in truth Red Wall seats, regardless of where in the country they are. Because most happen to be oop north 'Red Wall' has become a geographic term - but this is wrong, it's values/attitudes.
No, I think not. It's too carefully worded for that. Though no doubt I'm missing some of the subtleties.
Certainly not high profile.
No, but she's defining her position and I'm sure it's aimed at fellow party members more than anyone else.
A sitting on the sidelines response but stating she would like a nice ministerial job though. My guess is lots of thwe MSP's will do likewise rather than have a backbone and state their clear positions.
I’m interested in the corollary of this position. Given that negotiations will almost certainly last until after the next election to one of the two parliaments, does it follow that the mandate is lost if pro-independence parties fail to secure 50% of the vote at that point?
Many fine words are being written about Sturgeon as a communicator and campaigner, but her most damaging legacy for the country has been her lack of succession management. She departs abruptly with mounting problems and with no obvious leader-in-waiting. That is truly a mark of poor leadership.
Resigning, she said she was freeing her party to make its own decision on the best strategy for the next independence referendum. For some of the deeper thinkers in the SNP, that might mean putting independence on the backburner and returning to building a reputation for competent government.
In fairness Sturgeon was grooming a successor, but he was grooming a teenage boy…..
Pundits bang on about succession management but what has their been nationwide? From Cameron to May to Boris to Liz Truss to Rishi, who has been a designated and groomed successor?
Scotland is falling ever further behind on investment, innovation, skills, productivity as the never ending uncertainty about our future drags us down. We really, really need a break.
Roald Dahl's works might have been bowdlerised but he was lucky not to be cancelled for raging antisemitism.
Is it "raging" if its just a couple of comments? I feel like raging racists can't shut up about it because it is a central part of their identity.
Quite a few racists don’t bang on about it in everything they write.
In a complete set of the works of Rudyard Kipling I have, you have the following -
- a fictional story, written obviously for a real incident, where a Indian child are her actions are described with great sensitivity, compassion and kindness. She is seen as a person - and one of value to the world. Nor racism present.
- in the next section there is a journalistic account of encountering an white woman living with an Indian. The racist diatribe that followed was Der Sturmer grade - complete with a reference to “treason to the race”.
One of Kipling's poems ('If') is set for GCSE English.
Most pupils I teach don't see anything racist in it.
Then, when we've discussed it for a while, I let them read 'White Man's Burden.'
Suddenly they note a great deal more subtext to that line 'then yours is the Earth and everything that's in it!'
Though there’s a good question as to what he had in mind when wrote those words - I think the meterphorical/religious interpretation, myself.
🧵 My biggest surprise from our focus group in Leigh on Friday was quite how ridiculous/infuriating participants thought Lee Anderson’s comments about food-bank users were. Everyone (Tory and Labour voting alike) thought the person saying them was on a different planet. (1/6)
Red Wall folk don't comply with the stereotypical views projected onto them by outsiders. Not at all surprised.
For me 'Red Wall' is best understood as shorthand for a set of values/attitudes. So when something is said to be 'appealing to the Red Wall' it means it's pitched to those values/attitudes not to any specific place.
Are these attitudes/values particularly common in the north? Not necessarily. It's just that in the north they are more likely to be attached to people who are particularly important electorally given our current FPTP chemistry - ie voters in trad Labour seats who switched to the Cons last time because of Boris/Brexit/Corbyn and turned those seats blue.
All such seats are in truth Red Wall seats, regardless of where in the country they are. Because most happen to be oop north 'Red Wall' has become a geographic term - but this is wrong, it's values/attitudes.
I think you are right. The North does contain a higher proportion of ageing working class voters of a socially conservative bent. But that is a function of long term demography. The kids I teach, and their parents, in a very stereotypically Red Wall area, are no less "woke" than anywhere else. It's as much a function of the recent age polarisation of voting behaviour as anything geographical.
In light of announcements many people nobody ever thought would stand are not standing, I would like to announce I will not be putting myself forward for the post of leader of the SNP and FM of Scotland.
Many friends of mine urged me to stand on the basis I am not English, have a pulse and would only be up against Ash Regan and Humza Yousaf. Therefore, I would be bound to win.
