Use of "Fatcha" is another Tory sneer at the lower orders, as is 'Elf and Safety, and "innit". The plebs cannot even pronounce words properly. Aren't they ridiculous?
Everyone does it. Not just those on the left. The UK is the most class ridden, class conscious, class obsessed country on earth.
You've clearly never been to India...
A fair point. I may have been slightly OTT!! Put it this way, we are very class obsessed in this country.
It's notable that both Thatcher and Major felt they needed to change the way they spoke in order to get on.
In the Snob/Class League India is way out in front..The States has its own style of snobbery, particularly in the Southern States, far worse than anything in the UK.
Use of "Fatcha" is another Tory sneer at the lower orders, as is 'Elf and Safety, and "innit". The plebs cannot even pronounce words properly. Aren't they ridiculous?
Everyone does it. Not just those on the left. The UK is the most class ridden, class conscious, class obsessed country on earth.
You've clearly never been to India...
A fair point. I may have been slightly OTT!! Put it this way, we are very class obsessed in this country.
It's notable that both Thatcher and Major felt they needed to change the way they spoke in order to get on.
Mr. Divvie, calling Englishmen (and Welsh/Northern Irish) 'Britvolk' is not necessarily in keeping with Salmond's prediction that, post-independence, Scotland and England will be 'best pals'.
Independence is a matter for Scots. The British pound, however, is not something you can claim as of right and nor is it a matter only for Scots.
MD, if you read it you will see it was in reply to Turnip head's puerile post. Aimed squarely and fairly and appropriate.
The seventies were the decade when white enameled cast iron coal scuttles were stripped out and replaced with plastic bathroom suites in tropical avocado.
Oh, I agree about the front door - it's just the interior that puzzled me a little, but maybe she'd been in one or two before on the same estate.
Actually quite a few council houses were sold in Scotland too - certainly in the decent areas - as is instantly evident from your 'front door metric'. I wonder if you are perhaps thinkng of the universality of unpainted harling as a weather shield [I think the English call it rendering or pebbledashing]. It's not that common to paint harled houses, whether privately or publicly owned, any more than it would be to paint brick terrace houses (but it does happen, of course).
It was easy to spot the council houses that were sold under right to buy. The first thing the owners did was to spend on home improvements, even if this was as minor as painting the front door. Councils were notorious for failing to individualise houses, or to update them. When I was last in Scotland it was quite noticeable how uniform the council estates looked, as I understand that there was much fewer sales. They reminded me of England in the Seventies in their grim, grey monotony.
If the article is to be believed then bringing back grammar schools to give bright working class kids a chance would be a good start, but none of the political classes want to do that. I have heard all the arguments against, including OGH, and frankly they are rubbish.
Maybe the Tories would have done better with David Davies in charge, is that what the post is implying?
As for the Old Etonian bit, it's inverted snobbery and a very poor trait.
Have you seen this FT article which demolishes the case for grammar schools about as comprehensively as you could imagine?
"You can see that poor children do dramatically worse in selective areas.
There is an narrower idea out there in the ether that grammar schools are better for propelling poor children to the very top of the tree. But, again, that is not true. Poor children are less likely to score very highly at GCSE in grammar areas than the rest."
If you read the authoritative report on the effects of Grammar schools by the Sutton Trust you will see that Grammar schools raise the results of those who attend them whilst having no impact - and certainly not reducing the results of the other schools in the same catchment.
Overall Grammar schools improve education and mobility. But of course you would rather that overall results dropped just as long as everything was on a level playing field.
@David Herson "On topic, it's only those on the left who obsess about class and background."
That is compete rubbish. Ask John Prescott. What was it Nicholas Soames used to taunt him about?
That only worked because Prescott himself had a sack of potatoes on his shoulder, never mind a chip. I wouldn't say that was a class-obsessed comment as much as working on the weak spot in an opponent's armour.
Turnip head finds more unionist drivel. How many hours does Superman work representing 30,000 companies. If he works 365 days a year and 24 hours a day he can spend less than 17.5 minutes per company. Another patsy pushing self interest.
That's a pretty strange response. On the same logic we should just ignore what Alex Salmond says, since he can only spend 30 seconds per SNP voter.
Fashions change. I remember when Art Deco was considered naf, and only worthy of a skip. Modern furniture styles would fit well into the modernist early sixties.
Genuine Avocado bathroom suites will be in high demand in Islington in 10-15 years!
