"In this way a vote for independence is a prelude to months and years of extremely tiresome and debilitating uncertainty, horse-trading and jostling over weapons, over the state-owned RBS which would move to England, tax competition and so on."
"Tiresome"? Oh well we wouldn't want to bore a Tory journalist would we, better hope for No.
Of course the best reason to vote "Yes" is to prevent a Labour govt in rUK for the forseeable future.
Would Independence still massively impact Labour? Of course. But they would then morph into an ultra-Blairite party which even Cammie would be hard pushed to try and differentiate against. Never mind a new BOO leader or another jump to the right with a Howard type leader.
That would still be a massive change for the better. It's all upside for an English Tory however you look at it.
Risking Nationalist wrath but, I've always thought the North of England (roughly from the start of the Peninnes upwards) has far more in common with Scotland than it does with Southern England. It feels far more similar, nicer.
Perhaps a nice compromise would be to let Southern England declare independence and let Wales, Scotland and the North go it alone.
Presumably the perpetual UKIP / Tory Government in Southern England could then go on to negotiate EU exit too...
So basically in your world Labour voters are nicer? Interesting...
Please do not post links that accuse pollsters of push polling and/or that question their integrity.
Sorry??? Are you seriously claiming a pollsters methodology is now "off-limits".
Your choice but if you think it looks good for PB to make certain pollsters immune to criticism then that's a pretty bizarre and revealing stance to make.
No.
It is fine to question their methodology, but not fine to question their motives, and saying they are push polling falls into the latter category.
We apply this stricture to all BPC pollsters and have done so in the past.
See here Mike Smithson's comment, when people criticised another pollster.
What happened to your Spanish Employment - I thought Spain was on the up?
The Spanish employment number is not seasonally adjusted, unlike the numbers for the UK or the US. So, in 2013, January unemployment rose by 150,000; in 2012, it was 180,000; in 2011, it was 130,000.
The market has takes Spanish unemployment numbers very positively, and - on a day where the Nikkei was down more than 4%, and the British, German, French, etc. stockmarkets are all down - the Spanish stockmarket is up 0.4%.
So, while it may not fit with your personal narrative, Spain is definitely on the up.
Unemployment rising less quickly counts as being "on the up" these days, does it?
On a seasonally adjusted basis - which is what we use in the UK - Spanish unemployment fell.
Thanks. I can't find the MORI source data for the original Feb 2003 poll. I also saw another poll done in 2002 with (I think) only 46% opting for the same proposal. The 50,000 who signed a petition to downing street requested a fully devolved assembly is more interesting.
I'm not sure how much can be drawn from it: I think another poll found almost identical levels of support for a SW regional assembly as for a Cornish one (72% to 70%). My inclination would be that the distance/isolation from a London-based Labour government that poorly understood/appreciated fishing/farming and cared even less had much to do with it.
There is clearly a passionate base level of support for Cornish regionalism/nationalism (take your pick) in the county. However, looking at election results and general traction since, i'd be surprised if it's more than 10-20%. Much of it could probably be addressed with greater powers to the county council.
Interesting question for unionists: if you want to nip nationalism in the bud, what do you do? Ignore all demands for more devolution and nationalism/regionalism, in the hope it'll remain a minority interest and wither away? Or do you feed the beast, hoping that it satisfies those seeking more automony, but risking that it only feeds the appetite for more and more devolution?
English devolution is a very minor interest today. That might not be the case if Scottish independence blows the whole existing UK constitutional settlement out the water.
Perhaps Britain's Eurosceptics would be better off following a similar strategy: concentrating everything on getting a concession on the ECHR - which, the Germans at least, would be happy to give us. And to move, step-by-step from there.
Thus removing the need for that troublesome IN/OUT referendum and, if forced to, replacing it with the mandate referendum some tories were pushing. The more cynical types (tory rebels and kippers) might just suspect that to be Cammie's plan anyway.
What happened to your Spanish Employment - I thought Spain was on the up?
The Spanish employment number is not seasonally adjusted, unlike the numbers for the UK or the US. So, in 2013, January unemployment rose by 150,000; in 2012, it was 180,000; in 2011, it was 130,000.
The market has takes Spanish unemployment numbers very positively, and - on a day where the Nikkei was down more than 4%, and the British, German, French, etc. stockmarkets are all down - the Spanish stockmarket is up 0.4%.
So, while it may not fit with your personal narrative, Spain is definitely on the up.
Unemployment rising less quickly counts as being "on the up" these days, does it?
On a seasonally adjusted basis - which is what we use in the UK - Spanish unemployment fell.
Putting aside the issue of whether seasonal adjustments make sense when you have unemployment at these ridiculous levels and various aggregate demand effects going on, the best you can make the case for is that employment in Spain is stagnant. The reality is that it won't be until the 2020s until Spain has full employment again. And that will be devastating to the Spanish people. It doesn't matter too much that you're heading slowly towards the surface if you're so deeply submerged.
What happened to your Spanish Employment - I thought Spain was on the up?
The Spanish employment number is not seasonally adjusted, unlike the numbers for the UK or the US. So, in 2013, January unemployment rose by 150,000; in 2012, it was 180,000; in 2011, it was 130,000.
The market has takes Spanish unemployment numbers very positively, and - on a day where the Nikkei was down more than 4%, and the British, German, French, etc. stockmarkets are all down - the Spanish stockmarket is up 0.4%.
So, while it may not fit with your personal narrative, Spain is definitely on the up.
Unemployment rising less quickly counts as being "on the up" these days, does it?
On a seasonally adjusted basis - which is what we use in the UK - Spanish unemployment fell.
So did employment. It's now at it's lowest level for 12 years.
The intelligence complex is really completely unchecked by the rules of law isn't it? They do what the fuck they want and then put two fingers up to any scrutiny...
It's a myth that labour need scotish MPs. It just ain't so.
That article is fascinating Mick. For me it shows that at some key historical points in the last 40-odd years, Labour's Scottish MPs have played a crucial role.
For example, they made Wilson Prime Minister instead of his tory counterpart in 1964.
They tipped the balance twice for labour in 1974.
They helped save labour from annihilation in 1983 (along with Wales).
I wonder whether the EU is to the Conservatives, what abortion is to the Republicans - that is, something that resonates very strongly, but only with a limited number of voters (say 25% of people).
And, just like abortion and the Republicans, actually achieving their goal (leaving the EU / abolishing abortion) is harder than it appears, and therefore leaves the 'core' permanently disappointed, and feeling betrayed.
Perceptive comment. Labour in the 1980s had similar issues - mass nationalisation and unilateral disarmament - which at some level everyone knew just weren't going to happen. Ironically, the latter has become quite widely accepted now - even Tony Blair admits to flirting with it around 2005 in his book - but in the middle of the Cold War it obviously wasn't going to get a majority.
My recollection is that the Bennite activists enjoyed the struggle anyway, and the sense that it wouldn't happen almost reinforced that - saying "We don't care, we are so strong that we defy the reality". They'd have found pushing for a five quid minimum wage a bit banal.
If that sounds patronising, I admit that when a teenager I was an active supporter of the Danish Communist Party, which had around 2% of the vote and has since disappeared - I collected more signatures for them than their entire largest branch. Most of us have our Don Quixote periods, and to be honest it was good fun. But they're dangerous for parties seeking to win.
To be fair, Spain has always had a substantial "official" unemployment problem - even in the boom years it was considerably higher than in most (all?) European countries. The cash in hand economy is very big over there.
The egotist who would be President for Life is an invention.
For six years now Salmond and his government have been running the day to day affairs of Scotland with quiet efficiency and no ideology other than what is best for Scots.
It feels very different to previous administrations.
This is the argument for Yes to Indepedence
Jim, that intelligent response will go over the top of heads on here. Alex Salmond is a demon, nothing will change their minds, and it is certain to be NO.
Realistically however, the chances of David Cameron getting massive British opt outs are probably quite remote – more likely if it happens he’ll get some more modest rule changes and guarantees, but no major changes in which areas the EU has powers. In that scenario then the vote would be much closer – 39% say they would vote to stay, 38% would vote to leave.
The egotist who would be President for Life is an invention.
For six years now Salmond and his government have been running the day to day affairs of Scotland with quiet efficiency and no ideology other than what is best for Scots.
It feels very different to previous administrations.
This is the argument for Yes to Indepedence
Sorry, must have imagined the independence referendum then. Clearly no ideology or distraction involved there.
What happened to your Spanish Employment - I thought Spain was on the up?
The Spanish employment number is not seasonally adjusted, unlike the numbers for the UK or the US. So, in 2013, January unemployment rose by 150,000; in 2012, it was 180,000; in 2011, it was 130,000.
The market has takes Spanish unemployment numbers very positively, and - on a day where the Nikkei was down more than 4%, and the British, German, French, etc. stockmarkets are all down - the Spanish stockmarket is up 0.4%.
So, while it may not fit with your personal narrative, Spain is definitely on the up.
Unemployment rising less quickly counts as being "on the up" these days, does it?