Compelling as these arguments are, especially compared to the trivial ones that I am not eligible and don't live in Scotland, I have concluded my current family circumstances simply make it impossible for me to carry out the duties of First Minister in a way that befits the dignity of the office.
Moreover, having a very good memory, I think I would be unsuitable for the role.
I would like to thank all those figments of my imagination friends who urged me to stand and assure them that I was flattered and heartened by their support.
Scotland is falling ever further behind on investment, innovation, skills, productivity as the never ending uncertainty about our future drags us down. We really, really need a break.
🧵 My biggest surprise from our focus group in Leigh on Friday was quite how ridiculous/infuriating participants thought Lee Anderson’s comments about food-bank users were. Everyone (Tory and Labour voting alike) thought the person saying them was on a different planet. (1/6)
Red Wall folk don't comply with the stereotypical views projected onto them by outsiders. Not at all surprised.
For me 'Red Wall' is best understood as shorthand for a set of values/attitudes. So when something is said to be 'appealing to the Red Wall' it means it's pitched to those values/attitudes not to any specific place.
Are these attitudes/values particularly common in the north? Not necessarily. It's just that in the north they are more likely to be attached to people who are particularly important electorally given our current FPTP chemistry - ie voters in trad Labour seats who switched to the Cons last time because of Boris/Brexit/Corbyn and turned those seats blue.
All such seats are in truth Red Wall seats, regardless of where in the country they are. Because most happen to be oop north 'Red Wall' has become a geographic term - but this is wrong, it's values/attitudes.
The move away from Labour to the Conservatives in Midlands and Northern seats didn't begin in 2016 or 2019 - it began long before that.
In Sedgefield, for example, the Conservative vote rose at every election from 2005 to 2019 from 14% to 47% - that's a serious long term move of voters. The previous incarnation of Sedgefield (until 1970) regularly saw Conservative votes in the high 30s in straight fights with Labour.
Roald Dahl's works might have been bowdlerised but he was lucky not to be cancelled for raging antisemitism.
Is it "raging" if its just a couple of comments? I feel like raging racists can't shut up about it because it is a central part of their identity.
Quite a few racists don’t bang on about it in everything they write.
In a complete set of the works of Rudyard Kipling I have, you have the following -
- a fictional story, written obviously for a real incident, where a Indian child are her actions are described with great sensitivity, compassion and kindness. She is seen as a person - and one of value to the world. Nor racism present.
- in the next section there is a journalistic account of encountering an white woman living with an Indian. The racist diatribe that followed was Der Sturmer grade - complete with a reference to “treason to the race”.
One of Kipling's poems ('If') is set for GCSE English.
Most pupils I teach don't see anything racist in it.
Then, when we've discussed it for a while, I let them read 'White Man's Burden.'
Suddenly they note a great deal more subtext to that line 'then yours is the Earth and everything that's in it!'
Part of the nonsense discussed in respect of Dahl yesterday was that Matilda now reads Bronte not Kipling.
Which is a bit of a loss for her because the just so stories are brilliant for children.
I’m interested in the corollary of this position. Given that negotiations will almost certainly last until after the next election to one of the two parliaments, does it follow that the mandate is lost if pro-independence parties fail to secure 50% of the vote at that point?
The problem with this argument from Boris allies on NI is:
1. Any deal looks likely to be better for both UK & NI than anything Boris achieved 2. Boris literally tried to negotiate channels with the threat of NIP Bill & failed to make any real progress
Events suggest that some conservatives are struggling to adjust to the fact that their party is no longer appealing in quite the way it once did to the educated, settled, better-off portion of society?
Roald Dahl's works might have been bowdlerised but he was lucky not to be cancelled for raging antisemitism.
Is it "raging" if its just a couple of comments? I feel like raging racists can't shut up about it because it is a central part of their identity.
Quite a few racists don’t bang on about it in everything they write.
In a complete set of the works of Rudyard Kipling I have, you have the following -
- a fictional story, written obviously for a real incident, where a Indian child are her actions are described with great sensitivity, compassion and kindness. She is seen as a person - and one of value to the world. Nor racism present.