The seventies were the decade when white enameled cast iron coal scuttles were stripped out and replaced with plastic bathroom suites in tropical avocado.
Oh, I agree about the front door - it's just the interior that puzzled me a little, but maybe she'd been in one or two before on the same estate.
Actually quite a few council houses were sold in Scotland too - certainly in the decent areas - as is instantly evident from your 'front door metric'. I wonder if you are perhaps thinkng of the universality of unpainted harling as a weather shield [I think the English call it rendering or pebbledashing]. It's not that common to paint harled houses, whether privately or publicly owned, any more than it would be to paint brick terrace houses (but it does happen, of course).
It was easy to spot the council houses that were sold under right to buy. The first thing the owners did was to spend on home improvements, even if this was as minor as painting the front door. Councils were notorious for failing to individualise houses, or to update them. When I was last in Scotland it was quite noticeable how uniform the council estates looked, as I understand that there was much fewer sales. They reminded me of England in the Seventies in their grim, grey monotony.
Interesting to see your perceptions. I entirely agree that there is significant Tory support - it is perhaps distorted by FPTP and the Scottish Parliament gives a fairer view. The corollary is that if this social conservatism is in part centrist in sentiment then the SNP are also picking up on it (e.g. the notion that Britishness involves the post-war Attleean social consensus rather than, or as much as, the Churchillian rhetoric).
One might think that the recent Scottsh Pmt vote for same-sex marriage seems to show a distribution of social conservatism across parties. But I suppose that is more to do with religious conservatism anyway and one could as well see a Free Kirk SNP activist as a Labour RC parishioner or Episcopalian Tory campaigning against it - or some completely different permutation thereof. It was certainly not much of a party issue if at all, except perhaps on some details (not sure about that).
Back to housing, I had forgotten that more Scots used to live in council houses - I believe - than the UK average, so yes of course you are quite right in your perceptions. The actual percentage sold off is another matter, and I'm just wondering, does anybody know of a simple answer to the percentage of council housing sold off in Scotland vs England, Wales, etc? (ignoring 'sales' and transfers to such things as social housing associations and the Glasgow Council agency)?
Any New suite or kitchen would be recogniseable, and Mrs T was always a housewife as well, even when she was PM.
As well as front doors: new windows, extensions and garden improvements are signs that a council house is no longer in public hands. People take much better care of things that they own, than things that they rent. It is not just the uniform carling that made me see Scotland as resembling the England of my youth in the Seventies.
Not that the Seventies were all bad, the atomisation of lives in a more materialistic culture has losses as well as gains, and a lot of England has lost the social solidarity evident in parts of Scotland. It does show how far our two countries have seemed to diverge socially over the decades. Even under Mrs T and John Major the Tories had significant support in Scotland, it was from the mid 90's onwards that this evaporated, with the Conservative party becoming less and less interested in social conservatism and kitchen table politics. UKIP have picked up on this social conservatism, as have the Labour party. The "Cost of Living Crisis" is just inflation under another name, a core concern abround the kitchen table, and one that was a core concern of Mrs T and seventies Conservatives. The Tories are more concerned with dinner party conversations than kitchen table ones nowadays. All about Europe, and not about the price of bread.
The one thing we, as a business, cannot teach new graduates is experience and the UK is suffering from leaders across many fields (including politicians) who lack vital experience to do their job.
At one time many Chief Constables use to be ex-military men who had often seen action but had the experience of command. leadership and discernment.( as well as events). Today we have Chief Constables who have only the experience of the Police Force and their lack of experience shows not only in poor leadership but also in partisanship and political bias or influence.
Our governments (including devolved assemblies) set up committees to recommend on certain matters and fill those committees with politicians, public sector interested parties and leading academics. Again very few of those academics have any real experience outside of the hot-house of academia and so do not know what action is really required.
To put Cable in charge of Business is laughable as his very short terms as an economist with Shell was in a rarified atmosphere way short of reality.
Perhaps for an interim period we need to have a certain number of years of real experience in business or commerce etc before letting anyone loose on matters of importance - a move to compulsory apprenticeships?
Oh, dear. Another healthy dose of reality for Saint Alex the rest of the Kool Aid cult.
Alex Salmond's claim that British business leaders want Scotland to keep the pound was categorically rejected by an executive who represents more than 30,000 UK companies on Friday.