On a seasonally adjusted basis - which is what we use in the UK - Spanish unemployment fell.
Putting aside the issue of whether seasonal adjustments make sense when you have unemployment at these ridiculous levels and various aggregate demand effects going on, the best you can make the case for is that employment in Spain is stagnant. The reality is that it won't be until the 2020s until Spain has full employment again. And that will be devastating to the Spanish people. It doesn't matter too much that you're heading slowly towards the surface if you're so deeply submerged.
It is worth remembering that we've been here before with Spain. In 1994, Spanish unemployment was 23%. At that time, just 38% of Spaniards above the age of 15 were in employment (http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SL.EMP.TOTL.SP.ZS?page=3). Over the next decade, that number moved into the mid 50s - and that's despite a significant drag from an ageing population meaning a greater number of people were retired.
I was in Spain the week before last, and (for the first time in the last three years), the bars and restaraunts of Madrid were busy. I suspect that's not true in the Balaerics and in the South, but the centre and the North are distinctly improving.
The current account deficit has been eliminated. The private sector has delevered. Employment legislation has been drastically liberalised. Inward investment is rising fast. The banks have been restructured.
Now, I know I'm talking my own book, but I suspect Spain and Ireland will be the fastest growing European economies (including the UK) over the next five years. I would be very surprised in Spain's economy grew less than 15% in that time, and I suspect Ireland will be more like 20%. That will take up a lot of the employment slack.
England does not come in to it , it is a vote about Scotland.
Which is why David Cameron, an Englishman, who lives in England, and has no vote in Scotland, MUST appear on Scottish TV...
Usual tripe from Scott , Why then does he keep poking his nose in from 500 miles away and send his lap dogs up here to talk utter bollocks. He is a coward which is a very Tory trait.
It's a myth that labour need scotish MPs. It just ain't so.
That article is fascinating Mick. For me it shows that at some key historical points in the last 40-odd years, Labour's Scottish MPs have played a crucial role.
For example, they made Wilson Prime Minister instead of his tory counterpart in 1964.
They tipped the balance twice for labour in 1974.
They helped save labour from annihilation in 1983 (along with Wales).
1974 is nothing given the entire sweep of the historical picture. Yes, as I keep reiterating, it would be a huge cultural change but the numbers are the numbers and labour self-evidently do not rely on them for almost all westminster elections. The labour leadership have to push the line that they cannot possibly manage without scotland as it justifies their remote control of SLAB while at the same time preventing much in the way of self-reflection on how SLAB might do were they not shackled to westminster diktat. It's about control.
Not that the labour leadership would in any way want to lose what was a heartland but they still fight westminster elections in the exact same manner as the tories do. Concentrating on the marginals.
It's a myth that labour need scotish MPs. It just ain't so.
That article is fascinating Mick. For me it shows that at some key historical points in the last 40-odd years, Labour's Scottish MPs have played a crucial role.
For example, they made Wilson Prime Minister instead of his tory counterpart in 1964.
They tipped the balance twice for labour in 1974.
They helped save labour from annihilation in 1983 (along with Wales).
They also denied John Major a working majority in 1992 - that parliament would have been very different without Scottish Labour MPs, not least because John Smith wouldn't have become Labour leader in 1992.
On a mirror-image, they bolstered Blair's and Brown's majority between 2005 and 2010, without which Labour's difficult years in office would have been even more traumatic.
And even in those two short examples there are two Scottish Labour MPs mentioned. There were many more whose names feature prominently in Labour's history over the last half-century. Did Labour need them? At times, yes, but only at time. However, their significance goes far beyond the votes they could have changed.
I wonder whether the EU is to the Conservatives, what abortion is to the Republicans - that is, something that resonates very strongly, but only with a limited number of voters (say 25% of people).
And, just like abortion and the Republicans, actually achieving their goal (leaving the EU / abolishing abortion) is harder than it appears, and therefore leaves the 'core' permanently disappointed, and feeling betrayed.
Not really. In the case of abortion the tiny vociferous minority are those who oppose, in the case of the EU the tiny vociferous minority are those who support. The anti-EU and Pro-abortion positions are by far the most popular and mainstream positions in their respective countries.
I wouldn't be surprised if they grew very quickly too. But that's mainly because their crash has been so bad. But will they ever get back to where they would of been from a 2000-2005 trend.
The EU issue isn;t really about the EU. All but a very small rump realise we have to have a relationship with what is an emerging super country.
The EU issue is about control. Its about who decides what, and where.
People aren;t really annoyed about foreign criminals. What annoys voters is the government's impotence in the face of them - and the ridiculous gyrations and meally mouthed excuses it employs to try to get around that impotence.
"In this way a vote for independence is a prelude to months and years of extremely tiresome and debilitating uncertainty, horse-trading and jostling over weapons, over the state-owned RBS which would move to England, tax competition and so on."
"Tiresome"? Oh well we wouldn't want to bore a Tory journalist would we, better hope for No.
Of course the best reason to vote "Yes" is to prevent a Labour govt in rUK for the forseeable future.
Small point I know, but precisely how?
.
By removing the 40+ Mps they regularly return from Scotland.
It's a myth that labour need scotish MPs. It just ain't so.
The egotist who would be President for Life is an invention.
For six years now Salmond and his government have been running the day to day affairs of Scotland with quiet efficiency and no ideology other than what is best for Scots.
It feels very different to previous administrations.
This is the argument for Yes to Indepedence
Sorry, must have imagined the independence referendum then. Clearly no ideology or distraction involved there.
*tears of laughter* etc.
More Pandas than Tories in Scotland , LOL
Tory MPs, perhaps. In 2010, there were very similar numbers of Tory voters and SNP voters.
I wouldn't be surprised if they grew very quickly too. But that's mainly because their crash has been so bad. But will they ever get back to where they would of been from a 2000-2005 trend.
Well, I'd argue that the 2000-2005 trend was well above Spain's natural growth rate, driven by an astronomical house price and building boom, that saw 1-in-5 people in Spain working in construction or related areas.
Will the boom-and-bust have resulted in Spain having a GDP below the level it might have been? Yes, almost certainly (although counterfactuals are fraught with difficulties).
But I'm in the business of finding the best places to put my clients (and my) money - and the "direction of travel" and the low valuations make peripheral Europe the most exciting place in the world right now.
What happened to your Spanish Employment - I thought Spain was on the up?
The Spanish employment number is not seasonally adjusted, unlike the numbers for the UK or the US. So, in 2013, January unemployment rose by 150,000; in 2012, it was 180,000; in 2011, it was 130,000.
The market has takes Spanish unemployment numbers very positively, and - on a day where the Nikkei was down more than 4%, and the British, German, French, etc. stockmarkets are all down - the Spanish stockmarket is up 0.4%.
So, while it may not fit with your personal narrative, Spain is definitely on the up.
Unemployment rising less quickly counts as being "on the up" these days, does it?
On a seasonally adjusted basis - which is what we use in the UK - Spanish unemployment fell.
Putting aside the issue of whether seasonal adjustments make sense when you have unemployment at these ridiculous levels and various aggregate demand effects going on, the best you can make the case for is that employment in Spain is stagnant. The reality is that it won't be until the 2020s until Spain has full employment again. And that will be devastating to the Spanish people. It doesn't matter too much that you're heading slowly towards the surface if you're so deeply submerged.
It is worth remembering that we've been here before with Spain. In 1994, Spanish unemployment was 23%. At that time, just 38% of Spaniards above the age of 15 were in employment (http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SL.EMP.TOTL.SP.ZS?page=3). Over the next decade, that number moved into the mid 50s - and that's despite a significant drag from an ageing population meaning a greater number of people were retired.
I was in Spain the week before last, and (for the first time in the last three years), the bars and restaraunts of Madrid were busy. I suspect that's not true in the Balaerics and in the South, but the centre and the North are distinctly improving.
The current account deficit has been eliminated. The private sector has delevered. Employment legislation has been drastically liberalised. Inward investment is rising fast. The banks have been restructured.
Now, I know I'm talking my own book, but I suspect Spain and Ireland will be the fastest growing European economies (including the UK) over the next five years. I would be very surprised in Spain's economy grew less than 15% in that time, and I suspect Ireland will be more like 20%. That will take up a lot of the employment slack.
The Balearics are the only autonomous region in which unemployment fell in January. It rose most in the Basque country and Extremadura.
Realistically however, the chances of David Cameron getting massive British opt outs are probably quite remote – more likely if it happens he’ll get some more modest rule changes and guarantees, but no major changes in which areas the EU has powers. In that scenario then the vote would be much closer – 39% say they would vote to stay, 38% would vote to leave.
So the British public are split on the issue, and this is supposed to be something politically toxic?
One thing Cameron might be able to get : an unlimited time veto on lifting immigration restrictions from any future EU members. Any lifting of restrictions to be done at UK pejorative - e.g worker types, annual caps, points etc. Since each new member state has a sort of accession treaty, this could easily be written in for the UK.