- in the next section there is a journalistic account of encountering an white woman living with an Indian. The racist diatribe that followed was Der Sturmer grade - complete with a reference to “treason to the race”.
One of Kipling's poems ('If') is set for GCSE English.
Most pupils I teach don't see anything racist in it.
Then, when we've discussed it for a while, I let them read 'White Man's Burden.'
Suddenly they note a great deal more subtext to that line 'then yours is the Earth and everything that's in it!'
Part of the nonsense discussed in respect of Dahl yesterday was that Matilda now reads Bronte not Kipling.
Which is a bit of a loss for her because the just so stories are brilliant for children.
Although she reads Kim rather than the Just So stories, if memory serves.
I’m interested in the corollary of this position. Given that negotiations will almost certainly last until after the next election to one of the two parliaments, does it follow that the mandate is lost if pro-independence parties fail to secure 50% of the vote at that point?
In light of announcements many people nobody ever thought would stand are not standing, I would like to announce I will not be putting myself forward for the post of leader of the SNP and FM of Scotland.
Many friends of mine urged me to stand on the basis I am not English, have a pulse and would only be up against Ash Regan and Humza Yousaf. Therefore, I would be bound to win.
Compelling as these arguments are, especially compared to the trivial ones that I am not eligible and don't live in Scotland, I have concluded my current family circumstances simply make it impossible for me to carry out the duties of First Minister in a way that befits the dignity of the office.
Moreover, having a very good memory, I think I would be unsuitable for the role.
I would like to thank all those figments of my imagination friends who urged me to stand and assure them that I was flattered and heartened by their support.
I am considering a run for President of Peru, as leader of the Incompetent Corrupt Colonialist Party.
In light of announcements many people nobody ever thought would stand are not standing, I would like to announce I will not be putting myself forward for the post of leader of the SNP and FM of Scotland.
Many friends of mine urged me to stand on the basis I am not English, have a pulse and would only be up against Ash Regan and Humza Yousaf. Therefore, I would be bound to win.
Compelling as these arguments are, especially compared to the trivial ones that I am not eligible and don't live in Scotland, I have concluded my current family circumstances simply make it impossible for me to carry out the duties of First Minister in a way that befits the dignity of the office.
Moreover, having a very good memory, I think I would be unsuitable for the role.
I would like to thank all those figments of my imagination friends who urged me to stand and assure them that I was flattered and heartened by their support.
I am considering a run for President of Peru, as leader of the Incompetent Corrupt Colonialist Party.
🧵 My biggest surprise from our focus group in Leigh on Friday was quite how ridiculous/infuriating participants thought Lee Anderson’s comments about food-bank users were. Everyone (Tory and Labour voting alike) thought the person saying them was on a different planet. (1/6)
Red Wall folk don't comply with the stereotypical views projected onto them by outsiders. Not at all surprised.
For me 'Red Wall' is best understood as shorthand for a set of values/attitudes. So when something is said to be 'appealing to the Red Wall' it means it's pitched to those values/attitudes not to any specific place.
Are these attitudes/values particularly common in the north? Not necessarily. It's just that in the north they are more likely to be attached to people who are particularly important electorally given our current FPTP chemistry - ie voters in trad Labour seats who switched to the Cons last time because of Boris/Brexit/Corbyn and turned those seats blue.
All such seats are in truth Red Wall seats, regardless of where in the country they are. Because most happen to be oop north 'Red Wall' has become a geographic term - but this is wrong, it's values/attitudes.
The move away from Labour to the Conservatives in Midlands and Northern seats didn't begin in 2016 or 2019 - it began long before that.
In Sedgefield, for example, the Conservative vote rose at every election from 2005 to 2019 from 14% to 47% - that's a serious long term move of voters. The previous incarnation of Sedgefield (until 1970) regularly saw Conservative votes in the high 30s in straight fights with Labour.
A long time ago, I had started doing a spreadsheet with the swings in each region by seat back to 2005 (yes, there are boundaries changes but my view they all got washed out in the regional mix).