Turnip head finds more unionist drivel. How many hours does Superman work representing 30,000 companies. If he works 365 days a year and 24 hours a day he can spend less than 17.5 minutes per company. Another patsy pushing self interest.
Malcolmg - as one of the most bullish posters here re: the indyref, what do you see the chances of a YES victory? I asked yesterday but didn't see a reply (might easily have missed it if it was later)
Just on this and once again to annoy my fellow travellers in UKIP (sorry guys but you know how contrary I can be), this thread header also shows why Farage is not the best choice to lead UKIP. Think how much more effective the attacks on the establishment would be if Paul Nuttall (although I know he doesn't want it) or some other non Fee Paying School graduate were in charge of the party.
For all his many talents and assets to the party, Farage cannot really make an effective attack on the 'establishment' in British politics whist his background is so similar to theirs.
Inevitably our own experiences make us all feel we have expertise, but it seems to me that 11 is the wrong age for selection. No-one that I know opposes selection at 18 for university, but the question is where in this band of 11-18 should selection occur? Personally I think that public schools have it about right at 14 with their Common Entrance exam.
As I mentioned, one of my old teachers reckoned the grammars should start with small yeargroups and widen them up as the years go by, all the way up to sixth form, with talent "spotted" at the local secondaries. Not sure the secondaries would have been keen on that! But if you were going to have a selective system, that would make far more sense than picking everyone at 11 (which in practice means selecting them aged 10).
Funnily enough, the Germans seem to reverse around the way we do it. Selective education at secondary level (with Gymnasium very similar to a British grammar) but then uniformitarianism at the university level (though they are moving now towards having "elite" universities again, and I presume that will come with greater selectivity).
It's interesting that Germany with its highly successful industrial economy has, iirc, no universities in the world's top-rated 50.
That comment does not match the analysis in the FT article.
If Grammar schools benefited the poor so much, why is it that the only calls for their return come from the parties canvassing support from the right?
Gove's reforms are more subtle than a return to the 1950's grammar and Sec Moderns. By creating a variety of schools that select in a variety of ways (religion and musical accomplishment are good proxies for middle class values that correlate with academic success) he is re-creating Grammar schools by the back door. He also has the intention of shattering the Local authority control over who goes to which school, whether geographic or by exam. That is why the teaching unions hate him so much.
If the article is to be believed then bringing back grammar schools to give bright working class kids a chance would be a good start, but none of the political classes want to do that. I have heard all the arguments against, including OGH, and frankly they are rubbish.
Maybe the Tories would have done better with David Davies in charge, is that what the post is implying?
As for the Old Etonian bit, it's inverted snobbery and a very poor trait.
Have you seen this FT article which demolishes the case for grammar schools about as comprehensively as you could imagine?
"You can see that poor children do dramatically worse in selective areas.
There is an narrower idea out there in the ether that grammar schools are better for propelling poor children to the very top of the tree. But, again, that is not true. Poor children are less likely to score very highly at GCSE in grammar areas than the rest."
If you read the authoritative report on the effects of Grammar schools by the Sutton Trust you will see that Grammar schools raise the results of those who attend them whilst having no impact - and certainly not reducing the results of the other schools in the same catchment.
Overall Grammar schools improve education and mobility. But of course you would rather that overall results dropped just as long as everything was on a level playing field.
Some very interesting points, and I freely admit I'm no expert on education. I'd only vaguely heard of "coaching for the 11-plus", but is that what annoys so many people?
The "it's not fair" attitude. Aspirational parents nowadays would take positive steps to take advantage of the system - therefore it shouldn't be allowed.
I suppose it's the same with public schools like Eton but worse; there, money makes the unfairness.
A child who did not pass the 11+ is not going to a comprehensive. They are going to a secondary modern. A comprehensive school includes the brightest as well as the bottom end.
Actually this may not be true - many of the surviving grammar schools recruit from quite far afield. So it is quite possible for the choice to be between a local comp and a grammar, rather than a "secondary modern" and a grammar. (The latter description is more adequate if the non-grammar school is in the same borough as the grammar.)
Of course this does mean that many, theoretically "comprehensive", schools actually have some of the brightest students (or those whose parents have worked hardest to tutor them through the selection tests) "creamed off". I read a very thorough study of this last year, which alas I can't track down offhand, which suggested about 90% of schools in England are affected by academic selection to some extent (i.e. either the school is selective, or the school is competing forstudents with other schools which are selective). The effect may not be very strong: for many schools it may be only 1%-2% of students they are "losing" in this manner. For a secondary modern in a borough full of selective schools, that might rise above 20%.