Of course, trouble is, these couldn't be reversed once lifted and it might not be enough to satisfy the public. It'll still be more popular than just coming back with loosened worker protections.
What happened to your Spanish Employment - I thought Spain was on the up?
The Spanish employment number is not seasonally adjusted, unlike the numbers for the UK or the US. So, in 2013, January unemployment rose by 150,000; in 2012, it was 180,000; in 2011, it was 130,000.
The market has takes Spanish unemployment numbers very positively, and - on a day where the Nikkei was down more than 4%, and the British, German, French, etc. stockmarkets are all down - the Spanish stockmarket is up 0.4%.
So, while it may not fit with your personal narrative, Spain is definitely on the up.
Unemployment rising less quickly counts as being "on the up" these days, does it?
On a seasonally adjusted basis - which is what we use in the UK - Spanish unemployment fell.
Putting aside the issue of whether seasonal adjustments make sense when you have unemployment at these ridiculous levels and various aggregate demand effects going on, the best you can make the case for is that employment in Spain is stagnant. The reality is that it won't be until the 2020s until Spain has full employment again. And that will be devastating to the Spanish people. It doesn't matter too much that you're heading slowly towards the surface if you're so deeply submerged.
It is worth remembering that we've been here before with Spain. In 1994, Spanish unemployment was 23%. At that time, just 38% of Spaniards above the age of 15 were in employment (http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SL.EMP.TOTL.SP.ZS?page=3). Over the next decade, that number moved into the mid 50s - and that's despite a significant drag from an ageing population meaning a greater number of people were retired.
I was in Spain the week before last, and (for the first time in the last three years), the bars and restaraunts of Madrid were busy. I suspect that's not true in the Balaerics and in the South, but the centre and the North are distinctly improving.
The current account deficit has been eliminated. The private sector has delevered. Employment legislation has been drastically liberalised. Inward investment is rising fast. The banks have been restructured.
Now, I know I'm talking my own book, but I suspect Spain and Ireland will be the fastest growing European economies (including the UK) over the next five years. I would be very surprised in Spain's economy grew less than 15% in that time, and I suspect Ireland will be more like 20%. That will take up a lot of the employment slack.
Not that it's a good thing, but Spain has a huge black market/economy that many of its headline economic figures don't pick up.
Por comunidades, el paro solo bajó en enero sólo en Baleares (0,53%), mientras que subió en el resto de autonomías, especialmente en Extremadura, con un aumento del 5,23%, y en el País Vasco, con un 4,6%.
Por comunidades, el paro solo bajó en enero sólo en Baleares (0,53%), mientras que subió en el resto de autonomías, especialmente en Extremadura, con un aumento del 5,23%, y en el País Vasco, con un 4,6%.
Of course, the two are not mutually exclusive. If lots of people left the Balaerics, employment could fall and so could unemployment
The egotist who would be President for Life is an invention.
For six years now Salmond and his government have been running the day to day affairs of Scotland with quiet efficiency and no ideology other than what is best for Scots.
It feels very different to previous administrations.
This is the argument for Yes to Indepedence
Sorry, must have imagined the independence referendum then. Clearly no ideology or distraction involved there.
*tears of laughter* etc.
More Pandas than Tories in Scotland , LOL
Tory MPs, perhaps. In 2010, there were very similar numbers of Tory voters and SNP voters.
They have no hope in Scotland regardless of whatever straw you clutch at.
Oil giant BP boss Bob Dudley has warned there are "big uncertainties" for the company over the possibility of Scotland becoming independent.
Mr Dudley told the BBC the "question mark" over which currency Scotland might adopt if there was a 'yes' vote in September's referendum was "a concern".
However, Mr Dudley emphasised the firm was continuing to invest in Scotland.
BP plans to invest £10bn in the North Sea between 2011 and 2016, its highest ever investment in the region.
"We have a lot of people in Scotland. We have a lot of investments in Scotland. My personal view is that Great Britain is great and it ought to stay together," added Mr Dudley.
The egotist who would be President for Life is an invention.
For six years now Salmond and his government have been running the day to day affairs of Scotland with quiet efficiency and no ideology other than what is best for Scots.
It feels very different to previous administrations.
This is the argument for Yes to Indepedence
Sorry, must have imagined the independence referendum then. Clearly no ideology or distraction involved there.
*tears of laughter* etc.
More Pandas than Tories in Scotland , LOL
Tory MPs, perhaps. In 2010, there were very similar numbers of Tory voters and SNP voters.
They have no hope in Scotland regardless of whatever straw you clutch at.
That straw would be a different system other than FPTP. So unless they support that now it's amusing but irrelevant.
Por comunidades, el paro solo bajó en enero sólo en Baleares (0,53%), mientras que subió en el resto de autonomías, especialmente en Extremadura, con un aumento del 5,23%, y en el País Vasco, con un 4,6%.
Of course, the two are not mutually exclusive. If lots of people left the Balaerics, employment could fall and so could unemployment
True - these are the figures as supplied by the government:
Realistically however, the chances of David Cameron getting massive British opt outs are probably quite remote – more likely if it happens he’ll get some more modest rule changes and guarantees, but no major changes in which areas the EU has powers. In that scenario then the vote would be much closer – 39% say they would vote to stay, 38% would vote to leave.
So the British public are split on the issue, and this is supposed to be something politically toxic?
One thing Cameron might be able to get : an unlimited time veto on lifting immigration restrictions from any future EU members. Any lifting of restrictions to be done at UK pejorative - e.g worker types, annual caps, points etc. Since each new member state has a sort of accession treaty, this could easily be written in for the UK.
Of course, trouble is, these couldn't be reversed once lifted and it might not be enough to satisfy the public. It'll still be more popular than just coming back with loosened worker protections.
That's closing the door after the horse has bolted. All the big countries that have a realistic chance of joining the EU already have done. An opt-out of the CAP and the ability to sign our own free trade deals are the things we should go for.
Por comunidades, el paro solo bajó en enero sólo en Baleares (0,53%), mientras que subió en el resto de autonomías, especialmente en Extremadura, con un aumento del 5,23%, y en el País Vasco, con un 4,6%.
Of course, the two are not mutually exclusive. If lots of people left the Balaerics, employment could fall and so could unemployment
True - these are the figures as supplied by the government:
On which note, Irish consumer sentiment numbers are out, and they're scorchio: "The KBC Ireland/ESRI Consumer Sentiment Index increased to 84.6 in January - its best showing since May 2007"
"In this way a vote for independence is a prelude to months and years of extremely tiresome and debilitating uncertainty, horse-trading and jostling over weapons, over the state-owned RBS which would move to England, tax competition and so on."
"Tiresome"? Oh well we wouldn't want to bore a Tory journalist would we, better hope for No.
Of course the best reason to vote "Yes" is to prevent a Labour govt in rUK for the forseeable future.
Would Independence still massively impact Labour? Of course. But they would then morph into an ultra-Blairite party which even Cammie would be hard pushed to try and differentiate against. Never mind a new BOO leader or another jump to the right with a Howard type leader.
That would still be a massive change for the better. It's all upside for an English Tory however you look at it.
Risking Nationalist wrath but, I've always thought the North of England (roughly from the start of the Peninnes upwards) has far more in common with Scotland than it does with Southern England. It feels far more similar, nicer.
Perhaps a nice compromise would be to let Southern England declare independence and let Wales, Scotland and the North go it alone.
Presumably the perpetual UKIP / Tory Government in Southern England could then go on to negotiate EU exit too...
So basically in your world Labour voters are nicer? Interesting...
Er no.
North of England, Scotland and Wales all feel like nicer places to me, and have more similarites with each other than any of them do with Southern England.
Generally speaking of course. There's sh!tholes and idiots everywhere, and there's nice places and nice people everywhere.
Clearly you haven't been to the parts of Wales where they switch from English to Welsh when English people walk in...
Minor straw in the wind on the by-election - Labour got over 100 activists out at the weekend. That's pretty good, though not as great as in some by-elections (the closer to London, the larger the turnout). Labour does sound pretty confident, and I'd think the size of the majority and who is second are going to be the main issues.
Realistically however, the chances of David Cameron getting massive British opt outs are probably quite remote – more likely if it happens he’ll get some more modest rule changes and guarantees, but no major changes in which areas the EU has powers. In that scenario then the vote would be much closer – 39% say they would vote to stay, 38% would vote to leave.
So the British public are split on the issue, and this is supposed to be something politically toxic?
One thing Cameron might be able to get : an unlimited time veto on lifting immigration restrictions from any future EU members. Any lifting of restrictions to be done at UK pejorative - e.g worker types, annual caps, points etc. Since each new member state has a sort of accession treaty, this could easily be written in for the UK.
Of course, trouble is, these couldn't be reversed once lifted and it might not be enough to satisfy the public. It'll still be more popular than just coming back with loosened worker protections.
That's closing the door after the horse has bolted. All the big countries that have a realistic chance of joining the EU already have done. An opt-out of the CAP and the ability to sign our own free trade deals are the things we should go for.
