Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The “Wisdom of Crowds/PBers”: What you/they think will happ

13

Comments

  • Charles said:

    The problem you have is that a bunch of the CofE schools provide a necessary service and would need to be replaced if the state stops funding them - they would either close, or charge fees. Man7y of them are on church curtilage so difficult for the state to buy the current operations

    Pah! If Thomas Cromwell can confiscate the monasteries, I don't see why Ed Miliband can't appropriate the primary schools.

  • he's not english Richard. Celtic fringe LDs are allowed to have fun - see Lloyd George, Charlie Kennedy.

    Lol! Good point.
  • TGOHF said:

    Another coalition spat! The PM encourages a 'rethink' on Lib Dem Home Office Minister Norman Baker's decision to block pubs staying open late for England footie.....I wonder whether this, or the non-re-appointment of the head of Ofsted will get more traction.....

    Are the LDs against people having fun or the competitive nature of this soccer sport ?

    having fun offends the santimonious english middle classes.
    Now let's be fair to the LibDems, for once. Did Lembit not have fun?
    By their own lights...so did Cyril Smith and Mark Oaten....

    .....what about Rinka? Did she die in vain?
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    Charles said:

    Is every single thread on here no about immigration?

    One possible remedy for the issues discussed below is that schools only receive funding/charitable status if they stick to established fact, not religious superstition/supposition.

    This could and should be applied equally to Christian schools as it is to others. There are plenty of churches and temples etc where people can worship their god, without bringing it into schools.

    The problem you have is that a bunch of the CofE schools provide a necessary service and would need to be replaced if the state stops funding them - they would either close, or charge fees. Man7y of them are on church curtilage so difficult for the state to buy the current operations
    Indeed Charles the CoE was providing education to poor children before the state decided it could be bothered, hence Sunday Schools.
  • Charles said:

    The problem you have is that a bunch of the CofE schools provide a necessary service and would need to be replaced if the state stops funding them - they would either close, or charge fees. Man7y of them are on church curtilage so difficult for the state to buy the current operations

    Pah! If Thomas Cromwell can confiscate the monasteries, I don't see why Ed Miliband can't appropriate the primary schools.
    You will go giving him ideas.......

  • Labour deselected 4 MPs between 1997 and 2010 (not counting the expense scandal MPs blocked by central party).

    Jane Griffiths (Reading East) before 2005 GE
    Bob Wareing (Liverpool West Derby) before 2010 GE
    Frank Cook (Stockton North) before 2010 GE
    Anne Moffat (East Lothian) before 2010 GE

    Tom Cox (Tooting) retired after losing the trigger ballot in 2001 and before facing an open selection.

    Before 2001 Wareing lost the trigger ballot but survived the open selection. Before 2005 Helen Clark (Petersborough) survived the open selection after losing the trigger ballot.

    In this Parliament no sitting MP has lost the trigger ballot yet. Some CLPs have still to finish/do them though.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    Is Pete Wishart still in favour of votes for 16 year olds?
  • SMukeshSMukesh Posts: 1,759
    Why are the Tories killing off their moderate voices?
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    dr_spyn said:

    Is Pete Wishart still in favour of votes for 16 year olds?
    Well if he is he's sort of lost it since his solution to the tweets was to snitch to the teachers - how uncool is that ?
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited February 2014
    Jess Bowie ‏@jessbowie 5h

    Has maverick Lib Dem MP & Home Office minister Norman Baker got Coalition Stockholm Syndrome? I met him in Lewes: http://www.totalpolitics.com/articles/444067/interview-norman-baker.thtml

    Oh no! That's far too close to the tories. Quick, find some differentiation posturing.
    Chris Wimpress ‏@ChrisWimpress 4h

    Oh sorry it was Lib Dem Norman Baker who said there was no need to keep pubs open for the World Cup. Knew it was a lib dem!
    Ah, that's better. Gullbile tories will fall for that kind of nonsense every time.
    samana haq ‏@samhaqitv 1h

    A Lib Dem source makes it clear that both Norman Baker and Theresa May agreed no extension on pub opening hours for World Cup matches

    Kenan Malik ‏@kenanmalik 9h

    David Cameron is certain we need a snooper's charter. Why? Well, he watches Midsommer Murders and Silent Witness: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25969918
    LOL
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362

    It's worth noting the stark contrast in the performance of Bradford's schools with those of Tower Hamlets.

    It is,can't you tell by my Grammar on pb ;-)

  • Mick_Pork said:

    A Lib Dem source makes it clear that both Norman Baker and Theresa May agreed no extension on pub opening hours for World Cup matches

    But I thought Norman was telling Theresa what to do?

    LOL indeed!

  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    @mick_pork Has Cameron banned archery because he once watched Robin Hood?

    Can't find any reference to this on The Daily Mash, but imagine my surprise to read it in The Mail and The Mirror.

  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    Yo,ho,ho. Yeo going, going, gone!
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-26015369
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530

    Mick_Pork said:

    A Lib Dem source makes it clear that both Norman Baker and Theresa May agreed no extension on pub opening hours for World Cup matches

    But I thought Norman was telling Theresa what to do?

    LOL indeed!

    So you didn't even know May was Home Secretary and Baker is just a Home Office minister.
    It explains much. :)
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,326

    @Cyclefree - I absolutely agree with you and I'd go further: our values are intrinsically and absolutely better than those of societies which persecute people for their beliefs, their sex, their sexuality and so on. I don't think we should be shy in saying so. However, we should also have the self-confidence to seek to understand how some young Moslems in western countries have become radicalised and, as important, why. We don't do ourselves any good by letting ourselves completely off the hook. The truth is that for a long time it was not nice being the member of an ethnic minority of whatever religion or skin colour in this country. That does not excuse anything that is happening now or to make terrorist attacks and murders any less evil and revolting, but it might help us do something about preventing them in the future. Religions do not exist in a vacuum - they are what their adherents make them. We had a Christian enlightenment in Europe a few centuries back; we should be seeking to encourage a Moslem one here now.

    Agree. A good post.

    Re your last sentence, that is why it is so important that we do support - strongly - those who are trying for such an Enlightenment such as Mr Nawaz (and there are others). We don't. Cravenly, we suck up to the noisy violent element and abandon, both here and in other countries, those (many of them women) who are trying to find a more moderate, civilized Islamic way.

    Like the Enlightenment in Europe I think this - if it happens and I am not at all confident that it will - will be long and bloody and difficult. I only wish that we were on the right side and I have no confidence that our leaders are, instinctively, on the right side or that they're prepared to see it through. There has been far too much accommodation already with those who "persecute people for their beliefs, their sex, their sexuality and so on".

  • Mick_Pork said:

    Mick_Pork said:

    A Lib Dem source makes it clear that both Norman Baker and Theresa May agreed no extension on pub opening hours for World Cup matches

    But I thought Norman was telling Theresa what to do?

    LOL indeed!

    So you didn't even know May was Home Secretary and Baker is just a Home Office minister.
    It explains much. :)
    I was placing my faith in 'Lib Dem sources' - just like you!

    Were we both mistaken?

  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    edited February 2014
    SMukesh said:

    Why are the Tories killing off their moderate voices?

    Why did labour get rid of the anti EU or give the british people a say part of your party ? the moderate voices for a independent Britain.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    Wasn't Yeo involved in some unsavoury business involving wind farms and lobbying?

    You won't catch the tiny windmill fop involved in that.
    @Avitusparta@Avitusparta 2h

    Samantha Cameron's father nets £350,000 a year from subsidised wind farm http://bit.ly/nP5BRJ via @MailOnline
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498
    Carnyx said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Patrick said:

    Alanbrooke said:
    From memory oil is over 10% of the scottish economy, it's not a bonus it's fundamental. What else are you going to fall back on the successful banking sector ?

    comes from its position as a branch office of the City

    GDP per person excluding OIL is almost the same as UK, so it would just mean we would be back where we are now if giving it out free. Given no matter what happens oil will still be there and will not be cheap it will not mean we should be stupid enough to continue to give 100% of it away as we do now.
    On average the UK doesn't pay it's way - go figure.