It showed exactly what you say. Labour's foundations had been crumbling long before 2019. 2005 was when the trend first became apparent.
🧵 My biggest surprise from our focus group in Leigh on Friday was quite how ridiculous/infuriating participants thought Lee Anderson’s comments about food-bank users were. Everyone (Tory and Labour voting alike) thought the person saying them was on a different planet. (1/6)
Red Wall folk don't comply with the stereotypical views projected onto them by outsiders. Not at all surprised.
For me 'Red Wall' is best understood as shorthand for a set of values/attitudes. So when something is said to be 'appealing to the Red Wall' it means it's pitched to those values/attitudes not to any specific place.
Are these attitudes/values particularly common in the north? Not necessarily. It's just that in the north they are more likely to be attached to people who are particularly important electorally given our current FPTP chemistry - ie voters in trad Labour seats who switched to the Cons last time because of Boris/Brexit/Corbyn and turned those seats blue.
All such seats are in truth Red Wall seats, regardless of where in the country they are. Because most happen to be oop north 'Red Wall' has become a geographic term - but this is wrong, it's values/attitudes.
The move away from Labour to the Conservatives in Midlands and Northern seats didn't begin in 2016 or 2019 - it began long before that.
In Sedgefield, for example, the Conservative vote rose at every election from 2005 to 2019 from 14% to 47% - that's a serious long term move of voters. The previous incarnation of Sedgefield (until 1970) regularly saw Conservative votes in the high 30s in straight fights with Labour.
True. Then at GE19, with the added fuel of Boris/Brexit plus more than a dash of Corbyn, it took a double stride and delivered that big Con win.
Scotland is falling ever further behind on investment, innovation, skills, productivity as the never ending uncertainty about our future drags us down. We really, really need a break.
What we need is some Cameron>Brexit>May>Johnson>Truss>Sunak style stability. Though we get that by default anyway, lucky buggers that we are.
Curiously, Amazon has not stopped selling Abigail Shrier's "Irreversible Damage", though they did prevent the publisher from advertising the book on their site.
But there is simply no question that -- in our universities -- almost all efforts at censorship in recent years have come from the left. And that is why the work of, for example, FIRE, is so important. https://www.thefire.org/
(Full disclosure: When Amazon decided to no longer sell "When Harry Became Sally", I bought a copy from Barnes and Noble, and have almost completely stopped buying books from Amazon. And I will be looking for copiesof those old Dr. Seuss books in our used-book stores.)
I’m interested in the corollary of this position. Given that negotiations will almost certainly last until after the next election to one of the two parliaments, does it follow that the mandate is lost if pro-independence parties fail to secure 50% of the vote at that point?
I’m interested in the corollary of this position. Given that negotiations will almost certainly last until after the next election to one of the two parliaments, does it follow that the mandate is lost if pro-independence parties fail to secure 50% of the vote at that point?
In light of announcements many people nobody ever thought would stand are not standing, I would like to announce I will not be putting myself forward for the post of leader of the SNP and FM of Scotland.
Many friends of mine urged me to stand on the basis I am not English, have a pulse and would only be up against Ash Regan and Humza Yousaf. Therefore, I would be bound to win.
Compelling as these arguments are, especially compared to the trivial ones that I am not eligible and don't live in Scotland, I have concluded my current family circumstances simply make it impossible for me to carry out the duties of First Minister in a way that befits the dignity of the office.
Moreover, having a very good memory, I think I would be unsuitable for the role.
I would like to thank all those figments of my imagination friends who urged me to stand and assure them that I was flattered and heartened by their support.
I am considering a run for President of Peru, as leader of the Incompetent Corrupt Colonialist Party.
Any suggestions for education policy?
Are you buying AK47s or M16s?
One alternative to Saturday Detentions, I suppose.
There's an underlying tension now between the SNP's dual roles as secessionist insurgents and party of govt, which writers within the independence movement have emphasised in the past week.
Regan is placing herself on one side of that tension, that may not serve her well.
In light of announcements many people nobody ever thought would stand are not standing, I would like to announce I will not be putting myself forward for the post of leader of the SNP and FM of Scotland.