While an opt-out from the CAP is possible, an ability to sign our own trade deals is not.
The EU (and the EEC before it) is based around "The Common External Tariff", and the whole purpose of the Maastricht 1992 agreement was to allow goods and services to move around the EU without any impediment.
If we were to have our own trade deal with (say) Indonesia, and were to sign a free trade arrangement with them, then goods would be able to flow from Jakarta to the UK, where they would be inside the European FTA.
Por comunidades, el paro solo bajó en enero sólo en Baleares (0,53%), mientras que subió en el resto de autonomías, especialmente en Extremadura, con un aumento del 5,23%, y en el País Vasco, con un 4,6%.
Of course, the two are not mutually exclusive. If lots of people left the Balaerics, employment could fall and so could unemployment
True - these are the figures as supplied by the government:
Por comunidades, el paro solo bajó en enero sólo en Baleares (0,53%), mientras que subió en el resto de autonomías, especialmente en Extremadura, con un aumento del 5,23%, y en el País Vasco, con un 4,6%.
Of course, the two are not mutually exclusive. If lots of people left the Balaerics, employment could fall and so could unemployment
True - these are the figures as supplied by the government:
Realistically however, the chances of David Cameron getting massive British opt outs are probably quite remote – more likely if it happens he’ll get some more modest rule changes and guarantees, but no major changes in which areas the EU has powers. In that scenario then the vote would be much closer – 39% say they would vote to stay, 38% would vote to leave.
So the British public are split on the issue, and this is supposed to be something politically toxic?
One thing Cameron might be able to get : an unlimited time veto on lifting immigration restrictions from any future EU members. Any lifting of restrictions to be done at UK pejorative - e.g worker types, annual caps, points etc. Since each new member state has a sort of accession treaty, this could easily be written in for the UK.
Of course, trouble is, these couldn't be reversed once lifted and it might not be enough to satisfy the public. It'll still be more popular than just coming back with loosened worker protections.
That's closing the door after the horse has bolted. All the big countries that have a realistic chance of joining the EU already have done. An opt-out of the CAP and the ability to sign our own free trade deals are the things we should go for.
I know. I was talking about things that Cameron might be able to get. I doubt he'll get the free trade deal making powers. I think we might even have to leave both the EU and EEC for that. It'd be good for us but, from the EU point of view, that'd open up a 'leak' in the UK through which all sorts of goods and services could be re-routed into the EU worldwide.
The only thing I really care about wrt CAP is having to pay for it. I agree that it'd be a big win if Cameron managed to walk away with a rebate and not having to pay for it anymore.
Realistically however, the chances of David Cameron getting massive British opt outs are probably quite remote – more likely if it happens he’ll get some more modest rule changes and guarantees, but no major changes in which areas the EU has powers. In that scenario then the vote would be much closer – 39% say they would vote to stay, 38% would vote to leave.
So the British public are split on the issue, and this is supposed to be something politically toxic?
One thing Cameron might be able to get : an unlimited time veto on lifting immigration restrictions from any future EU members. Any lifting of restrictions to be done at UK pejorative - e.g worker types, annual caps, points etc. Since each new member state has a sort of accession treaty, this could easily be written in for the UK.
Of course, trouble is, these couldn't be reversed once lifted and it might not be enough to satisfy the public. It'll still be more popular than just coming back with loosened worker protections.
That's closing the door after the horse has bolted. All the big countries that have a realistic chance of joining the EU already have done. An opt-out of the CAP and the ability to sign our own free trade deals are the things we should go for.
I know. I was talking about things that Cameron might be able to get. I doubt he'll get the free trade deal making powers. I think we might even have to leave both the EU and EEC for that. It'd be good for us but, from the EU point of view, that'd open up a 'leak' in the UK through which all sorts of goods and services could be re-routed into the EU worldwide.
The only thing I really care about wrt CAP is having to pay for it. I agree that it'd be a big win if Cameron managed to walk away with a rebate and not having to pay for it anymore.
CAP is an interesting one - because pretty much only the French benefit from it to any great extent.
If the French economy were to falter further, and they needed bailing out by the Germans, then it could potentially be up for renegotiation across the EU. (A repatriation of powers to subsidise agriculture, across the EU.)
The best thing that could happen to the EU would be Norway, Switzerland and Iceland deciding to join. I don't think the UK would vote to leave if they were members.
I was under the impression the Italians, Romanians and Poles all either currently benefit or stand to benefit a lot from the CAP. It's basically a massive transfer system from urban countries to rural countries. Outrageous really. And, this is half of what the EU does, which is always worth reminding any EU supporter. If you think the CAP is economic madness (as pretty much all economically-minded people do), then you already dislike half the EU. The problem is just that Europhiles are usually hooked on the idea, regardless of the practice.
Realistically however, the chances of David Cameron getting massive British opt outs are probably quite remote – more likely if it happens he’ll get some more modest rule changes and guarantees, but no major changes in which areas the EU has powers. In that scenario then the vote would be much closer – 39% say they would vote to stay, 38% would vote to leave.
So the British public are split on the issue, and this is supposed to be something politically toxic?
One thing Cameron might be able to get : an unlimited time veto on lifting immigration restrictions from any future EU members. Any lifting of restrictions to be done at UK pejorative - e.g worker types, annual caps, points etc. Since each new member state has a sort of accession treaty, this could easily be written in for the UK.
Of course, trouble is, these couldn't be reversed once lifted and it might not be enough to satisfy the public. It'll still be more popular than just coming back with loosened worker protections.
That's closing the door after the horse has bolted. All the big countries that have a realistic chance of joining the EU already have done. An opt-out of the CAP and the ability to sign our own free trade deals are the things we should go for.
While an opt-out from the CAP is possible, an ability to sign our own trade deals is not.
The EU (and the EEC before it) is based around "The Common External Tariff", and the whole purpose of the Maastricht 1992 agreement was to allow goods and services to move around the EU without any impediment.
If we were to have our own trade deal with (say) Indonesia, and were to sign a free trade arrangement with them, then goods would be able to flow from Jakarta to the UK, where they would be inside the European FTA.
Norway is inside the FTA yet has a number of bilateral trade deals.
"In this way a vote for independence is a prelude to months and years of extremely tiresome and debilitating uncertainty, horse-trading and jostling over weapons, over the state-owned RBS which would move to England, tax competition and so on."
"Tiresome"? Oh well we wouldn't want to bore a Tory journalist would we, better hope for No.
Of course the best reason to vote "Yes" is to prevent a Labour govt in rUK for the forseeable future.
Small point I know, but precisely how?
.
By removing the 40+ Mps they regularly return from Scotland.
It's a myth that labour need scotish MPs. It just ain't so.
The best thing that could happen to the EU would be Norway, Switzerland and Iceland deciding to join. I don't think the UK would vote to leave if they were members.
The three of them have a total population of 13 million, a fifth of France's. They really wouldn't make much difference to the balance of power. Far more important is that France is growing at 0.5% a year, while Germany is stagnant.
Realistically however, the chances of David Cameron getting massive British opt outs are probably quite remote – more likely if it happens he’ll get some more modest rule changes and guarantees, but no major changes in which areas the EU has powers. In that scenario then the vote would be much closer – 39% say they would vote to stay, 38% would vote to leave.
So the British public are split on the issue, and this is supposed to be something politically toxic?
One thing Cameron might be able to get : an unlimited time veto on lifting immigration restrictions from any future EU members. Any lifting of restrictions to be done at UK pejorative - e.g worker types, annual caps, points etc. Since each new member state has a sort of accession treaty, this could easily be written in for the UK.
Of course, trouble is, these couldn't be reversed once lifted and it might not be enough to satisfy the public. It'll still be more popular than just coming back with loosened worker protections.
That's closing the door after the horse has bolted. All the big countries that have a realistic chance of joining the EU already have done. An opt-out of the CAP and the ability to sign our own free trade deals are the things we should go for.
I know. I was talking about things that Cameron might be able to get. I doubt he'll get the free trade deal making powers. I think we might even have to leave both the EU and EEC for that. It'd be good for us but, from the EU point of view, that'd open up a 'leak' in the UK through which all sorts of goods and services could be re-routed into the EU worldwide.
The only thing I really care about wrt CAP is having to pay for it. I agree that it'd be a big win if Cameron managed to walk away with a rebate and not having to pay for it anymore.
CAP is an interesting one - because pretty much only the French benefit from it to any great extent.
If the French economy were to falter further, and they needed bailing out by the Germans, then it could potentially be up for renegotiation across the EU. (A repatriation of powers to subsidise agriculture, across the EU.)
I wouldn't hold my breath, mind.
There are potentially a lot of common areas of interest between the UK and Germany in reforming the EU, and mostly for the same reason: money.
I was under the impression the Italians, Romanians and Poles all either currently benefit or stand to benefit a lot from the CAP. It's basically a massive transfer system from urban countries to rural countries. Outrageous really. And, this is half of what the EU does, which is always worth reminding any EU supporter. If you think the CAP is economic madness (as pretty much all economically-minded people do), then you already dislike half the EU. The problem is just that Europhiles are usually hooked on the idea, regardless of the practice.