    Only 3 regions do so London, SE and Scotland. Take out oil and Scotland is somewhere around Lancashire. Or put another way the Labour recession killed off nearly 10% of the economy that's what it would be like until some new businesses took over or enough people emigrated.
    Yes if it all disappeared we would be borrowing as per now, but it is a very unlikely scenario in the short term regardless of what middle east does. So worst case we would still be better off than we are now even if needing to borrow.
    On a point of detail - do those figures for Scotland include oil at all, please? Certainly for some gmt purposes, the oil revenue is or was ascribed to Extra Regio, or some such name, for its own "region".

    Carnyx , they usually exclude them , I cannot find teh charts at present but sure they are on BusinessforScotland website. Following from there.

    Where does Scotland’s wealth go?
    First Scotland’s onshore economy is 99% of the UK average in GDP per head terms – this despite the fact that Scotland economy has been growing more slowly than the UK’s for generations, due to lack of investment from Westminster. As a result you can say that oil and gas is a bonus to Scotland and that we have both a strong (compared to UK average) onshore economy and a strong offshore economy. Scotland’s GDP per head is £28,500 compared to the UK average of £24,350 and this relates to Scotland generating £10,700 per head in taxes compared to the UK average of £9,000 per head.

    Taking oil out of Scotland’s figures and claiming that our economy looks bad is a regular trick of the Unionists but it doesn’t make sense, you would then be comparing apples and oranges – take finance out of England figures and hey presto we are back to Scotland’s figures looking better again. You can only compare whole picture with whole picture and oil and gas revenues form part of the whole picture for an independent Scotland.
  • I have just trawled my way through the education debate on the previous thread. Very informative

    Message to Southam Observer though

    1. London success - coming off a very low base, so is it that easy wins like throwing people at a problem get dramatic results? Now that it is on a par with the rest, will it retain the growth? Incidentally, London is aggressively recruiting star teachers - who is going to teach in less fashionable, poor white working class areas - a clearly identified problem area.

    2. Don't trust Ofsted reports as a trusted currency. Our local school was outstanding 3 years ago. It wasn't and has been shown to be not so.

    3. After 14 years as a parent of state educated kids these things I know
    - A good state school plus additional paid for tuition is the best value option. My daughter's B in Latin became an A*
    - Education is more sensitive to staff quality than most professions. More so than doctors I venture. Therefore the ability to remove crap ones is very important, as they are appreciably worse than the mean.
    - Gove's rhetoric speaks to me. It addresses the problems I have witnessed. He is clearly on the side of the angels with regard the difference in quality between state and private education. This is fundamentally a left wing argument - right wingers don't care. Perhaps that is why the Left hate him so much. He's on their turf.
  • IOSIOS Posts: 1,450
    Gotta love the Tories. They can't even wait till after the election to start their civil war.
  • MikeK said:

    Yo,ho,ho. Yeo going, going, gone!
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-26015369

    Good to see these dinosaurs dying out.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Patrick said:

    Alanbrooke said:
    From memory oil is over 10% of the scottish economy, it's not a bonus it's fundamental. What else are you going to fall back on the successful banking sector ?

    Scotland won't have a successful banking sector though. If they go for Sterling then it will be regulated by the BoE and there would be huge pressure to relocate as ultimately the English could not tolerate a foreign power creaing money and derivative positions which English taxpayers were liable for. We see from the Euro that currency union requires transfer union and an England that had just been told to F off would not do that. Edinburgh's current success comes from its position as a branch office of the City

    GDP per person excluding OIL is almost the same as UK, so it would just mean we would be back where we are now if giving it out free. Given no matter what happens oil will still be there and will not be cheap it will not mean we should be stupid enough to continue to give 100% of it away as we do now.
    On average the UK doesn't pay it's way - go figure.

    Only 3 regions do so London, SE and Scotland. Take out oil and Scotland is somewhere around Lancashire. Or put another way the Labour recession killed off nearly 10% of the economy that's what it would be like until some new businesses took over or enough people emigrated.
    Yes if it all disappeared we would be borrowing as per now, but it is a very unlikely scenario in the short term regardless of what middle east does. So worst case we would still be better off than we are now even if needing to borrow.
    can't see it malc.

    1. you can only borrow without constraint if you have your own currency.
    2. oil is a wobbler - the second oil peak is based on price not volume and the pricing side is looking shaky as Iran comes back onstream
    3. Scotland still has a hit to take as jobs move back down south so it must first replace them before it can think of growth
    4. the state sector is too large and needs to be adjusted.

    I think you have a decade of adjustment ahead and oil might just be enough to cover the restructuring costs.
    Alan, As you say I doubt it will be a bed of roses , but I doubt oil will be gone in 10 years and we could be making a better fist of it. Will still be better than the slash and burn we can expect if we vote NO, at least we can try some new things.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    Tony McNulty ‏@Tony_McNulty 27s

    According to @JamesKirkup, it has now been 230 days since Cameron gave a full press conference in the UK.
    *chortle*
  • SMukeshSMukesh Posts: 1,759

    SMukesh said:

    Why are the Tories killing off their moderate voices?

    Why did labour get rid of the anti EU or give the british people a say part of your party ? the moderate voices for a independent Britain.
    Are you taking something?Which anti-EU MP did Labour deselect?
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498
    TGOHF said:

    Wait - if Scotland votes yes in September I will become an immigrant.

    Will I have to support Stevie G and the boys when they play at Wembley ?

    Thought you would be desperate to sign up for rUK passport
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Patrick said:

    Alanbrooke said:
    From memory oil is over 10% of the scottish economy, it's not a bonus it's fundamental. What else are you going to fall back on the successful banking sector ?

    Scotland won't have a successful banking sector though. If they go for Sterling then it will be regulated by the BoE and there would be huge pressure to relocate as ultimately the English could not tolerate a foreign power creaing money and derivative positions which English taxpayers were liable for. We see from the Euro that currency union requires transfer union and an England that had just been told to F off would not do that. Edinburgh's current success comes from its position as a branch office of the City

    GDP per person excluding OIL is almost the same as UK, so it would just mean we would be back where we are now if giving it out free. Given no matter what happens oil will still be there and will not be cheap it will not mean we should be stupid enough to continue to give 100% of it away as we do now.
    On average the UK doesn't pay it's way - go figure.

    Only 3 regions do so London, SE and Scotland. Take out oil and Scotland is somewhere around Lancashire. Or put another way the Labour recession killed off nearly 10% of the economy that's what it would be like until some new businesses took over or enough people emigrated.
    Yes if it all disappeared we would be borrowing as per now, but it is a very unlikely scenario in the short term regardless of what middle east does. So worst case we would still be better off than we are now even if needing to borrow.
    can't see it malc.

    1. you can only borrow without constraint if you have your own currency.
    2. oil is a wobbler - the second oil peak is based on price not volume and the pricing side is looking shaky as Iran comes back onstream
    3. Scotland still has a hit to take as jobs move back down south so it must first replace them before it can think of growth
    4. the state sector is too large and needs to be adjusted.