The 90% figure is believable when you bear in mind that some non-grammar schools use academic selection for students outside a certain catchment area, and grammar schools are a magnet for children from surprisingly far away. (If you know how to recognise the school uniforms, there are quite a few schoolkids in Tower Hamlets who attend grammar school in Southend-on-Sea...) When you throw in the number of kids taking full scholarship exams for private schools, academic selection is clearly not dead. The commentariat tend to write as if it were.
MBE (welcome back by the way)
Various reports by the Sutton Trust are probably the best way to go with this. however, unsurprisingly, their results are not always straight forward. For example the report on social selection they commissioned from University of Durham in 2008 found that 83 of the top 100 most socially selective schools in England were not Grammars. Clearly there is some other factor than just the entrance exam in play which is resulting in social selectivity amongst non Grammar schools.
Just on this and once again to annoy my fellow travellers in UKIP (sorry guys but you know how contrary I can be), this thread header also shows why Farage is not the best choice to lead UKIP. Think how much more effective the attacks on the establishment would be if Paul Nuttall (although I know he doesn't want it) or some other non Fee Paying School graduate were in charge of the party.
For all his many talents and assets to the party, Farage cannot really make an effective attack on the 'establishment' in British politics whist his background is so similar to theirs.
How about a two pronged attack? Farage attracting disaffected Tories in the South and Nuttall the WWC in the North!
Inevitably our own experiences make us all feel we have expertise, but it seems to me that 11 is the wrong age for selection. No-one that I know opposes selection at 18 for university, but the question is where in this band of 11-18 should selection occur? Personally I think that public schools have it about right at 14 with their Common Entrance exam.
As I mentioned, one of my old teachers reckoned the grammars should start with small yeargroups and widen them up as the years go by, all the way up to sixth form, with talent "spotted" at the local secondaries. Not sure the secondaries would have been keen on that! But if you were going to have a selective system, that would make far more sense than picking everyone at 11 (which in practice means selecting them aged 10).
Funnily enough, the Germans seem to reverse around the way we do it. Selective education at secondary level (with Gymnasium very similar to a British grammar) but then uniformitarianism at the university level (though they are moving now towards having "elite" universities again, and I presume that will come with greater selectivity).
It's interesting that Germany with its highly successful industrial economy has, iirc, no universities in the world's top-rated 50.
Maybe the average university/college in Germany is a lot better than in Anglo-Saxon countries, whereas we have a few world-class places but the average is disappointing.
Some very interesting points, and I freely admit I'm no expert on education. I'd only vaguely heard of "coaching for the 11-plus", but is that what annoys so many people?
The "it's not fair" attitude. Aspirational parents nowadays would take positive steps to take advantage of the system - therefore it shouldn't be allowed.
I suppose it's the same with public schools like Eton but worse; there, money makes the unfairness.
I think that is one of the big issues. I know that Tim used to rail continuously about the unfairness of tutors and coaching but to my mind it is simply a reflection of the importance parents place on their child's education compared to other calls on their time and money.
Interestingly the tutoring thing itself is not straight forward. Tutoring is very popular in areas bordering counties with Grammar schools since the Primary/Junior schools will not provide any support for 11+ aspirants. It is also the case that some schools in areas with grammars refuse in principle to provide any support or practice for 11+ aspirants. So tutoring again is common there.
In the end a tutor at the moment will cost about £15 a session and generally the child will have one session a week. Most of these tutors are also doing lessons for Comprehensive school kids to help them with day to day school work and improve their chances. I wonder if those who oppose people trying to help their kids get ahead also object to that?
It is noticeable that the SNP/SLAB electoral map does show the SNP have picked up support mostly in the areas of Scotland that used to vote Tory. The SNP does seem to include both leftist elements (wasn't Salmond once suspended for being in the leftist 79 group?) and large elements of Butskillite centrists.
In many ways the politics of the SNP (apart from separatism) and SLAB match the attitudes and aspirations of the post war consensus on social policy that held until shattered by the twin demons of Thatcherism and Blairism that have taken over the Unionist parties. I think the division on this is a more genuine one, and a sounder reason for independence, than any amount of Braveheartism and flag waving by either side of the Indy ref.