Many friends of mine urged me to stand on the basis I am not English, have a pulse and would only be up against Ash Regan and Humza Yousaf. Therefore, I would be bound to win.
Compelling as these arguments are, especially compared to the trivial ones that I am not eligible and don't live in Scotland, I have concluded my current family circumstances simply make it impossible for me to carry out the duties of First Minister in a way that befits the dignity of the office.
Moreover, having a very good memory, I think I would be unsuitable for the role.
I would like to thank all those figments of my imagination friends who urged me to stand and assure them that I was flattered and heartened by their support.
I am considering a run for President of Peru, as leader of the Incompetent Corrupt Colonialist Party.
Any suggestions for education policy?
Are you buying AK47s or M16s?
Both have been out of production for a while…
No, I will respect tradition - put out a tender, and award the contract to someone incompetent at both bribing people and providing the contracted service
Trying to pigeonhole Kipling is like trying to nail jelly to the wall. Very subtle, with numerous texts to contradict everything else he wrote. You think he's a warmonger ? Read Recessional, or My Son Jack. Think he's a hard-hearted cruel despot? Read Baa Baa Black Sheep. Think he's just a narrow-minded racist? Read any of the things which portray Indians as having a civilisation and culture vastly superior to the Europeans. Yes, that's relativist, which is Bad nowadays, but relativism was acceptable then, as was the classification of people into stereotypical races.
Dame Marghanita Laski said that every generation would have to re-discover Kipling whilst trying to shake off the opinions of their parents. She was absolutely right.
Starmer seems to have got to the place where he consistently makes good strategic decisions. It makes it so remarkable in retrospect that he made such poor ones in the Brexit aftermath.
Not sure the SNP statement really changes the dial with Starmer. The reason why it worked so well with Miliband was that it played exactly into popular conceptions about EM being weak in character, conniving and a bit of a nerd who could be bullied - which is what that poster encapsulated.
Nobody sees Starmer as that. The underlying core issue - and one which is captured by people saying they don't know what he stands for- is that people feel that he can't be trusted. A stereotype I know but a lot of RW voters do not live in a world of perfect information. They have to make a lot of fairly important decisions based on a judgement call of what makes sense and whether, importantly, someone can be trusted.
If you asked many voters what SKS thinks, my feel is that most would say their fear is that he might be making the right noises now re being sensitive to get elected but the moment he gets into power it will be unlimited immigration and compulsory trans lessons in schools (obviously not but...)
So he needs to address that. I reckon he would get far more traction with RW voters if he came out swinging the bat for Rosie Duffield and JK Rowling, and saying that, while he respects trans rights, abuse such as the two aforesaid have suffered is unacceptable and will be treated in the same way he treats anti-semitism. The fact he doesn't, and struggles to define what is a woman, to many voters screams someone not to be trusted
In light of announcements many people nobody ever thought would stand are not standing, I would like to announce I will not be putting myself forward for the post of leader of the SNP and FM of Scotland.
Many friends of mine urged me to stand on the basis I am not English, have a pulse and would only be up against Ash Regan and Humza Yousaf. Therefore, I would be bound to win.
Compelling as these arguments are, especially compared to the trivial ones that I am not eligible and don't live in Scotland, I have concluded my current family circumstances simply make it impossible for me to carry out the duties of First Minister in a way that befits the dignity of the office.
Moreover, having a very good memory, I think I would be unsuitable for the role.
I would like to thank all those figments of my imagination friends who urged me to stand and assure them that I was flattered and heartened by their support.
I am considering a run for President of Peru, as leader of the Incompetent Corrupt Colonialist Party.
Any suggestions for education policy?
Are you buying AK47s or M16s?
Both have been out of production for a while…
No, I will respect tradition - put out a tender, and award the contract to someone incompetent at both bribing people and providing the contracted service
So pea shooters, then?
I was assuming you were buying second hand, anyway.
In any case, it's irrelevant. The important thing is not to have a policy, as it will be a clusterfuck.
Just let schools carry on. If they teach effectively, result, and if they don't, you've probably not lost anything.