    I think you have a decade of adjustment ahead and oil might just be enough to cover the restructuring costs.
    Alan, As you say I doubt it will be a bed of roses , but I doubt oil will be gone in 10 years and we could be making a better fist of it. Will still be better than the slash and burn we can expect if we vote NO, at least we can try some new things.
    You can try new things now, but like childcare Salmond hasn't got the guts.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited February 2014
    Cleggy will be relieved Rennard has been keeping quiet for the moment.
    Kate Taylor ‏@plymouthkate 3h

    Mike Hancock stands down from Portsmouth cabinet to "stop other councillors leaving" and to "keep the group together" http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-26014794

    Peter Henley ‏@BBCPeterH 1h

    National Lib Dems "frustrated" at deal on Mike Hancock resignation - he continues to go to group meetings & no candidate against him in May

    TheBlueGuerilla ‏@theblueguerilla 6m

    Hancock has been ordered to take all Lib Dem material from his website http://www.theblueguerilla.co.uk/2014/02/mike-hancock-mp-quits-council-cabinet.html
    Or not.
  • The pub story is weird. We ended forced 11pm closing years ago. Loads of pubs and bars already open until 1am, or later. What's the problem?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles said:

    The problem you have is that a bunch of the CofE schools provide a necessary service and would need to be replaced if the state stops funding them - they would either close, or charge fees. Man7y of them are on church curtilage so difficult for the state to buy the current operations

    Pah! If Thomas Cromwell can confiscate the monasteries, I don't see why Ed Miliband can't appropriate the primary schools.
    I think a Putney boy would be a cannier operator than some kid from Highgate
  • They missed 1 more female Lab MP retiring: Meg Munn from Sheffield Heeley.

    To be fair, the great majority of Labour women are either old, or long serving or both. Except Munn

    Clwyd: elected in 1984/born in 1937
    Primarolo: elected in 1987/born in 1954
    Walley: elected in 1987/born in 1949
    Ruddock: elected in 1987/born in 1943
    Jackon: elected in 1992/born in 1936
    Jowell: elected in 1992/born in 1947
    McGuire: elected in 1997/born in 1949
    Munn: elected in 2001/born in 1959
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    IOS said:

    Gotta love the Tories. They can't even wait till after the election to start their civil war.

    What makes you say that?
    Sun Politics ‏@Sun_Politics

    David Cameron left bruised and humiliated after being forced to raise the white flag to Tory immigration rebels: http://bit.ly/1loqGaO
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,410
    I don't think many will worry about the passing of Yeo as an MP. No doubt he will join Huhne on the green ex MP jobber gravy train.

    Good riddance !
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @joncraig: Breaking news: Climbdown by Ed M on union reforms at PLP. Candidates for leader will need nominations of 15% of MPs, not 20% as was planned.
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    SMukesh said:

    SMukesh said:

    Why are the Tories killing off their moderate voices?

    Why did labour get rid of the anti EU or give the british people a say part of your party ? the moderate voices for a independent Britain.
    Are you taking something?Which anti-EU MP did Labour deselect?
    Yes,I taking the smell of freedom ;-)

    The big problem,your party are not selecting them,the labour party as had a political body snatcher take over from pro EU fanatics and if any dissent on this by the small numbers of labour MP's who still believe in democracy,they are marginalised.

  • SMukeshSMukesh Posts: 1,759
    That`s just silly.While 8 long-serving female Labour MP`s are retiring,4 first-time Tory female MP`s are retiring or retired already.

    It may be 8% but 8 MP`s approaching natural retirement is not equivalent to 4 first-time marginal MP`s retiring.
  • IOS said:

    Gotta love the Tories. They can't even wait till after the election to start their civil war.

    What has precipitated this bloodletting? A few bad polls on the back of a few good polls? Surely not.

    As I have said before the party has but two states of mind: complacency and panic.

    This time last week they were swinging back to victory.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498
    Alan, that is your private education for you , vile unionists starting early.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530

    SMukesh said:

    SMukesh said:

    Why are the Tories killing off their moderate voices?

    Why did labour get rid of the anti EU or give the british people a say part of your party ? the moderate voices for a independent Britain.
    Are you taking something?Which anti-EU MP did Labour deselect?
    Yes,I taking the smell of freedom ;-)

    The big problem,your party are not selecting them,the labour party as had a political body snatcher take over from pro EU fanatics and if any dissent on this by the small numbers of labour MP's who still believe in democracy,they are marginalised.

    Cammie is pro-EU. He wants to stay IN. If you didn't know that already expect it to be hammered home by Farage and the kippers almost every single day during the EU election campaign. I think some of his backbenchers might even have noticed by now.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Patrick said:

    Alanbrooke said:
    From memory oil is over 10% of the scottish economy, it's not a bonus it's fundamental. What else are you going to fall back on the successful banking sector ?

    Scotland won't have a successful banking sector though. If they go for Sterling then it will be regulated by the BoE and there would be huge pressure to relocate as ultimately the English could not tolerate a foreign power creaing money and derivative positions which English taxpayers were liable for. We see from the Euro that currency union requires transfer union and an England that had just been told to F off would not do that. Edinburgh's current success comes from its position as a branch office of the City

    GDP per person excluding OIL is almost the same as UK, so it would just mean we would be back where we are now if giving it out free. Given no matter what happens oil will still be there and will not be cheap it will not mean we should be stupid enough to continue to give 100% of it away as we do now.
    On average the UK doesn't pay it's way - go figure.

    Only 3 regions do so London, SE and Scotland. Take out oil and Scotland is somewhere around Lancashire. Or put another way the Labour recession killed off nearly 10% of the economy that's what it would be like until some new businesses took over or enough people emigrated.
    Yes if it all disappeared we would be borrowing as per now, but it is a very unlikely scenario in the short term regardless of what middle east does. So worst case we would still be better off than we are now even if needing to borrow.
    can't see it malc.

    1. you can only borrow without constraint if you have your own currency.
    2. oil is a wobbler - the second oil peak is based on price not volume and the pricing side is looking shaky as Iran comes back onstream
    3. Scotland still has a hit to take as jobs move back down south so it must first replace them before it can think of growth
    4. the state sector is too large and needs to be adjusted.

    I think you have a decade of adjustment ahead and oil might just be enough to cover the restructuring costs.
    Alan, As you say I doubt it will be a bed of roses , but I doubt oil will be gone in 10 years and we could be making a better fist of it. Will still be better than the slash and burn we can expect if we vote NO, at least we can try some new things.
    You can try new things now, but like childcare Salmond hasn't got the guts.
    Alan, Childcare is rubbish. Why would he fund that out of a fixed budget to give all the benefits to Westminster. He is not that stupid.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    SMukesh said:

    That`s just silly.While 8 long-serving female Labour MP`s are retiring,4 first-time Tory female MP`s are retiring or retired already.

    It may be 8% but 8 MP`s approaching natural retirement is not equivalent to 4 first-time marginal MP`s retiring.
    I think you'll find the silly thing is trying to talk up something Labour are just as bad at. it's like the nonsense of political appointments to quangos, where Labour are by far the biggest offender.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,342
    malcolmg said:




    Carnyx , they usually exclude them , I cannot find teh charts at present but sure they are on BusinessforScotland website. Following from there.

    Where does Scotland’s wealth go?
    First Scotland’s onshore economy is 99% of the UK average in GDP per head terms – this despite the fact that Scotland economy has been growing more slowly than the UK’s for generations, due to lack of investment from Westminster. As a result you can say that oil and gas is a bonus to Scotland and that we have both a strong (compared to UK average) onshore economy and a strong offshore economy. Scotland’s GDP per head is £28,500 compared to the UK average of £24,350 and this relates to Scotland generating £10,700 per head in taxes compared to the UK average of £9,000 per head.

    Taking oil out of Scotland’s figures and claiming that our economy looks bad is a regular trick of the Unionists but it doesn’t make sense, you would then be comparing apples and oranges – take finance out of England figures and hey presto we are back to Scotland’s figures looking better again. You can only compare whole picture with whole picture and oil and gas revenues form part of the whole picture for an independent Scotland.