Interesting to see your perceptions. I entirely agree that there is significant Tory support - it is perhaps distorted by FPTP and the Scottish Parliament gives a fairer view. The corollary is that if this social conservatism is in part centrist in sentiment then the SNP are also picking up on it (e.g. the notion that Britishness involves the post-war Attleean social consensus rather than, or as much as, the Churchillian rhetoric).
One might think that the recent Scottsh Pmt vote for same-sex marriage seems to show a distribution of social conservatism across parties. But I suppose that is more to do with religious conservatism anyway and one could as well see a Free Kirk SNP activist as a Labour RC parishioner or Episcopalian Tory campaigning against it - or some completely different permutation thereof. It was certainly not much of a party issue if at all, except perhaps on some details (not sure about that).
Back to housing, I had forgotten that more Scots used to live in council houses - I believe - than the UK average, so yes of course you are quite right in your perceptions. The actual percentage sold off is another matter, and I'm just wondering, does anybody know of a simple answer to the percentage of council housing sold off in Scotland vs England, Wales, etc? (ignoring 'sales' and transfers to such things as social housing associations and the Glasgow Council agency)?
Inevitably our own experiences make us all feel we have expertise, but it seems to me that 11 is the wrong age for selection. No-one that I know opposes selection at 18 for university, but the question is where in this band of 11-18 should selection occur? Personally I think that public schools have it about right at 14 with their Common Entrance exam.
As I mentioned, one of my old teachers reckoned the grammars should start with small yeargroups and widen them up as the years go by, all the way up to sixth form, with talent "spotted" at the local secondaries. Not sure the secondaries would have been keen on that! But if you were going to have a selective system, that would make far more sense than picking everyone at 11 (which in practice means selecting them aged 10).
Funnily enough, the Germans seem to reverse around the way we do it. Selective education at secondary level (with Gymnasium very similar to a British grammar) but then uniformitarianism at the university level (though they are moving now towards having "elite" universities again, and I presume that will come with greater selectivity).
It's interesting that Germany with its highly successful industrial economy has, iirc, no universities in the world's top-rated 50.
50 Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg
53 Technische Universität München
65 Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
and next door:
12 ETH Zurich (Swiss Federal Institute of Technology)
Germany has many good technical universities whereas the UK has only one: Imperial College
It's possible UKIP come first in England but fourth or fifth in Scotland. That could be a big help to the Yes campaign in Scotland because it would show just how different the two countries have become recently.
Use of "Fatcha" is another Tory sneer at the lower orders, as is 'Elf and Safety, and "innit". The plebs cannot even pronounce words properly. Aren't they ridiculous?
Everyone does it. Not just those on the left. The UK is the most class ridden, class conscious, class obsessed country on earth.
You've clearly never been to India...
For class-consciousness, and out-right racism, I think you have to go a long way to beat the Arabs (though the Chinese, at least the Hong Kong Chinese, run them a very close second). Even the Omanis, who for my money are way the best of the bunch, have an understanding of class distinctions so fine as to make the 18th century English nobility look like a bunch of anarchists.
Man City at 5/4 are a great price to beat my beloved Chelsea today. When we won up there a couple of weeks ago Terry and Cahill were brilliant. Today we have the hapless Luiz and Ivanovic at centre back, City will want revenge big time.
I had a comprehensive education and it certainly was not crap.
Only UKIP and the headbangers in the Conservative right want a return to Grammar schools, and UKIP knows this does not play well in working class areas.
Did UKIP emphasise a call for a return to grammar schools in their literature in Wythenshaw? I suspect they did not, knowing that it would go down like a lead balloon there.
The FT article quoted by Antifrank relied heavily on equating poverty represented by Free School Dinners with lack of performance.
In Wales (where there are no grammar schools and very few good private sector schools) this huge red herring is used to excuse poor education. In fact, in general, Wales lacks aspiration by parents and teachers and so has and is destroying the education of many of their children. Now the Welsh Government wishes to throw more money at poor performing schools.
My experience in Africa and Asia of schools who have very few financial resources and parents struggle to pay for their children's education (In many countries education - outside of mission schools - is not free), there is a huge united aspiration by children, parents and teachers to learn, to get qualified and to get a good job - overseas, if not in their own country.
In the UK we employ truancy officers - why and where have we gone so wrong?
I'm sure you had an exemplary education. I would also guess that your parents encouraged you.