I agree that CAP is economic madness :-)
Re EEA members, it's a little more complex than that. If you read through the text of the Canada-EFTA Free Trade Agreement (http://www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/agr-acc/eu-ue/efta.aspx?lang=eng#a2), you'll see that the Free Trade is in by no means all areas. There is a lot of guff in the agreement about harmonising licensing procedures, and facilitating people from either country working temporarily in both countries.
More importantly, the EFTA countries were only able to enter into that agreement because of the parallel negotiations for the EU-Canada Free Trade Deal which was agreed on 18 October 2013. Without this agreement (which is not yet law), the EFTA-Canada free trade deal would not have been possible.
I was under the impression the Italians, Romanians and Poles all either currently benefit or stand to benefit a lot from the CAP. It's basically a massive transfer system from urban countries to rural countries. Outrageous really. And, this is half of what the EU does, which is always worth reminding any EU supporter. If you think the CAP is economic madness (as pretty much all economically-minded people do), then you already dislike half the EU. The problem is just that Europhiles are usually hooked on the idea, regardless of the practice.
Nearly all developed countries have wasteful, expensive agriculture subsidies, so it's not at all obvious that the UK would stop inflicting them on consumers and taxpayers if it left the EU. I may be out of date on this, but IIUC UKIP has tended to be a little bit vague about whether they want to stop giving money to people in the rural seats they're targetting.
The egotist who would be President for Life is an invention.
For six years now Salmond and his government have been running the day to day affairs of Scotland with quiet efficiency and no ideology other than what is best for Scots.
It feels very different to previous administrations.
This is the argument for Yes to Indepedence
Sorry, must have imagined the independence referendum then. Clearly no ideology or distraction involved there.
*tears of laughter* etc.
More Pandas than Tories in Scotland , LOL
Tory MPs, perhaps. In 2010, there were very similar numbers of Tory voters and SNP voters.
They have no hope in Scotland regardless of whatever straw you clutch at.
I look forward to writing the column the weekend after the referendum when I'll be able to say the same about the SNP.
It doesn't matter what Germany wants. Treaty revisions require unanimous agreement, and the French are stubborn as hell, as we saw with their blocking of US-EU talks. Somehow they never get called a "bad European" like the Brits do, however...
Markit released its monthly PMI for UK Construction this morning.
Continuing thre recovery of the sector, now in place for over six months the PMI for January was 64.6, up from 62.1 in December.
Given that the last three Construction PMIs have all been over 60 it does make one wonder how the ONS reached a conclusion that Construction Output fell by 0.3% in Q4 2013.
As a very rough rule of thumb construction is just under 10% of the economy. The fall of 0.3% found by the ONS accordingly knocked a fairly miniscule 0.03% off growth in the quarter. On the other hand if the sector was growing at 3% in the quarter as per Markit then this should have boosted overall growth by 0.3% making total growth 1%.
It is curious and not the first time that the ONS figures on construction have been seriously out of line with other surveys etc.
It may be that this was simply out of sympathy for David Blanchflower's blood pressure. Goodness knows what he would have found to write about if growth had come in at 1%. His latest article in the Indy linked to last night was just hilarious.
In the ST this weekend David Smith noted in a ps that does not appear on his website:
"consumer spending in the third quarter (for which we have data) was slightly lower as a percentage of GDP than when the coalition took over in 2010. Consumers' real disposible income is rising -in aggregate 3.4% up on pre-crisis levels- but consumer spending is 1.5% lower, The savings ratio, 5.4%, compares with a pre-crisis 0.2%."
So on the most up to date figures we in fact have the complete opposite of a consumer led boom. David Smith or David Blanchflower, who to believe?
@paulwaugh: Business ppl say it privately, but now BP boss publicly warns of currency 'uncertainties' Scots independence cd cause http://t.co/55BkobGqk2
Eck will want to kick his company out of Scotland. Oh, wait...
Now @tom_watson challenges idea Parl not misled. Says Sikh protests re Amritsar were banned cos of £5bn of poss contracts with India
Am I the only one who thinks what a cheek of labour trying to make political capital out of this.watching the bbc4 storyville,maddog,the programme was about gaddafi and it showed how Tony blair got western governments to give maddog another chance and then the oil deals that came from it.
They are very rarely as high as the EU, however. Even the US, which is highly wasteful, is at half the EU level. In addition, the UK has consistently been on the side of fighting for lower CAP spending, so it's pretty clear the government is basically free of the agriculture lobby here. And, of course, that's only talking about the money we'd save from not spending it here. It's certain we'd save on eliminating the transfer to rural states we currently provide.
They are very rarely as high as the EU, however. Even the US, which is highly wasteful, is at half the EU level. In addition, the UK has consistently been on the side of fighting for lower CAP spending, so it's pretty clear the government is basically free of the agriculture lobby here. And, of course, that's only talking about the money we'd save from not spending it here. It's certain we'd save on eliminating the transfer to rural states we currently provide.
The CAP is not just expensive, it is also tremendously negative from an economic perspective, and introduces hideous economic distortions.
I was under the impression the Italians, Romanians and Poles all either currently benefit or stand to benefit a lot from the CAP. It's basically a massive transfer system from urban countries to rural countries. Outrageous really. And, this is half of what the EU does, which is always worth reminding any EU supporter. If you think the CAP is economic madness (as pretty much all economically-minded people do), then you already dislike half the EU. The problem is just that Europhiles are usually hooked on the idea, regardless of the practice.
I agree that CAP is economic madness :-)
Re EEA members, it's a little more complex than that. If you read through the text of the Canada-EFTA Free Trade Agreement (http://www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/agr-acc/eu-ue/efta.aspx?lang=eng#a2), you'll see that the Free Trade is in by no means all areas. There is a lot of guff in the agreement about harmonising licensing procedures, and facilitating people from either country working temporarily in both countries.
More importantly, the EFTA countries were only able to enter into that agreement because of the parallel negotiations for the EU-Canada Free Trade Deal which was agreed on 18 October 2013. Without this agreement (which is not yet law), the EFTA-Canada free trade deal would not have been possible.
I don't believe that is correct. The EFTA/Canada Free Trade Agreement was signed in 2009. Negotiations between the EU and Canada on a Free Trade Agreement didn't even start until October 2009 by which time the EFTA agreement was already signed.
According to the European Commission website the EU has FTAs with 4 countries: Chile, Korea, Mexico and South Africa.
Oil giant BP boss Bob Dudley has warned there are "big uncertainties" for the company over the possibility of Scotland becoming independent.
Mr Dudley told the BBC the "question mark" over which currency Scotland might adopt if there was a 'yes' vote in September's referendum was "a concern".
However, Mr Dudley emphasised the firm was continuing to invest in Scotland.
BP plans to invest £10bn in the North Sea between 2011 and 2016, its highest ever investment in the region.
"We have a lot of people in Scotland. We have a lot of investments in Scotland. My personal view is that Great Britain is great and it ought to stay together," added Mr Dudley.
More bollocks from a foreigner, whilst investing in Norway for jackets for Scottish fields. The dummy is just trying to take the heat of BP profits warning, he is in the crap so gets the EBC to broadcast some lies for him. Just another rich foreigner supporting Westminster, he should stick to wrecking an oil company.
@paulwaugh: Business ppl say it privately, but now BP boss publicly warns of currency 'uncertainties' Scots independence cd cause http://t.co/55BkobGqk2
Eck will want to kick his company out of Scotland. Oh, wait...
The egotist who would be President for Life is an invention.
For six years now Salmond and his government have been running the day to day affairs of Scotland with quiet efficiency and no ideology other than what is best for Scots.
It feels very different to previous administrations.
This is the argument for Yes to Indepedence
Sorry, must have imagined the independence referendum then. Clearly no ideology or distraction involved there.
*tears of laughter* etc.
More Pandas than Tories in Scotland , LOL
Tory MPs, perhaps. In 2010, there were very similar numbers of Tory voters and SNP voters.
They have no hope in Scotland regardless of whatever straw you clutch at.
I look forward to writing the column the weekend after the referendum when I'll be able to say the same about the SNP.
It will be large slices of humble pie you will be needing, foreign pie at that.
They are very rarely as high as the EU, however. Even the US, which is highly wasteful, is at half the EU level. In addition, the UK has consistently been on the side of fighting for lower CAP spending, so it's pretty clear the government is basically free of the agriculture lobby here. And, of course, that's only talking about the money we'd save from not spending it here. It's certain we'd save on eliminating the transfer to rural states we currently provide.
The CAP is not just expensive, it is also tremendously negative from an economic perspective, and introduces hideous economic distortions.
The Economist summed up the differing French and British views of the CAP once - to the French it is the EU's crowning glory - to the British, a protectionist monstrosity fit only for destruction....
Markit released its monthly PMI for UK Construction this morning.
Continuing thre recovery of the sector, now in place for over six months the PMI for January was 64.6, up from 62.1 in December.