    Thanks. Pretty much my perception too, and comparable to the FT report figures (which are somewhat different but make much the same point). Add to that about a quarter or a third of all current UK exports as well (depending on how much is currently counted as non-Scots because it leaves through a southern port, like Harris Tweed leaving through East Midlands Airport). Of course a good deal of that will have to be invested in restructuring, shifting to tidal and other renewable power, paying the debt, etc. But nobody's expecting Clynelish single malt to be piped on draught to all homes in indy Scotland ... unfortunately.

    The other factor which nobody mentioned today, in all this, unless I missed something, is what happens when (as many PBers wish/predict?) EWNI leaves the EU and Scotland remains in, which must have some impact on companies moving their HQs and operations - casino banking will no doubt move south to the free realms of London, but we are told that will happen that anyway, and other companies may think differently.

    On which vide the Spanish Foreign Minister saying they won't challenge Scotland's membership of the EU - also something that nobody thought fit to comment on, http://elpais.com/elpais/2014/02/03/inenglish/1391425089_214995.html Usual handwringing stuff saying how long it will take, but that is quite different from their actually vetoing it.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Patrick said:

    Alanbrooke said:
    From memory oil is over 10% of the scottish economy, it's not a bonus it's fundamental. What else are you going to fall back on the successful banking sector ?

    Scotland won't have a successful banking sector though. If they go for Sterling then it will be success comes from its position as a branch office of the City

    GDP per person excluding OIL is almost the same as UK, so it would just mean we would be back where we are now if giving it out free. Given no matter what happens oil will still be there and will not be cheap it will not mean we should be stupid enough to continue to give 100% of it away as we do now.
    On average the UK doesn't pay it's way - go figure.

    Only 3 regions do so London, SE and Scotland. Take out oil and Scotland is somewhere around Lancashire. Or put another way the Labour recession killed off nearly 10% of the economy that's what it would be like until some new businesses took over or enough people emigrated.
    Yes if it all disappeared we would be borrowing as per now, but it is a very unlikely scenario in the short term regardless of what middle east does. So worst case we would still be better off than we are now even if needing to borrow.
    can't see it malc.


    I think you have a decade of adjustment ahead and oil might just be enough to cover the restructuring costs.
    Alan, As you say I doubt it will be a bed of roses , but I doubt oil will be gone in 10 years and we could be making a better fist of it. Will still be better than the slash and burn we can expect if we vote NO, at least we can try some new things.
    You can try new things now, but like childcare Salmond hasn't got the guts.
    Alan, Childcare is rubbish. Why would he fund that out of a fixed budget to give all the benefits to Westminster. He is not that stupid.
    wasn't his argument that it would be hugely beneficial to the Scottish economy, if so why wait ?
  • MrsBMrsB Posts: 574
    a point for the Mr Tyndall's of pb:
    Prince Charles, as reported to the Telegraph (won't frighten you off reading it by linking to the Guardian) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/prince-charles/10610108/Prince-Charles-climate-change-deniers-are-headless-chickens.html

    Very good point about accepting science, except when it comes to climate change.
    Tell me, if your wife had a lump and 9 doctors told you it was cancer and had to be operated on immediately, but the 10th said it was fine, who would you listen to? Especially if the lump didn't go away but got bigger.

  • Alanbrooke said

    On 2 July 1908, Russian Foreign Minister Alexander Izvolsky wrote to Austro-Hungarian Foreign Minister Alois Aehrenthal and proposed a discussion of reciprocal changes to the 1878 Treaty of Berlin in favour of the Russian interest in the Straits of Constantinople and Austro-Hungarian interests in the annexation of Bosnia-Herzegovina and the Sanjak of Novibazar.

    Half right Mr AB

    I believe Austria initiated this not Russia as A-H's term as protector of Bosnia ran out in 1908, 30 years after the Congress of Berlin. Isvolsky went along with it and then when the Austrian invasion provoked an uproar rapidly back tracked and said he had been tricked.

    Since 1881 the Austrians had always said they reserved the right to take over in Bosnia and turn their protectorate into a province of the empire. Russia had conceded this point in principle, although wanted something in return.

    All this is in Christopher Clark's absolutely spiffing book "The Sleepwalkers" The best history book I have read in absolutely ages.

    http://www.amazon.co.uk/Sleepwalkers-How-Europe-Went-1914/dp/0141027827/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1391454137&sr=1-1&keywords=sleepwalkers
  • IOSIOS Posts: 1,450
    I see Scott P is tweeting about things he doesn't understand again.
  • IOS said:

    Gotta love the Tories. They can't even wait till after the election to start their civil war.

    What has precipitated this bloodletting? A few bad polls on the back of a few good polls? Surely not.

    As I have said before the party has but two states of mind: complacency and panic.

    This time last week they were swinging back to victory.
    I don't think this has anything to do with the polls. It is about local constituencies getting rid of MPs who they feel are either out of touch with public opinion or who have considered representing their constituents to be less important than grandstanding in London.
  • SMukeshSMukesh Posts: 1,759

    SMukesh said:

    That`s just silly.While 8 long-serving female Labour MP`s are retiring,4 first-time Tory female MP`s are retiring or retired already.

    It may be 8% but 8 MP`s approaching natural retirement is not equivalent to 4 first-time marginal MP`s retiring.
    I think you'll find the silly thing is trying to talk up something Labour are just as bad at. it's like the nonsense of political appointments to quangos, where Labour are by far the biggest offender.
    On Quangos,I agree.Sally Morgan shouldn`t have cause for complaint though I understand that such appointments are usually extended for a second term unless there was concern on competence which there wasn`t in this case.

    But on female MP`s,can you explain how Labour are just as bad.Try adding a touch of logic to your posts.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,342
    edited February 2014
    malcolmg said:



    You can try new things now, but like childcare Salmond hasn't got the guts.

    Alan, Childcare is rubbish. Why would he fund that out of a fixed budget to give all the benefits to Westminster. He is not that stupid.
    What Malcolm is referring to is that the budget for childcare only works if the costs are partly recouped by increased taxes and reduced benefits paid to working parents. Now if that happens the Scottish Government pays all the costs but doesn't get a penny of those extra taxes/reduced benefits. And then it can't make the sums balance. And it can't borrow. So what can it do? No wonder childcare is being held up as an exemplar of the problems of the devolution settlement.
  • IOSIOS Posts: 1,450
    Last boy scout.

    I don't think anything has caused it per se. I just think they do it because they can. That and the members hate Cameron.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    SMukesh said:

    SMukesh said:

    That`s just silly.While 8 long-serving female Labour MP`s are retiring,4 first-time Tory female MP`s are retiring or retired already.

    It may be 8% but 8 MP`s approaching natural retirement is not equivalent to 4 first-time marginal MP`s retiring.
    I think you'll find the silly thing is trying to talk up something Labour are just as bad at. it's like the nonsense of political appointments to quangos, where Labour are by far the biggest offender.
    On Quangos,I agree.Sally Morgan shouldn`t have cause for complaint though I understand that such appointments are usually extended for a second term unless there was concern on competence which there wasn`t in this case.

    But on female MP`s,can you explain how Labour are just as bad.Try adding a touch of logic to your posts.
    They're losing 8% of they're MPs same as the Tories.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,342
    edited February 2014

    Alanbrooke said

    On 2 July 1908, Russian Foreign Minister Alexander Izvolsky wrote to Austro-Hungarian Foreign Minister Alois Aehrenthal and proposed a discussion of reciprocal changes to the 1878 Treaty of Berlin in favour of the Russian interest in the Straits of Constantinople and Austro-Hungarian interests in the annexation of Bosnia-Herzegovina and the Sanjak of Novibazar.