I believe you were brought up and now live in Leicestershire. You do realise that all the intellectuals emigrated Eastwards 300 years ago when the Dutch drained the fens?
Ask John Prescott. What was it Nicholas Soames used to taunt him about?
His poor effort at being a lardy-arse?
Something about mine's a gin Giovanni.
Use of "Fatcha" is another Tory sneer at the lower orders, as is 'Elf and Safety, and "innit". The plebs cannot even pronounce words properly. Aren't they ridiculous?
Everyone does it. Not just those on the left. The UK is the most class ridden, class conscious, class obsessed country on earth.
What a load of nonsense. India, for example, is far worse than the UK despite it being supposedly hidden by the use of the phrase "caste system".
Oh, dear. Another healthy dose of reality for Saint Alex the rest of the Kool Aid cult.
Alex Salmond's claim that British business leaders want Scotland to keep the pound was categorically rejected by an executive who represents more than 30,000 UK companies on Friday.
Turnip head finds more unionist drivel. How many hours does Superman work representing 30,000 companies. If he works 365 days a year and 24 hours a day he can spend less than 17.5 minutes per company. Another patsy pushing self interest.
Malcolmg - as one of the most bullish posters here re: the indyref, what do you see the chances of a YES victory? I asked yesterday but didn't see a reply (might easily have missed it if it was later)
Thank you
Even given that I may be a bit biased, there does seem to be change afoot. BT have almost disappeared, Darling been seen on TV twice this year for maybe 20 seconds a time. Labour leader has made no comment on independence for many months , again never ever seen in public. Will be interesting head to head with Nichola Sturgeon on 25th on STV. Even the Daily Record was unhappy with the threats this week and call in yesterday on BBC propaganda radio was almost unanimously for yes and people registering to vote due to the insults, at least 3-1 were yes and this really irks the BBC. I see changes , BT has no volunteers on the ground and only scare stories. YES have local groups all over Scotland , very vibrant etc. Labour backing Tories was the killer. I think it is downhill all the way for NO now. Trend is certainly away from NO if not yet all to YES.
Just on this and once again to annoy my fellow travellers in UKIP (sorry guys but you know how contrary I can be), this thread header also shows why Farage is not the best choice to lead UKIP. Think how much more effective the attacks on the establishment would be if Paul Nuttall (although I know he doesn't want it) or some other non Fee Paying School graduate were in charge of the party.
For all his many talents and assets to the party, Farage cannot really make an effective attack on the 'establishment' in British politics whist his background is so similar to theirs.
He can, and he does. One of his frequent attacks against the political class is that they have no experience outside of politics, whereas he spent twenty years working in financial services. Including a spell running his own business.
My parents certainly were supportive, and that surely is the biggest predictor of academic success, apart from IQ (if such a thing exists). I was however born in Lancashire to Lancs born parents, I am a Leicester man now by adoption rather than birth, as is so typical of this vibrant city!
I'm sure you had an exemplary education. I would also guess that your parents encouraged you.
I believe you were brought up and now live in Leicestershire. You do realise that all the intellectuals emigrated Eastwards 300 years ago when the Dutch drained the fens?
The key in educational mobility of course is aspiration.
There are children from poor backgrounds who get into Grammar schools. So what sets them apart from their classmates? I would hazard a guess that it is the importance their parents place on education and the willingness of those parents to make sacrifices in other areas to make sure their children get the best possible chance of success.
There are also primary schools in Grammar school areas that refuse point blank to help their pupils with their 11+ preparation. How is that helping any child? It is the politics of envy being played out in the classroom.
It is noticeable that the SNP/SLAB electoral map does show the SNP have picked up support mostly in the areas of Scotland that used to vote Tory. The SNP does seem to include both leftist elements (wasn't Salmond once suspended for being in the leftist 79 group?) and large elements of Butskillite centrists.
In many ways the politics of the SNP (apart from separatism) and SLAB match the attitudes and aspirations of the post war consensus on social policy that held until shattered by the twin demons of Thatcherism and Blairism that have taken over the Unionist parties. I think the division on this is a more genuine one, and a sounder reason for independence, than any amount of Braveheartism and flag waving by either side of the Indy ref.
Interesting to see your perceptions. I entirely agree that there is significant Tory support - it is perhaps distorted by FPTP and the Scottish Parliament gives a fairer view. The corollary is that if this social conservatism is in part centrist in sentiment then the SNP are also picking up on it (e.g. the notion that Britishness involves the post-war Attleean social consensus rather than, or as much as, the Churchillian rhetoric).