Given that the last three Construction PMIs have all been over 60 it does make one wonder how the ONS reached a conclusion that Construction Output fell by 0.3% in Q4 2013.
So on the most up to date figures we in fact have the complete opposite of a consumer led boom. David Smith or David Blanchflower, who to believe?
Well one was financial jouro of the year 2013 and the other predicted 4M unemployed for 2013.
I was under the impression the Italians, Romanians and Poles all either currently benefit or stand to benefit a lot from the CAP. It's basically a massive transfer system from urban countries to rural countries. Outrageous really. And, this is half of what the EU does, which is always worth reminding any EU supporter. If you think the CAP is economic madness (as pretty much all economically-minded people do), then you already dislike half the EU. The problem is just that Europhiles are usually hooked on the idea, regardless of the practice.
Nearly all developed countries have wasteful, expensive agriculture subsidies, so it's not at all obvious that the UK would stop inflicting them on consumers and taxpayers if it left the EU. I may be out of date on this, but IIUC UKIP has tended to be a little bit vague about whether they want to stop giving money to people in the rural seats they're targetting.
You give yourself away with that post EiT. I think you miss the point: it's not what the EU does or doesn't do in this area. It's that the EU makes the decision for "us", in the UK, and we don't identify with that body having the right to do so.
I accept there is a mechanism to elect MEPs to the european parliament that have *some* degree of influence over EU law-making. There are even a few (only a few, mind) EU policy decisions that I like and happen to agree with. However, that's not the point: I want to hold my own government accountable for many of those competencies currently reserved by the EU through national elections. I want to be able to elect them in, or throw them out.
This is about Britain, and British democracy, and at least if UKIP were elected here as the UK government then if people were unhappy with their agricultural policy they'd either (a) begrudingly accept it (b) lobby/pressure them to change it, or (c) chuck 'em out.
I was under the impression the Italians, Romanians and Poles all either currently benefit or stand to benefit a lot from the CAP. It's basically a massive transfer system from urban countries to rural countries. Outrageous really. And, this is half of what the EU does, which is always worth reminding any EU supporter. If you think the CAP is economic madness (as pretty much all economically-minded people do), then you already dislike half the EU. The problem is just that Europhiles are usually hooked on the idea, regardless of the practice.
I agree that CAP is economic madness :-)
Re EEA members, it's a little more complex than that. If you read through the text of the Canada-EFTA Free Trade Agreement (http://www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/agr-acc/eu-ue/efta.aspx?lang=eng#a2), you'll see that the Free Trade is in by no means all areas. There is a lot of guff in the agreement about harmonising licensing procedures, and facilitating people from either country working temporarily in both countries.
More importantly, the EFTA countries were only able to enter into that agreement because of the parallel negotiations for the EU-Canada Free Trade Deal which was agreed on 18 October 2013. Without this agreement (which is not yet law), the EFTA-Canada free trade deal would not have been possible.
I don't believe that is correct. The EFTA/Canada Free Trade Agreement was signed in 2009. Negotiations between the EU and Canada on a Free Trade Agreement didn't even start until October 2009 by which time the EFTA agreement was already signed.
According to the European Commission website the EU has FTAs with 4 countries: Chile, Korea, Mexico and South Africa.
Clearly membership of EFTA is better for free trade than membership of the EU.
The EFTA free trade area statistics are very interesting. ALthough IIRC, the EU has free trade agreements with many of them too - such as Albania, Bosnia, Tuekey, the Ukraine, etc. Presumably many of the agreements will be parallel ones to EU ones. I would be interested to see places where there are EFTA FTAs and no corresponding EU ones.
Re Canada and the EU, I read that "negotiations began in early 2007". Where is your late 2009 number from?
How does the EU deal with the re-export of goods imported into Norway from - say - Canada?
Markit released its monthly PMI for UK Construction this morning.
Continuing thre recovery of the sector, now in place for over six months the PMI for January was 64.6, up from 62.1 in December.
Given that the last three Construction PMIs have all been over 60 it does make one wonder how the ONS reached a conclusion that Construction Output fell by 0.3% in Q4 2013.
So on the most up to date figures we in fact have the complete opposite of a consumer led boom. David Smith or David Blanchflower, who to believe?
Well one was financial jouro of the year 2013 and the other predicted 4M unemployed for 2013.
They are very rarely as high as the EU, however. Even the US, which is highly wasteful, is at half the EU level. In addition, the UK has consistently been on the side of fighting for lower CAP spending, so it's pretty clear the government is basically free of the agriculture lobby here. And, of course, that's only talking about the money we'd save from not spending it here. It's certain we'd save on eliminating the transfer to rural states we currently provide.
I agree they'd likely be lower, but they'd still be big. Wanting the payments to be lower (since as you say it's a net minus) and more targeted to large-scale commercial farming (which is the other UK angle on this, while other countries want to support smaller farmers) doesn't remotely show the UK is free of the agriculture lobby. If the UK was free of the agriculture lobby then doing the sensible thing and abolishing the subsidies would be a plausible outcome without the CAP, but we all know that's not what would happen.
I don't believe that is correct. The EFTA/Canada Free Trade Agreement was signed in 2009. Negotiations between the EU and Canada on a Free Trade Agreement didn't even start until October 2009 by which time the EFTA agreement was already signed.
According to the European Commission website the EU has FTAs with 4 countries: Chile, Korea, Mexico and South Africa.
Albania - yes Bosnia and Herzegovina - yes Canada - agreed, not signed Central American States (Costa Rica and Panama) - yes Chile - yes Colombia - yes Egypt - yes Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) -?? Hong Kong, China - there is an agreement, but it falls short of a FTA Israel - yes Jordan - yes Korea, Republic of - provisional Lebanon - yes Macedonia - yes Mexico - yes Montenegro - yes Morocco - yes Palestinian Authority - yes Peru - yes Serbia - yes Singapore - agreed, not signed Southern African Customs Union (SACU) - yes with South Africa, not sure if it's the same thing Tunisia - yes Turkey - yes Ukraine - ?? a moving target
So, actually, the situation is incredibly similar between EFTA and the EU
The subsidies would likely be phased out over a longer time period. New Zealand has shown pretty clearly how this can be done without damage to the sector, and I'm sure free trade would have its way here. We might molly coddle certain industries via a light regulatory touch, but what other industry do we outright subsidize here? If it's a question of money for wealthy farmers or more spending on the NHS, it's pretty clear which the government would direct the money towards.
@paulwaugh: Business ppl say it privately, but now BP boss publicly warns of currency 'uncertainties' Scots independence cd cause http://t.co/55BkobGqk2
Eck will want to kick his company out of Scotland. Oh, wait...
Turnip head adds his value, Oh wait ......
Malcolm, the day you stop being rude about those who hold different views to your own will be the day I believe you think you are actually going to win...
.....So do carry on with the windy rhetoric, half baked ad-Homs and bumptious bluster....us Unionists find it very reassuring.....
@paulwaugh: Business ppl say it privately, but now BP boss publicly warns of currency 'uncertainties' Scots independence cd cause http://t.co/55BkobGqk2
Eck will want to kick his company out of Scotland. Oh, wait...
Turnip head adds his value, Oh wait ......
MalcomG, do you promise to be posting here in the days following the referendum, regardless of the result?
The EFTA free trade area statistics are very interesting. ALthough IIRC, the EU has free trade agreements with many of them too - such as Albania, Bosnia, Tuekey, the Ukraine, etc. Presumably many of the agreements will be parallel ones to EU ones. I would be interested to see places where there are EFTA FTAs and no corresponding EU ones.
Re Canada and the EU, I read that "negotiations began in early 2007". Where is your late 2009 number from?
How does the EU deal with the re-export of goods imported into Norway from - say - Canada?
From the European Commission page I linked to :
"At the June 2007 EU-Canada Summit, leaders agreed to carry out a joint scoping study to lay the foundation for a future trade agreement. The conclusions of this study, which was presented at the October 2008 EU-Canada Summit, persuaded the leaders to agree to begin negotiations on a Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement. Negotiations began in October 2009 and have both an ambitious timescale, both sides aim to complete negotiations within two years, and an ambitious scope."
Markit released its monthly PMI for UK Construction this morning.
Continuing thre recovery of the sector, now in place for over six months the PMI for January was 64.6, up from 62.1 in December.
Given that the last three Construction PMIs have all been over 60 it does make one wonder how the ONS reached a conclusion that Construction Output fell by 0.3% in Q4 2013.
So on the most up to date figures we in fact have the complete opposite of a consumer led boom. David Smith or David Blanchflower, who to believe?
Well one was financial jouro of the year 2013 and the other predicted 4M unemployed for 2013.
A more general point coming out of the farm subsidy thing, turning back towards the thread topic: It's possible to persuade yourself that you'd be better off seceding from any given political entity, by assuming that the independent entity would adopt policies that match your own preferences.