    Half right Mr AB

    I believe Austria initiated this not Russia as A-H's term as protector of Bosnia ran out in 1908, 30 years after the Congress of Berlin. Isvolsky went along with it and then when the Austrian invasion provoked an uproar rapidly back tracked and said he had been tricked.

    Since 1881 the Austrians had always said they reserved the right to take over in Bosnia and turn their protectorate into a province of the empire. Russia had conceded this point in principle, although wanted something in return.

    All this is in Christopher Clark's absolutely spiffing book "The Sleepwalkers" The best history book I have read in absolutely ages.

    http://www.amazon.co.uk/Sleepwalkers-How-Europe-Went-1914/dp/0141027827/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1391454137&sr=1-1&keywords=sleepwalkers

    [my bit begins here]

    Many thanks. Have flagged it up on Amazon!

  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    Martin Robinson ‏@SurrealAnarchy 5m

    Sometimes it's hard to know whether to take Gove seriously: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/03/state-schools-independents-michael-gove?CMP=twt_gu
    No it's not.

    *laughs at Gove's latest headline chasing for gullible tories "nerds are cool"*
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    MrsB said:

    a point for the Mr Tyndall's of pb:
    Prince Charles, as reported to the Telegraph (won't frighten you off reading it by linking to the Guardian) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/prince-charles/10610108/Prince-Charles-climate-change-deniers-are-headless-chickens.html

    Very good point about accepting science, except when it comes to climate change.
    Tell me, if your wife had a lump and 9 doctors told you it was cancer and had to be operated on immediately, but the 10th said it was fine, who would you listen to? Especially if the lump didn't go away but got bigger.

    Straw man.

    The options are as follows:

    1. Stick your head in the sand
    2. Accept the "science is settled" and spend many billions on shifting carbon dioxide production from West to East
    3. Accept there is some doubt about the science, spend money on research to try and figure out what is going on and spend money on mitigation (e.g. flood defences) right now

    3 seems more rational to me, but then I am not a scientist
  • I still have no response to my query below about what the problem with the a World Cup pubs is.

    Forced 11pm closing ended years ago.
  • SMukeshSMukesh Posts: 1,759

    SMukesh said:

    SMukesh said:

    That`s just silly.While 8 long-serving female Labour MP`s are retiring,4 first-time Tory female MP`s are retiring or retired already.

    It may be 8% but 8 MP`s approaching natural retirement is not equivalent to 4 first-time marginal MP`s retiring.
    I think you'll find the silly thing is trying to talk up something Labour are just as bad at. it's like the nonsense of political appointments to quangos, where Labour are by far the biggest offender.
    On Quangos,I agree.Sally Morgan shouldn`t have cause for complaint though I understand that such appointments are usually extended for a second term unless there was concern on competence which there wasn`t in this case.

    But on female MP`s,can you explain how Labour are just as bad.Try adding a touch of logic to your posts.
    They're losing 8% of they're MPs same as the Tories.

    Except Labour`s 8% is entirely old-timers approaching natural retirement while Tories`8% is entirely first-time female MP`s chucking in their Parliamentary careers.See a difference.Thank you.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,989
    Evening all :)

    Norman Baker's line on pubs opening late for the World Cup match against Italy is simply that it's a local matter to be decided by local magistrates.

    An excellent example of decentralisation and letting local communities decide for themselves - the last thing we need is some Minister ordering pubs to open by politically-driven populist diktat.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,710

    TGOHF said:

    Another coalition spat! The PM encourages a 'rethink' on Lib Dem Home Office Minister Norman Baker's decision to block pubs staying open late for England footie.....I wonder whether this, or the non-re-appointment of the head of Ofsted will get more traction.....

    Are the LDs against people having fun or the competitive nature of this soccer sport ?

    having fun offends the santimonious english middle classes.
    Now let's be fair to the LibDems, for once. Did Lembit not have fun?
    he's not english Richard. Celtic fringe LDs are allowed to have fun - see Lloyd George, Charlie Kennedy.
    I thought Lembik was Estomian. He might have sat for a Welsh seat ….. but!!!
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,498

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    malcolmg said:

    Patrick said:

    Alanbrooke said:
    From memory oil is over 10% of the scottish economy, it's not a bonus it's fundamental. What else are you going to fall back on the successful banking sector ?

    Scotland won't have a successful banking sector though. If they go for Sterling then it will be success comes from its position as a branch office of the City

    GDP per person excluding OIL is almost the same as UK, so it would just mean we would be back where we are now if giving it out free. Given no matter what happens oil will still be there and will not be cheap it will not mean we should be stupid enough to continue to give 100% of it away as we do now.
    On average the UK doesn't pay it's way - go figure.

    Only 3 regions do so London, SE and Scotland. Take out oil and Scotland is somewhere around Lancashire. Or put another way the Labour recession killed off nearly 10% of the economy that's what it would be like until some new businesses took over or enough people emigrated.
    Yes if it all disappeared we would be borrowing as per now, but it is a very unlikely scenario in the short term regardless of what middle east does. So worst case we would still be better off than we are now even if needing to borrow.
    can't see it malc.


    I think you have a decade of adjustment ahead and oil might just be enough to cover the restructuring costs.
    Alan, As you say I doubt it will be a bed of roses , but I doubt oil will be gone in 10 years and we could be making a better fist of it. Will still be better than the slash and burn we can expect if we vote NO, at least we can try some new things.
    You can try new things now, but like childcare Salmond hasn't got the guts.
    Alan, Childcare is rubbish. Why would he fund that out of a fixed budget to give all the benefits to Westminster. He is not that stupid.
    wasn't his argument that it would be hugely beneficial to the Scottish economy, if so why wait ?
    Alan, As I stated all the benefits go to Westminster and the cost comes out of fixed budget. So we have to cut services and all benefit goes to Westminster. Only with independence does it benefit Scotland.
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    Aidan Walsh ‏@ThunderboltAWal 49s

    If geeks and nerds thought their day had come; Michael Gove just called them cool. #channel4news

    Stefan Simanowitz ‏@StefSimanowitz 1m

    "Nerds and geeks are cool" nerdy geek Michael Gove tells @GaryGibbonBlog on @Channel4News pic.twitter.com/16haiU80XW

    shakeandcrawl ‏@shakeandcrawl 1m

    Is Michael Gove *tripping*?
    Truly a twit of spectacular proportions.
  • Mr Alanbrooke

    Its not your day

    I'm sure others will say it better - Labour are losing a clutch of veterans, due to retire anyway. The Tories are losing bright young things who should want to stay if they think Parliament is a good use of their time.

    Dave paying for his otherwise laudable policy of keeping governmental reshuffles to the minimum?
  • Mark Oaten was English through and through.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    SMukesh said:

    SMukesh said:

    SMukesh said:

    That`s just silly.While 8 long-serving female Labour MP`s are retiring,4 first-time Tory female MP`s are retiring or retired already.

    It may be 8% but 8 MP`s approaching natural retirement is not equivalent to 4 first-time marginal MP`s retiring.
    I think you'll find the silly thing is trying to talk up something Labour are just as bad at. it's like the nonsense of political appointments to quangos, where Labour are by far the biggest offender.
    On Quangos,I agree.Sally Morgan shouldn`t have cause for complaint though I understand that such appointments are usually extended for a second term unless there was concern on competence which there wasn`t in this case.

    But on female MP`s,can you explain how Labour are just as bad.Try adding a touch of logic to your posts.
    They're losing 8% of they're MPs same as the Tories.

    Except Labour`s 8% is entirely old-timers approaching natural retirement while Tories`8% is entirely first-time female MP`s chucking in their Parliamentary careers.See a difference.Thank you.
    That's simply you ascribing motivations to other people . As ever the issue is simply Labour has nothing tangible to say on the policy front and needs to fill the void with chit chat. Having comprehensively lost the economic argument Labour, there's not much else in the pipeline bar the back biting.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,410
    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Norman Baker's line on pubs opening late for the World Cup match against Italy is simply that it's a local matter to be decided by local magistrates.