In light of announcements many people nobody ever thought would stand are not standing, I would like to announce I will not be putting myself forward for the post of leader of the SNP and FM of Scotland.
Many friends of mine urged me to stand on the basis I am not English, have a pulse and would only be up against Ash Regan and Humza Yousaf. Therefore, I would be bound to win.
Compelling as these arguments are, especially compared to the trivial ones that I am not eligible and don't live in Scotland, I have concluded my current family circumstances simply make it impossible for me to carry out the duties of First Minister in a way that befits the dignity of the office.
Moreover, having a very good memory, I think I would be unsuitable for the role.
I would like to thank all those figments of my imagination friends who urged me to stand and assure them that I was flattered and heartened by their support.
I am considering a run for President of Peru, as leader of the Incompetent Corrupt Colonialist Party.
Any suggestions for education policy?
Are you buying AK47s or M16s?
Both have been out of production for a while…
No, I will respect tradition - put out a tender, and award the contract to someone incompetent at both bribing people and providing the contracted service
So pea shooters, then?
I was assuming you were buying second hand, anyway.
In any case, it's irrelevant. The important thing is not to have a policy, as it will be a clusterfuck.
Just let schools carry on. If they teach effectively, result, and if they don't, you've probably not lost anything.
No - brand new and unaffordable. Bigger the price, bigger the bribe.
What about hiring the DfE to destroy education in Peru? Since they will screw that up…
Comments
It could go either way. Might see support rally to Scottish independence if the UK response is seen as heavy-handed, or it might discredit the cause of Scottish independence in the eyes of some of its less committed supporters who would recoil from the chaos, confusion and divisiveness.
Resigning, she said she was freeing her party to make its own decision on the best strategy for the next independence referendum. For some of the deeper thinkers in the SNP, that might mean putting independence on the backburner and returning to building a reputation for competent government.
https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/mandy-rhodes-sturgeon-resignation/
In fairness Sturgeon was grooming a successor, but he was grooming a teenage boy…..
May have been weighted of course.
We simply don't know.
But seems implausible she fell in and only drifted a mile without being seen by any of the hordes of journalists and assorted ghouls and Plod.
https://twitter.com/holyroodmandy/status/1627248369272868864?s=20
Starmer: No deal with SNP under any circumstances
Excellent position from Starmer.
You’re welcome.
https://twitter.com/TitaniaMcGrath/status/1627331028569186304?s=20
And then it would be very much a case of sadly, with regret, forced by the intransigence of Westminster, etc, etc.
Where it gets more murky in my view is what would happen if Westminster offered a referendum in the circumstance that the SNP won an election that they said was a referendum already.
And I concluded very swiftly I would refuse it, for all the reasons you have given. Directed time, admin, parents evenings etc. etc. I'd actually be being paid less. And the pension and job security simply don't compensate for it.
Plus the tutoring's going rather well at the moment.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/dec/18/scottish-greens-msp-resigns-claiming-intolerance-over-women-and-trans-rights
He doubted the intelligence. Then, after the initial landings proved it to be exactly accurate, still didn’t use it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eVsD7mKHlDM
SNP: 42% (-1)
LAB: 32% (+2)
CON: 17% (-2)
LDEM: 6% (-)
via @Savanta_UK, 15 - 17 Feb
Chgs. w/ Dec
Tories are dead in Scotland.
The famous case of Lisa Murkowski's 2010 win shows how that can work: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisa_Murkowski
There's a detail in her win that I learned just recently: Her last name is not the easiest to spell for most Americans, and Alaskan rules do not allow electioneering at the polls, so her voters could not come in with visible signs with her name on them. So her campaign provided them with bracelets -- with her name on the inside of the bracelet.
But even in the far more common cases where a write-in candidate loses, write-ins provide important feedback to the parties.
(I will admit that having a write-in choice on the ballot made it easier for me to vote in the last two presidential elections here.)
Just back from a most pleasant walk round East Ham and Barking (contradiction in terms though it may sound)and more than a hint of spring in the air. Tomorrow, I'm off to Lingfield to lose some money at the couse's final jumps card which will be run on watered good ground.