This stuff is politically effective because confirmation bias persuades us that people agree with us even when they don't, and also because it's much easier to make the case for policies that aren't actually going to happen, because it's not in anyone's interests to spend money and political capital pointing out the holes and contradictions, and there's no cost to anybody to vaguely pretending to agree with you.
Salmond really needs to get people talking and exercising their imagination about all the things Scotland would be doing if it was independent. But the tricky part is that this can't be a single national conversation, because people will want different things. Maybe he's already on top of this, but I think he needs a whole bunch of little micro-campaigns running in social media, targeted at different segments with different views of their ideal independent country. The internet is potentially very helpful here, because it's easy to end up in a bubble of self-confirmation, so you don't have to engage too much with people whose ideal country would be different to yours.
@paulwaugh: Business ppl say it privately, but now BP boss publicly warns of currency 'uncertainties' Scots independence cd cause http://t.co/55BkobGqk2
Eck will want to kick his company out of Scotland. Oh, wait...
Turnip head adds his value, Oh wait ......
MalcomG, do you promise to be posting here in the days following the referendum, regardless of the result?
I suspect the malcolmg will be on here about as much stuart_truth...
Actually, deluded as he is, I genuinely think malcolmg believes everything he types. If you want to know how he is likely to react post disappointment, can I recommend the excellent book When Prophecy Fails.
The EFTA free trade area statistics are very interesting. ALthough IIRC, the EU has free trade agreements with many of them too - such as Albania, Bosnia, Tuekey, the Ukraine, etc. Presumably many of the agreements will be parallel ones to EU ones. I would be interested to see places where there are EFTA FTAs and no corresponding EU ones.
Re Canada and the EU, I read that "negotiations began in early 2007". Where is your late 2009 number from?
How does the EU deal with the re-export of goods imported into Norway from - say - Canada?
From the European Commission page I linked to :
"At the June 2007 EU-Canada Summit, leaders agreed to carry out a joint scoping study to lay the foundation for a future trade agreement. The conclusions of this study, which was presented at the October 2008 EU-Canada Summit, persuaded the leaders to agree to begin negotiations on a Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement. Negotiations began in October 2009 and have both an ambitious timescale, both sides aim to complete negotiations within two years, and an ambitious scope."
So, in fact, we're both right. A study began in 2007, but official negotiations only began in 2009.
Foreigners with investments in Scotland not allowed to voice an opinion,presumably the SNP don't want their investments either.
Good business strategy to be taking political sides in a foreign country, pontificating on something that is none of his business. Sure it will help his product sales and get those poor profit numbers back on track. People will be flocking to BP garages.
@paulwaugh: Business ppl say it privately, but now BP boss publicly warns of currency 'uncertainties' Scots independence cd cause http://t.co/55BkobGqk2
Eck will want to kick his company out of Scotland. Oh, wait...
Turnip head adds his value, Oh wait ......
MalcomG, do you promise to be posting here in the days following the referendum, regardless of the result?
I will certainly be here , and if a miracle does happen and it is NO I will be able to take it on the chin.
Comments
I'm not sure how much can be drawn from it: I think another poll found almost identical levels of support for a SW regional assembly as for a Cornish one (72% to 70%). My inclination would be that the distance/isolation from a London-based Labour government that poorly understood/appreciated fishing/farming and cared even less had much to do with it.
There is clearly a passionate base level of support for Cornish regionalism/nationalism (take your pick) in the county. However, looking at election results and general traction since, i'd be surprised if it's more than 10-20%. Much of it could probably be addressed with greater powers to the county council.
Interesting question for unionists: if you want to nip nationalism in the bud, what do you do? Ignore all demands for more devolution and nationalism/regionalism, in the hope it'll remain a minority interest and wither away? Or do you feed the beast, hoping that it satisfies those seeking more automony, but risking that it only feeds the appetite for more and more devolution?
English devolution is a very minor interest today. That might not be the case if Scottish independence blows the whole existing UK constitutional settlement out the water.
http://economia.elpais.com/economia/2014/02/04/empleo/1391501449_795020.html
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11196601
The intelligence complex is really completely unchecked by the rules of law isn't it? They do what the fuck they want and then put two fingers up to any scrutiny...
That article is fascinating Mick. For me it shows that at some key historical points in the last 40-odd years, Labour's Scottish MPs have played a crucial role.
For example, they made Wilson Prime Minister instead of his tory counterpart in 1964.
They tipped the balance twice for labour in 1974.
They helped save labour from annihilation in 1983 (along with Wales).
My recollection is that the Bennite activists enjoyed the struggle anyway, and the sense that it wouldn't happen almost reinforced that - saying "We don't care, we are so strong that we defy the reality". They'd have found pushing for a five quid minimum wage a bit banal.
If that sounds patronising, I admit that when a teenager I was an active supporter of the Danish Communist Party, which had around 2% of the vote and has since disappeared - I collected more signatures for them than their entire largest branch. Most of us have our Don Quixote periods, and to be honest it was good fun. But they're dangerous for parties seeking to win.
Realistically however, the chances of David Cameron getting massive British opt outs are probably quite remote – more likely if it happens he’ll get some more modest rule changes and guarantees, but no major changes in which areas the EU has powers. In that scenario then the vote would be much closer – 39% say they would vote to stay, 38% would vote to leave.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/category/europe
So the British public are split on the issue, and this is supposed to be something politically toxic?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2551333/Nurture-grassroots-pay-heavy-price-polls-Tory-party-barely-presence-seats-hopes-win-says-SIMON-HEFFER.html
I was in Spain the week before last, and (for the first time in the last three years), the bars and restaraunts of Madrid were busy. I suspect that's not true in the Balaerics and in the South, but the centre and the North are distinctly improving.
The current account deficit has been eliminated. The private sector has delevered. Employment legislation has been drastically liberalised. Inward investment is rising fast. The banks have been restructured.
Now, I know I'm talking my own book, but I suspect Spain and Ireland will be the fastest growing European economies (including the UK) over the next five years. I would be very surprised in Spain's economy grew less than 15% in that time, and I suspect Ireland will be more like 20%. That will take up a lot of the employment slack.
He is a coward which is a very Tory trait.
1974 is nothing given the entire sweep of the historical picture. Yes, as I keep reiterating, it would be a huge cultural change but the numbers are the numbers and labour self-evidently do not rely on them for almost all westminster elections. The labour leadership have to push the line that they cannot possibly manage without scotland as it justifies their remote control of SLAB while at the same time preventing much in the way of self-reflection on how SLAB might do were they not shackled to westminster diktat. It's about control.
Not that the labour leadership would in any way want to lose what was a heartland but they still fight westminster elections in the exact same manner as the tories do. Concentrating on the marginals.
On a mirror-image, they bolstered Blair's and Brown's majority between 2005 and 2010, without which Labour's difficult years in office would have been even more traumatic.
And even in those two short examples there are two Scottish Labour MPs mentioned. There were many more whose names feature prominently in Labour's history over the last half-century. Did Labour need them? At times, yes, but only at time. However, their significance goes far beyond the votes they could have changed.
Lord Sugar @Lord_Sugar 3m
Bob Crow's shameful Tube strike is bringing misery to millions of Londoners. He was pictured one the beach in Rio is the papers last week
Spain's unemployment rate since 1987:
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/spain/unemployment-rate
And Portugal's:
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/portugal/unemployment-rate
And Italy's:
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/italy/unemployment-rate
And Greece's since 1998:
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/greece/unemployment-rate
I wouldn't be surprised if they grew very quickly too. But that's mainly because their crash has been so bad. But will they ever get back to where they would of been from a 2000-2005 trend.
The EU issue is about control. Its about who decides what, and where.
People aren;t really annoyed about foreign criminals. What annoys voters is the government's impotence in the face of them - and the ridiculous gyrations and meally mouthed excuses it employs to try to get around that impotence.
Unionists do not like to see the truth in print , it is alien to them.
Will the boom-and-bust have resulted in Spain having a GDP below the level it might have been? Yes, almost certainly (although counterfactuals are fraught with difficulties).
But I'm in the business of finding the best places to put my clients (and my) money - and the "direction of travel" and the low valuations make peripheral Europe the most exciting place in the world right now.
Of course, trouble is, these couldn't be reversed once lifted and it might not be enough to satisfy the public. It'll still be more popular than just coming back with loosened worker protections.
http://economia.elpais.com/economia/2014/02/04/empleo/1391501449_795020.html
Por comunidades, el paro solo bajó en enero sólo en Baleares (0,53%), mientras que subió en el resto de autonomías, especialmente en Extremadura, con un aumento del 5,23%, y en el País Vasco, con un 4,6%.
Mr Dudley told the BBC the "question mark" over which currency Scotland might adopt if there was a 'yes' vote in September's referendum was "a concern".
However, Mr Dudley emphasised the firm was continuing to invest in Scotland.
BP plans to invest £10bn in the North Sea between 2011 and 2016, its highest ever investment in the region.