    An excellent example of decentralisation and letting local communities decide for themselves - the last thing we need is some Minister ordering pubs to open by politically-driven populist diktat.

    Talk about a spin and a smokescreen, the pubs will still be able to shut if they want to. I'm with Dave on this one - amusing he's done Baker up like a kipper if you'll excuse the pun. Opening the pubs and having a pop at the Lib Dems - Decent work for once.
  • SMukeshSMukesh Posts: 1,759
    edited February 2014

    SMukesh said:

    SMukesh said:

    SMukesh said:

    That`s just silly.While 8 long-serving female Labour MP`s are retiring,4 first-time Tory female MP`s are retiring or retired already.

    It may be 8% but 8 MP`s approaching natural retirement is not equivalent to 4 first-time marginal MP`s retiring.
    I think you'll find the silly thing is trying to talk up something Labour are just as bad at. it's like the nonsense of political appointments to quangos, where Labour are by far the biggest offender.
    On Quangos,I agree.Sally Morgan shouldn`t have cause for complaint though I understand that such appointments are usually extended for a second term unless there was concern on competence which there wasn`t in this case.

    But on female MP`s,can you explain how Labour are just as bad.Try adding a touch of logic to your posts.
    They're losing 8% of they're MPs same as the Tories.

    Except Labour`s 8% is entirely old-timers approaching natural retirement while Tories`8% is entirely first-time female MP`s chucking in their Parliamentary careers.See a difference.Thank you.
    That's simply you ascribing motivations to other people . As ever the issue is simply Labour has nothing tangible to say on the policy front and needs to fill the void with chit chat. Having comprehensively lost the economic argument Labour, there's not much else in the pipeline bar the back biting.
    4 first-time Female Tory MP`s not standing for re-election-Fact.
    8 Female Labour MP`s retiring after multiple terms-Fact.
    Anyway you changed the subject mate.Good idea.
  • MrsB said:

    a point for the Mr Tyndall's of pb:
    Prince Charles, as reported to the Telegraph (won't frighten you off reading it by linking to the Guardian) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/prince-charles/10610108/Prince-Charles-climate-change-deniers-are-headless-chickens.html

    Very good point about accepting science, except when it comes to climate change.
    Tell me, if your wife had a lump and 9 doctors told you it was cancer and had to be operated on immediately, but the 10th said it was fine, who would you listen to? Especially if the lump didn't go away but got bigger.

    Two points to be made about that frankly idiotic position Mrs B.

    1. This would be the Prince Charles who believes that if you have a lump then you should consider consulting a charlatan who will prescribe you pure water as a cure.

    2. Your analogy fails in my case because under this scenario I would be one of the doctors. Prince Charles would be the homeopathic quack.

    Perhaps once you have learnt something about the subject and then spent a couple of decades studying it in depth you will learn to discern between scientific arguments rather than citing ignorant alternative medicine advocates who feel that a royal bloodline gives them the right and ability to comment on scientific debates.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514

    Mr Alanbrooke

    Its not your day

    I'm sure others will say it better - Labour are losing a clutch of veterans, due to retire anyway. The Tories are losing bright young things who should want to stay if they think Parliament is a good use of their time.

    Dave paying for his otherwise laudable policy of keeping governmental reshuffles to the minimum?

    If the MPs want to go after one Parlt. then they go. It;s not the first time it's happened nor will it be the last, as I've pointed out Labour need to make an issue of it as they have no substantive issues to push. One could equally make a much stronger point out of Labour's forced Parliamentary retirements for fraud.

    So as days go it's pretty much like any other, ignore the spin and look at the real issues.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,035
    SMukesh said:

    SMukesh said:

    SMukesh said:

    SMukesh said:

    That`s just silly.While 8 long-serving female Labour MP`s are retiring,4 first-time Tory female MP`s are retiring or retired already.

    It may be 8% but 8 MP`s approaching natural retirement is not equivalent to 4 first-time marginal MP`s retiring.
    I think you'll find the silly thing is trying to talk up something Labour are just as bad at. it's like the nonsense of political appointments to quangos, where Labour are by far the biggest offender.
    On Quangos,I agree.Sally Morgan shouldn`t have cause for complaint though I understand that such appointments are usually extended for a second term unless there was concern on competence which there wasn`t in this case.

    But on female MP`s,can you explain how Labour are just as bad.Try adding a touch of logic to your posts.
    They're losing 8% of they're MPs same as the Tories.

    Except Labour`s 8% is entirely old-timers approaching natural retirement while Tories`8% is entirely first-time female MP`s chucking in their Parliamentary careers.See a difference.Thank you.
    That's simply you ascribing motivations to other people . As ever the issue is simply Labour has nothing tangible to say on the policy front and needs to fill the void with chit chat. Having comprehensively lost the economic argument Labour, there's not much else in the pipeline bar the back biting.
    4 first-time Female Tory MP`s not standing for re-election-Fact.
    8 Female Labour MP`s retiring after multiple terms-Fact.
    Anyway you changed the subject mate.Good idea.
    You have quite a loose definition of the word 'entirely' ;-)
  • stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Norman Baker's line on pubs opening late for the World Cup match against Italy is simply that it's a local matter to be decided by local magistrates.

    An excellent example of decentralisation and letting local communities decide for themselves - the last thing we need is some Minister ordering pubs to open by politically-driven populist diktat.

    That at least makes more sense - the way the stories have been written is that all pubs still close at 11pm. They don't. Many open until 1am and later and have done since the licensing laws were relaxed years ago. Have the journalists who wrote these stories not noticed?
  • Slightly on topic, ref US elections: here we go again ...

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-26021640
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,410
    @stodge And the magistrates courts have better used than to be clogged up with licensing applications.

    Oh and the cost to each pub.

    None will be ORDERED to be open either, Cameron is doing the right thing for once, and yes its populist but it is the right thing to do nonetheless
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    edited February 2014
    SMukesh said:

    SMukesh said:

    SMukesh said:

    SMukesh said:

    That`s just silly.While 8 long-serving female Labour MP`s are retiring,4 first-time Tory female MP`s are retiring or retired already.

    It may be 8% but 8 MP`s approaching natural retirement is not equivalent to 4 first-time marginal MP`s retiring.
    I think you'll find the silly thing is trying to talk up something Labour are just as bad at. it's like the nonsense of political appointments to quangos, where Labour are by far the biggest offender.

    But on female MP`s,can you explain how Labour are just as bad.Try adding a touch of logic to your posts.
    They're losing 8% of they're MPs same as the Tories.

    Except Labour`s 8% is entirely old-timers approaching natural retirement while Tories`8% is Having comprehensively lost the economic argument Labour, there's not much else in the pipeline bar the back biting.
    4 first-time Female Tory MP`s not standing for re-election-Fact.
    8 Female Labour MP`s retiring after multiple terms-Fact.
    Anyway you changed the subject mate.Good idea.
    And the issues stay the same. labour ascribing motivations to their opponents because they have nothing left in the tank. This is simply what we will see until next year and has been the pattern of this Parliament. Labour remains policy free and needs to fill the news with something. Women this week horses next. On the grand scale of things none of it has any significance.

  • Pulpstar said:

    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Norman Baker's line on pubs opening late for the World Cup match against Italy is simply that it's a local matter to be decided by local magistrates.

    An excellent example of decentralisation and letting local communities decide for themselves - the last thing we need is some Minister ordering pubs to open by politically-driven populist diktat.