On topic, no, you can't make voting compulsory - the right not to vote is as essential as the right to vote. The only way in which I would even contemplate compulsory voting is if every ballot paper carried a NOTA box.
The 15.5 million who didn't vote at the last election outpoll the nearly 14 million who voted Conservative so there's a thought and you could perhaps force a re-run in any seat where NOTA gets above 50% and perhaps offer a no-deposit run off to encourage a wider spread of candidates.
I was musing on political parties and moral questions on my perambulation. You could argue successful parties have relied on internal discipline and cohesion and that's true. Where you have parties with prescribed aim such as the SNP or UKIP, as long as each member supports the prescribed aim, their view on other issues is irrelevant.
The problem for individuals holding a strong principled objection to an item of Party policy is how to express that view without weakening the Party. Internal private argument is one thing - open public dissent is another. It would be incompatible with being a member of the SNP not to support Scottish Independence but to be a Conservative or Liberal and be, for example, opposed to abortion or in favour of the death penalty shouldn't be an issue.
It's not even as though consistency can be a problem - Blair stood as a candidate on Foot's 1983 Manifesto but does anyone seriously think Blair at that time supported EU and NATO withdrawal for example? Starmer was a candidate on Corbyn's 2019 Manifesto - do we think he supported every aspect of that? Clearly not but as a member of a political party emphasising collective responsibility, you go along with what the Party decides as policy.
On the Conservative side, we saw in 1997 how when candidates go their own way on a key issue o policy it makes the Party leader's impossible job even less possible or more impossible if you prefer.
But, according to the teachers (who I got to know), she was inspirational - among other things she had a simple policy of being first in and last out. And it wasn’t presentee’ism - real work all the way.
I think we could have told them this anyway.
'Don't worry Mrs Kennedy, we can wash that blood out of your jacket, no problem.'
https://www.homeaffairs.gov.au/research-and-statistics/statistics/country-profiles/profiles/united-kingdom
https://ukandeu.ac.uk/the-facts/how-many-british-citizens-live-in-the-eu/
Personally I think we should introduce it here, but only if we also bring over the democracy sausage tradition from Australia at the same time.
The entire administration, information and safeguarding sharing, and well as planning and contact with parents, not to mention marking is breaking down, as the majority clock on at 8:30 and off at 3:30.
Of course. The school is going to have to pay and staff hold all the cards.
Meaning the supply bill is ballooning again.
To be honest its hard not to.
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/18901207.angus-robertson-dragged-alex-salmond-affair-inquiry/
And of course he too has a young family:
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/snps-angus-robertson-announces-birth-24212477
Then everyone would have a vote counted at the election, but if you wanted to change your vote from the default of voting for the government you'd have to make the effort to turn up to the polling station.
You sometimes get people quite close to expressing that view when they talk about a silent majority, or manipulate opinion polls by adding don't knows to their preferred outcome.
Are these attitudes/values particularly common in the north? Not necessarily. It's just that in the north they are more likely to be attached to people who are particularly important electorally given our current FPTP chemistry - ie voters in trad Labour seats who switched to the Cons last time because of Boris/Brexit/Corbyn and turned those seats blue.
All such seats are in truth Red Wall seats, regardless of where in the country they are. Because most happen to be oop north 'Red Wall' has become a geographic term - but this is wrong, it's values/attitudes.
In a complete set of the works of Rudyard Kipling I have, you have the following -
- a fictional story, written obviously for a real incident, where a Indian child are her actions are described with great sensitivity, compassion and kindness. She is seen as a person - and one of value to the world. Nor racism present.
- in the next section there is a journalistic account of encountering an white woman living with an Indian. The racist diatribe that followed was Der Sturmer grade - complete with a reference to “treason to the race”.
Most pupils I teach don't see anything racist in it.
Then, when we've discussed it for a while, I let them read 'White Man's Burden.'
Suddenly they note a great deal more subtext to that line 'then yours is the Earth and everything that's in it!'
I’m interested in the corollary of this position. Given that negotiations will almost certainly last until after the next election to one of the two parliaments, does it follow that the mandate is lost if pro-independence parties fail to secure 50% of the vote at that point?
https://twitter.com/ProfChalmers/status/1627275684346310656?s=20
Scotland is falling ever further behind on investment, innovation, skills, productivity as the never ending uncertainty about our future drags us down. We really, really need a break.