"We have a lot of people in Scotland. We have a lot of investments in Scotland. My personal view is that Great Britain is great and it ought to stay together," added Mr Dudley.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-26028481
http://www.sepe.es/contenido/estadisticas/datos_avance/pdf/empleo/parosexedasect.pdf
Bloomberg is quoting the same report
Cameron won;t get anything now. The EU knows that they only have to say no and sit tight for a year.
When Cam comes back empty handed he will be eaten alive by a combination of UKIP and his own back benchers.
Cue labour win, and five more years of integration.
The EU (and the EEC before it) is based around "The Common External Tariff", and the whole purpose of the Maastricht 1992 agreement was to allow goods and services to move around the EU without any impediment.
If we were to have our own trade deal with (say) Indonesia, and were to sign a free trade arrangement with them, then goods would be able to flow from Jakarta to the UK, where they would be inside the European FTA.
The only thing I really care about wrt CAP is having to pay for it. I agree that it'd be a big win if Cameron managed to walk away with a rebate and not having to pay for it anymore.
If the French economy were to falter further, and they needed bailing out by the Germans, then it could potentially be up for renegotiation across the EU. (A repatriation of powers to subsidise agriculture, across the EU.)
I wouldn't hold my breath, mind.
EEA members are allowed to sign their own free trade deals.
@rcs1000
I was under the impression the Italians, Romanians and Poles all either currently benefit or stand to benefit a lot from the CAP. It's basically a massive transfer system from urban countries to rural countries. Outrageous really. And, this is half of what the EU does, which is always worth reminding any EU supporter. If you think the CAP is economic madness (as pretty much all economically-minded people do), then you already dislike half the EU. The problem is just that Europhiles are usually hooked on the idea, regardless of the practice.
Is it permitted to print a cartoon of "wings over Somerset" under the Nat holy scriptures ?
Re EEA members, it's a little more complex than that. If you read through the text of the Canada-EFTA Free Trade Agreement (http://www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/agr-acc/eu-ue/efta.aspx?lang=eng#a2), you'll see that the Free Trade is in by no means all areas. There is a lot of guff in the agreement about harmonising licensing procedures, and facilitating people from either country working temporarily in both countries.
More importantly, the EFTA countries were only able to enter into that agreement because of the parallel negotiations for the EU-Canada Free Trade Deal which was agreed on 18 October 2013. Without this agreement (which is not yet law), the EFTA-Canada free trade deal would not have been possible.
Norway is currently negotiating one with China I believe, despite the lack of any China-EU agreements.
@david_herdson
It doesn't matter what Germany wants. Treaty revisions require unanimous agreement, and the French are stubborn as hell, as we saw with their blocking of US-EU talks. Somehow they never get called a "bad European" like the Brits do, however...
As a very rough rule of thumb construction is just under 10% of the economy. The fall of 0.3% found by the ONS accordingly knocked a fairly miniscule 0.03% off growth in the quarter. On the other hand if the sector was growing at 3% in the quarter as per Markit then this should have boosted overall growth by 0.3% making total growth 1%.
It is curious and not the first time that the ONS figures on construction have been seriously out of line with other surveys etc.
It may be that this was simply out of sympathy for David Blanchflower's blood pressure. Goodness knows what he would have found to write about if growth had come in at 1%. His latest article in the Indy linked to last night was just hilarious.
In the ST this weekend David Smith noted in a ps that does not appear on his website:
"consumer spending in the third quarter (for which we have data) was slightly lower as a percentage of GDP than when the coalition took over in 2010. Consumers' real disposible income is rising -in aggregate 3.4% up on pre-crisis levels- but consumer spending is 1.5% lower, The savings ratio, 5.4%, compares with a pre-crisis 0.2%."
So on the most up to date figures we in fact have the complete opposite of a consumer led boom. David Smith or David Blanchflower, who to believe?
@paulwaugh: Business ppl say it privately, but now BP boss publicly warns of currency 'uncertainties' Scots independence cd cause http://t.co/55BkobGqk2
Eck will want to kick his company out of Scotland. Oh, wait...
Paul Waugh @paulwaugh
Now @tom_watson challenges idea Parl not misled. Says Sikh protests re Amritsar were banned cos of £5bn of poss contracts with India
Am I the only one who thinks what a cheek of labour trying to make political capital out of this.watching the bbc4 storyville,maddog,the programme was about gaddafi and it showed how Tony blair got western governments to give maddog another chance and then the oil deals that came from it.
They are very rarely as high as the EU, however. Even the US, which is highly wasteful, is at half the EU level. In addition, the UK has consistently been on the side of fighting for lower CAP spending, so it's pretty clear the government is basically free of the agriculture lobby here. And, of course, that's only talking about the money we'd save from not spending it here. It's certain we'd save on eliminating the transfer to rural states we currently provide.
Have emailed you
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2014/02/russia-syria-will-attend-next-geneva-talks-2014248113247441.html
According to the European Commission website the EU has FTAs with 4 countries: Chile, Korea, Mexico and South Africa.
http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/international/facilitating-trade/free-trade/
EFTA by contrast has FTAs with 36 countries outside the EU.
http://www.efta.int/free-trade/free-trade-agreements
Clearly membership of EFTA is better for free trade than membership of the EU.
I accept there is a mechanism to elect MEPs to the european parliament that have *some* degree of influence over EU law-making. There are even a few (only a few, mind) EU policy decisions that I like and happen to agree with. However, that's not the point: I want to hold my own government accountable for many of those competencies currently reserved by the EU through national elections. I want to be able to elect them in, or throw them out.
This is about Britain, and British democracy, and at least if UKIP were elected here as the UK government then if people were unhappy with their agricultural policy they'd either (a) begrudingly accept it (b) lobby/pressure them to change it, or (c) chuck 'em out.
Re Canada and the EU, I read that "negotiations began in early 2007". Where is your late 2009 number from?
How does the EU deal with the re-export of goods imported into Norway from - say - Canada?
http://order-order.com/2012/10/18/david-blanchflowers-terrible-tips/
Things to note,
1) It is weighted to Holyrood 2011 past vote
2) They ask the referendum question
3) The Lib Dems go down from an unweighed 187 to a weighted 75
4) The weightings for the SNP go from 376 to a weighted 433
http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/9e5qx2f7sa/YG-Archive-140127-Scotland.pdf
Albania - yes
Bosnia and Herzegovina - yes
Canada - agreed, not signed
Central American States (Costa Rica and Panama) - yes
Chile - yes
Colombia - yes
Egypt - yes
Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) -??
Hong Kong, China - there is an agreement, but it falls short of a FTA
Israel - yes
Jordan - yes
Korea, Republic of - provisional
Lebanon - yes
Macedonia - yes
Mexico - yes
Montenegro - yes
Morocco - yes
Palestinian Authority - yes
Peru - yes
Serbia - yes
Singapore - agreed, not signed
Southern African Customs Union (SACU) - yes with South Africa, not sure if it's the same thing
Tunisia - yes
Turkey - yes
Ukraine - ?? a moving target
So, actually, the situation is incredibly similar between EFTA and the EU
'More bollocks from a foreigner'
Foreigners with investments in Scotland not allowed to voice an opinion,presumably the SNP don't want their investments either.
No leads by 8% among males and among females the no lead is 30%
The subsidies would likely be phased out over a longer time period. New Zealand has shown pretty clearly how this can be done without damage to the sector, and I'm sure free trade would have its way here. We might molly coddle certain industries via a light regulatory touch, but what other industry do we outright subsidize here? If it's a question of money for wealthy farmers or more spending on the NHS, it's pretty clear which the government would direct the money towards.
.....So do carry on with the windy rhetoric, half baked ad-Homs and bumptious bluster....us Unionists find it very reassuring.....
"At the June 2007 EU-Canada Summit, leaders agreed to carry out a joint scoping study to lay the foundation for a future trade agreement. The conclusions of this study, which was presented at the October 2008 EU-Canada Summit, persuaded the leaders to agree to begin negotiations on a Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement. Negotiations began in October 2009 and have both an ambitious timescale, both sides aim to complete negotiations within two years, and an ambitious scope."
This stuff is politically effective because confirmation bias persuades us that people agree with us even when they don't, and also because it's much easier to make the case for policies that aren't actually going to happen, because it's not in anyone's interests to spend money and political capital pointing out the holes and contradictions, and there's no cost to anybody to vaguely pretending to agree with you.
Salmond really needs to get people talking and exercising their imagination about all the things Scotland would be doing if it was independent. But the tricky part is that this can't be a single national conversation, because people will want different things. Maybe he's already on top of this, but I think he needs a whole bunch of little micro-campaigns running in social media, targeted at different segments with different views of their ideal independent country. The internet is potentially very helpful here, because it's easy to end up in a bubble of self-confirmation, so you don't have to engage too much with people whose ideal country would be different to yours.
Actually, deluded as he is, I genuinely think malcolmg believes everything he types. If you want to know how he is likely to react post disappointment, can I recommend the excellent book When Prophecy Fails.
Thank you very much.
Leaked Emails Reveal "UKIP Kidnapper" is Tory Member http://guyfawk.es/1euCZgo via @guidofawkes