    Talk about a spin and a smokescreen, the pubs will still be able to shut if they want to. I'm with Dave on this one - amusing he's done Baker up like a kipper if you'll excuse the pun. Opening the pubs and having a pop at the Lib Dems - Decent work for once.
    Do pubs near you close at 11pm? Many near me already open until 1am or later. The licensing laws were changed years ago.

  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530
    edited February 2014

    I still have no response to my query below about what the problem with the a World Cup pubs is.

    Forced 11pm closing ended years ago.

    It's just differentiation posturing for gullible tories. It's not just Clegg that has to do it after all. Cammie is Pro-EU and fully signed up to the science of Climate change, so any old tosh to take the tories mind off that will do for the gullibles. Even when it's obvious May and Baker had both agreed to the previous stance before the u-turn.

    Let's face facts. If Cammie wasn't terrified out of his wits to hold a press conference he would be posturing and differentiating away as well. But he is. 230 days since Cammie gave a full press conference. Says it all, doesn't it?

    :)


  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,989
    Pulpstar said:

    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Norman Baker's line on pubs opening late for the World Cup match against Italy is simply that it's a local matter to be decided by local magistrates.

    An excellent example of decentralisation and letting local communities decide for themselves - the last thing we need is some Minister ordering pubs to open by politically-driven populist diktat.

    Talk about a spin and a smokescreen, the pubs will still be able to shut if they want to. I'm with Dave on this one - amusing he's done Baker up like a kipper if you'll excuse the pun. Opening the pubs and having a pop at the Lib Dems - Decent work for once.
    Yes of course they will, what's wrong with that ? Applying for an extension is a reasonable course of action as it will allow local communities and the Police to have their say but no one should be compelled to open if they prefer not to. It's a free market (assuming you believe in such a radical idea) and if a pub decides it's not going to be in their interest to open (for whatever reason) that's their decision.

    Do you think Government should be all about top-down telling people what to do or do you believe in people being able to make up their own minds ?

    Or are you just having a pop at Norman Baker because he's a Lib Dem and you don't like Lib Dems ?

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,410

    Pulpstar said:

    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Norman Baker's line on pubs opening late for the World Cup match against Italy is simply that it's a local matter to be decided by local magistrates.

    An excellent example of decentralisation and letting local communities decide for themselves - the last thing we need is some Minister ordering pubs to open by politically-driven populist diktat.

    Talk about a spin and a smokescreen, the pubs will still be able to shut if they want to. I'm with Dave on this one - amusing he's done Baker up like a kipper if you'll excuse the pun. Opening the pubs and having a pop at the Lib Dems - Decent work for once.
    Do pubs near you close at 11pm? Many near me already open until 1am or later. The licensing laws were changed years ago.

    I don't honestly know, one of them is sadly boarded up that is a few miles away.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,410
    I was under the impression that pubs needed a special license to open for the 2 AM match...

    That's certainly the impression people will get from R5L at any rate !
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    edited February 2014
    @Carnyx Clark debunks myth of gallant little Serbia, a regime of regicide nationalists intent on destabilising the status quo. His focus on the decline of the OE as a major factor in the outbreak of war is commendable. There is a danger in overlooking the significance of the Balkan Wars. The expected war was Britain and Russia, rather than Britain and her biggest trading partner - Germany.

    Haven't yet read Iron Kingdom - I gather it is very good.
  • stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Norman Baker's line on pubs opening late for the World Cup match against Italy is simply that it's a local matter to be decided by local magistrates.

    An excellent example of decentralisation and letting local communities decide for themselves - the last thing we need is some Minister ordering pubs to open by politically-driven populist diktat.

    That at least makes more sense - the way the stories have been written is that all pubs still close at 11pm. They don't. Many open until 1am and later and have done since the licensing laws were relaxed years ago. Have the journalists who wrote these stories not noticed?
    I think the point is (or at least the point that the publicans are trying to make) that they want the assurance that comes from a change in the licencing laws which will make sure Local Councils cannot refuse extended licences except in exceptional circumstances.

    Personally like Stodge I am in favour of leaving it with the councils. There are many good reasons why extended licences are not granted as a matter of course - often due to disturbance to neighbours. Local authorities have this knowledge which a broad brush instruction from central government would lack.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    dr_spyn said:

    @Carnyx Clark debunks myth of gallant little Serbia, a regime of regicide nationalists intent on destabilising the status quo. His focus on the decline of the OE as a major factor in the outbreak of war is commendable. There is a danger in overlooking the significance of the Balkan Wars. The expected war was Britain and Russia, rather than Britain and her biggest trading partner - Germany.

    Haven't yet read Iron Kingdom - I gather it is very good.

    Iron Kingdom is an excellent book.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,410

    Pulpstar said:

    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Norman Baker's line on pubs opening late for the World Cup match against Italy is simply that it's a local matter to be decided by local magistrates.

    An excellent example of decentralisation and letting local communities decide for themselves - the last thing we need is some Minister ordering pubs to open by politically-driven populist diktat.

    Talk about a spin and a smokescreen, the pubs will still be able to shut if they want to. I'm with Dave on this one - amusing he's done Baker up like a kipper if you'll excuse the pun. Opening the pubs and having a pop at the Lib Dems - Decent work for once.
    Do pubs near you close at 11pm? Many near me already open until 1am or later. The licensing laws were changed years ago.

    David Cameron has called for a rethink on pub opening hours during the World Cup after ministers appeared to rule out extending them for England matches.

    Publicans had asked for serving times to be extended on two weekends during the tournament in Brazil this summer.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,710
    So Cameron is in favour of hordes of drunken football fans drowning their sorrows in suburban and village streets.
  • stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Norman Baker's line on pubs opening late for the World Cup match against Italy is simply that it's a local matter to be decided by local magistrates.

    An excellent example of decentralisation and letting local communities decide for themselves - the last thing we need is some Minister ordering pubs to open by politically-driven populist diktat.

    Why clog up the magistrates with a whole load of applications when it can be done nationally? Local decisions are best left to local people when there are local circumstances but in this case it is a bit different.

    Presumably the decision doesn't apply to Scotland, due to the different licensing laws there?
  • Mick_PorkMick_Pork Posts: 6,530

    So Cameron is in favour of hordes of drunken football fans drowning their sorrows in suburban and village streets.

    NannyCam will know if any undesirables intend to go out drinking and stop it in it's tracks.
    LobbyComm ‏@LobbyComm Feb 2

    Cameron cites TV dramas as reason to reinstigate snoopers charter & tracking. He & reality really going their seperate ways. #HouseofCards
  • Carnyx said:

    Alanbrooke said

    On 2 July 1908, Russian Foreign Minister Alexander Izvolsky wrote to Austro-Hungarian Foreign Minister Alois Aehrenthal and proposed a discussion of reciprocal changes to the 1878 Treaty of Berlin in favour of the Russian interest in the Straits of Constantinople and Austro-Hungarian interests in the annexation of Bosnia-Herzegovina and the Sanjak of Novibazar.

    Half right Mr AB

    I believe Austria initiated this not Russia as A-H's term as protector of Bosnia ran out in 1908, 30 years after the Congress of Berlin. Isvolsky went along with it and then when the Austrian invasion provoked an uproar rapidly back tracked and said he had been tricked.

    Since 1881 the Austrians had always said they reserved the right to take over in Bosnia and turn their protectorate into a province of the empire. Russia had conceded this point in principle, although wanted something in return.

    All this is in Christopher Clark's absolutely spiffing book "The Sleepwalkers" The best history book I have read in absolutely ages.

    http://www.amazon.co.uk/Sleepwalkers-How-Europe-Went-1914/dp/0141027827/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1391454137&sr=1-1&keywords=sleepwalkers
    [my bit begins here]

    Many thanks. Have flagged it up on Amazon!