The North does contain a higher proportion of ageing working class voters of a socially conservative bent. But that is a function of long term demography.
The kids I teach, and their parents, in a very stereotypically Red Wall area, are no less "woke" than anywhere else.
It's as much a function of the recent age polarisation of voting behaviour as anything geographical.
Many friends of mine urged me to stand on the basis I am not English, have a pulse and would only be up against Ash Regan and Humza Yousaf. Therefore, I would be bound to win.
Compelling as these arguments are, especially compared to the trivial ones that I am not eligible and don't live in Scotland, I have concluded my current family circumstances simply make it impossible for me to carry out the duties of First Minister in a way that befits the dignity of the office.
Moreover, having a very good memory, I think I would be unsuitable for the role.
I would like to thank all those
figments of my imaginationfriends who urged me to stand and assure them that I was flattered and heartened by their support.In Sedgefield, for example, the Conservative vote rose at every election from 2005 to 2019 from 14% to 47% - that's a serious long term move of voters. The previous incarnation of Sedgefield (until 1970) regularly saw Conservative votes in the high 30s in straight fights with Labour.
Which is a bit of a loss for her because the just so stories are brilliant for children.
1. Any deal looks likely to be better for both UK & NI than anything Boris achieved
2. Boris literally tried to negotiate channels with the threat of NIP Bill & failed to make any real progress
https://twitter.com/RaoulRuparel/status/1627326404193837063?s=20
Any suggestions for education policy?
It showed exactly what you say. Labour's foundations had been crumbling long before 2019. 2005 was when the trend first became apparent.
Though we get that by default anyway, lucky buggers that we are.
https://apnews.com/article/dr-seuss-books-racist-images-d8ed18335c03319d72f443594c174513
https://ncac.org/news/amazon-book-removal
Curiously, Amazon has not stopped selling Abigail Shrier's "Irreversible Damage", though they did prevent the publisher from advertising the book on their site.
But there is simply no question that -- in our universities -- almost all efforts at censorship in recent years have come from the left. And that is why the work of, for example, FIRE, is so important. https://www.thefire.org/
(Full disclosure: When Amazon decided to no longer sell "When Harry Became Sally", I bought a copy from Barnes and Noble, and have almost completely stopped buying books from Amazon. And I will be looking for copiesof those old Dr. Seuss books in our used-book stores.)
Regan is placing herself on one side of that tension, that may not serve her well.
https://twitter.com/markmcgeoghegan/status/1627319741751721984?s=20
No, I will respect tradition - put out a tender, and award the contract to someone incompetent at both bribing people and providing the contracted service
Dame Marghanita Laski said that every generation would have to re-discover Kipling whilst trying to shake off the opinions of their parents. She was absolutely right.
Nobody sees Starmer as that. The underlying core issue - and one which is captured by people saying they don't know what he stands for- is that people feel that he can't be trusted. A stereotype I know but a lot of RW voters do not live in a world of perfect information. They have to make a lot of fairly important decisions based on a judgement call of what makes sense and whether, importantly, someone can be trusted.
If you asked many voters what SKS thinks, my feel is that most would say their fear is that he might be making the right noises now re being sensitive to get elected but the moment he gets into power it will be unlimited immigration and compulsory trans lessons in schools (obviously not but...)
So he needs to address that. I reckon he would get far more traction with RW voters if he came out swinging the bat for Rosie Duffield and JK Rowling, and saying that, while he respects trans rights, abuse such as the two aforesaid have suffered is unacceptable and will be treated in the same way he treats anti-semitism. The fact he doesn't, and struggles to define what is a woman, to many voters screams someone not to be trusted
I was assuming you were buying second hand, anyway.
In any case, it's irrelevant. The important thing is not to have a policy, as it will be a clusterfuck.
Just let schools carry on. If they teach effectively, result, and if they don't, you've probably not lost anything.
What about hiring the DfE to destroy education in Peru? Since they will screw that up…