    I agree. A more detailed review here:

    http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/cdp/member-reviews/A1059GN1CM178R/ref=cm_pdp_rev_all?ie=UTF8&sort_by=MostRecentReview
  • stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Norman Baker's line on pubs opening late for the World Cup match against Italy is simply that it's a local matter to be decided by local magistrates.

    An excellent example of decentralisation and letting local communities decide for themselves - the last thing we need is some Minister ordering pubs to open by politically-driven populist diktat.

    Why clog up the magistrates with a whole load of applications when it can be done nationally? Local decisions are best left to local people when there are local circumstances but in this case it is a bit different.

    Presumably the decision doesn't apply to Scotland, due to the different licensing laws there?
    I would contend that licencing of pubs and bars to prevent disturbance to neighbours is one of the ultimate 'local' circumstances. A town centre pub where there are only shops around is a very different situation to an estate or village pub surrounded by residential property. Surely it should be for the local community to decide on any extensions.
  • Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Norman Baker's line on pubs opening late for the World Cup match against Italy is simply that it's a local matter to be decided by local magistrates.

    An excellent example of decentralisation and letting local communities decide for themselves - the last thing we need is some Minister ordering pubs to open by politically-driven populist diktat.

    Talk about a spin and a smokescreen, the pubs will still be able to shut if they want to. I'm with Dave on this one - amusing he's done Baker up like a kipper if you'll excuse the pun. Opening the pubs and having a pop at the Lib Dems - Decent work for once.
    Do pubs near you close at 11pm? Many near me already open until 1am or later. The licensing laws were changed years ago.

    David Cameron has called for a rethink on pub opening hours during the World Cup after ministers appeared to rule out extending them for England matches.

    Publicans had asked for serving times to be extended on two weekends during the tournament in Brazil this summer.
    Yes I have read it! But pubs don't have to close at 11pm anymore - those laws were binned years ago! I can grasp Cameron wanting to give all pubs an automatic 1am licence but the way that reads is that pubs have to close at 11pm already - that hasn't been true for years!
  • stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Norman Baker's line on pubs opening late for the World Cup match against Italy is simply that it's a local matter to be decided by local magistrates.

    An excellent example of decentralisation and letting local communities decide for themselves - the last thing we need is some Minister ordering pubs to open by politically-driven populist diktat.

    Why clog up the magistrates with a whole load of applications when it can be done nationally? Local decisions are best left to local people when there are local circumstances but in this case it is a bit different.

    Presumably the decision doesn't apply to Scotland, due to the different licensing laws there?
    Aaaaaaargh! What different licensing laws? The restrictions on pub opening in England & Wales were abolished years ago.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    Best bet in this match tonight is Hazard anytime scorer 5/1 Coral
  • I will be watching the game from behind the sofa tonight, but I have got a bet on Demichelis to be shown a card at 5/2. He is not a natural midfielder and at some point will take one for the team with a cynical trip or shirt pull as Chelsea will be fast on the break.
  • dr_spyn said:

    @Carnyx Clark debunks myth of gallant little Serbia, a regime of regicide nationalists intent on destabilising the status quo. His focus on the decline of the OE as a major factor in the outbreak of war is commendable. There is a danger in overlooking the significance of the Balkan Wars. The expected war was Britain and Russia, rather than Britain and her biggest trading partner - Germany.

    Haven't yet read Iron Kingdom - I gather it is very good.

    Actually, one of the few criticisms I have with The Sleepwalkers is that while he focusses very heavily on the Balkan peninsula, he almost entirely ignores the Ottoman Empire as a power centre in its own right; looking instead at its (enforced) retreat and the political vacuum left behind. Considering how much time and detail he devotes to the governments in Vienna, Belgrade, St Petersburg, Paris and elsewhere, a little more attention might have been paid to Constantinople too.
  • I've backed Chelsea to win this at 3/1

    Also gone for 3 or 4 Man City goals at 11/2 and 10/1 respectively.
  • stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Norman Baker's line on pubs opening late for the World Cup match against Italy is simply that it's a local matter to be decided by local magistrates.

    An excellent example of decentralisation and letting local communities decide for themselves - the last thing we need is some Minister ordering pubs to open by politically-driven populist diktat.

    Why clog up the magistrates with a whole load of applications when it can be done nationally? Local decisions are best left to local people when there are local circumstances but in this case it is a bit different.

    Presumably the decision doesn't apply to Scotland, due to the different licensing laws there?
    Aaaaaaargh! What different licensing laws? The restrictions on pub opening in England & Wales were abolished years ago.
    I had presumed the aim is to get central government to override the local licencing decisions. Whilst 24 hour opening is possible under national law, the licence still has to be granted locally after hearing submissions from all concerned parties. Certainly a lot of restrictions are placed on pubs locally to ensure a minimum of disturbance to local residents. I honestly don't know but had assumed that the aim of this pressure was to alter the licencing laws to make it more difficult for late night licences to be refused
  • TykejohnnoTykejohnno Posts: 7,362
    Toby Young ‏@toadmeister · 2 mins
    Stop Press: Michael Gove wants children to "behave in lessons". Fascist bastard

  • stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Norman Baker's line on pubs opening late for the World Cup match against Italy is simply that it's a local matter to be decided by local magistrates.

    An excellent example of decentralisation and letting local communities decide for themselves - the last thing we need is some Minister ordering pubs to open by politically-driven populist diktat.

    Why clog up the magistrates with a whole load of applications when it can be done nationally? Local decisions are best left to local people when there are local circumstances but in this case it is a bit different.

    Presumably the decision doesn't apply to Scotland, due to the different licensing laws there?
    I would contend that licencing of pubs and bars to prevent disturbance to neighbours is one of the ultimate 'local' circumstances. A town centre pub where there are only shops around is a very different situation to an estate or village pub surrounded by residential property. Surely it should be for the local community to decide on any extensions.
    A sensible approach might be to allow automatic 1am licences for the Italy game and leave it as it is for the rest of the tournament. As I keep saying, pubs already open past 11pm so the story is based on an absurd false premise.

  • MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523

    Mr. Observer, perhaps we should pass a similar law.

    Everyone in this country must be able to speak English.

    I would be very surprised if that was not the law already with regard to schools: kids have to be taught in English. That's one of the reasons why the children of immigrants become fluent in English. And however hard you try, the language is pervasive - even in the highest density immigrant areas you just cannot escape it on the TV, on advertising, in shops, on the internet and so on. .
    Which is why people who don't want their kids influenced by the western media's morality get middle-east satellite channels and make their kids watch that instead.

    (Small part of the reason for the radicalization as well btw.)

    If the Christian churches had any sense they'd do the same - only slightly a preaching channel but mainly one people felt was safe to watch for their kids and their gran.
  • stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    Norman Baker's line on pubs opening late for the World Cup match against Italy is simply that it's a local matter to be decided by local magistrates.

    An excellent example of decentralisation and letting local communities decide for themselves - the last thing we need is some Minister ordering pubs to open by politically-driven populist diktat.

    Why clog up the magistrates with a whole load of applications when it can be done nationally? Local decisions are best left to local people when there are local circumstances but in this case it is a bit different.

    Presumably the decision doesn't apply to Scotland, due to the different licensing laws there?
    Aaaaaaargh! What different licensing laws? The restrictions on pub opening in England & Wales were abolished years ago.
    It isn't a free-for-all. I was a councillor at the time of the so-called deregulation. There was (still is, I'd guess) central guidance about how to apply licencing policy. The effect in my area was simply to move from a blanket 11pm closing time to a blanket 1am one.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    edited February 2014
    isam said:

    Best bet in this match tonight is Hazard anytime scorer 5/1 Coral

    Sorry I meant "I think that the..."
This discussion has been closed.