One might think that the recent Scottsh Pmt vote for same-sex marriage seems to show a distribution of social conservatism across parties. But I suppose that is more to do with religious conservatism anyway and one could as well see a Free Kirk SNP activist as a Labour RC parishioner or Episcopalian Tory campaigning against it - or some completely different permutation thereof. It was certainly not much of a party issue if at all, except perhaps on some details (not sure about that).
Back to housing, I had forgotten that more Scots used to live in council houses - I believe - than the UK average, so yes of course you are quite right in your perceptions. The actual percentage sold off is another matter, and I'm just wondering, does anybody know of a simple answer to the percentage of council housing sold off in Scotland vs England, Wales, etc? (ignoring 'sales' and transfers to such things as social housing associations and the Glasgow Council agency)?
Any New suite or kitchen would be recogniseable, and Mrs T was always a housewife as well, even when she was PM.
Asblockquote>
Fox, that is exactly the reason for it and why it will happen. The braveheart stuff is just an imagination of the southern media, this has nothing to do with any dislike of the English and is totally about how the UK is going in a different direction from what people in Scotland want. Only fools like Scottp try to conflate the move with hating English. Most of the English people living here and there are huge amounts are for independence.
Just on this and once again to annoy my fellow travellers in UKIP (sorry guys but you know how contrary I can be), this thread header also shows why Farage is not the best choice to lead UKIP. Think how much more effective the attacks on the establishment would be if Paul Nuttall (although I know he doesn't want it) or some other non Fee Paying School graduate were in charge of the party.
For all his many talents and assets to the party, Farage cannot really make an effective attack on the 'establishment' in British politics whist his background is so similar to theirs.
He can, and he does. One of his frequent attacks against the political class is that they have no experience outside of politics, whereas he spent twenty years working in financial services. Including a spell running his own business.
That is a great line and I agree with him entirely on that. But it doesn't change the fact that a large number of people (rightly or wrongly) do not believe his attacks on the public school boys when he himself was also a public school boy. I consider Farage to be very much a parson's egg kind of guy. In some ways he is nothing short of brilliant and I think he has done fantastic things to get UKIP to where it is now. But he also has some serious shortcomings both in terms of his leadership abilities and his background and whilst perhaps the latter shouldn't matter I am afraid that it does make his attacks on privilege sound rather hollow.
According to Amy Chua's new book, The Triple Package, the keys to success are (a) a sense of group superiority, (b) a sense of group inferiority (paradoxically), (c) impulse control.
Inevitably our own experiences make us all feel we have expertise, but it seems to me that 11 is the wrong age for selection. No-one that I know opposes selection at 18 for university, but the question is where in this band of 11-18 should selection occur? Personally I think that public schools have it about right at 14 with their Common Entrance exam.
As I mentioned, one of my old teachers reckoned the grammars should start with small yeargroups and widen them up as the years go by, all the way up to sixth form, with talent "spotted" at the local secondaries. Not sure the secondaries would have been keen on that! But if you were going to have a selective system, that would make far more sense than picking everyone at 11 (which in practice means selecting them aged 10).
Funnily enough, the Germans seem to reverse around the way we do it. Selective education at secondary level (with Gymnasium very similar to a British grammar) but then uniformitarianism at the university level (though they are moving now towards having "elite" universities again, and I presume that will come with greater selectivity).
It's interesting that Germany with its highly successful industrial economy has, iirc, no universities in the world's top-rated 50.
Maybe the average university/college in Germany is a lot better than in Anglo-Saxon countries, whereas we have a few world-class places but the average is disappointing.
A lot of it is to do with language. If you teach in German you can only employ German speakers. That's why more and more universities in Europe are moving to English as the lingua franca. It's even happening in France on some courses.
The divergence on this (Butskellist consensus vs Thatcherism/Blairism) is also why a post independence currency union with rUK would be doomed to failure. It could only work if Scotland and rUK were pursuing much the same economic and spending policies, which would preclude Scotland deviating from Thatcherism/Blairism.
It is noticeable that the SNP/SLAB electoral map does show the SNP have picked up support mostly in the areas of Scotland that used to vote Tory. The SNP does seem to include both leftist elements (wasn't Salmond once suspended for being in the leftist 79 group?) and large elements of Butskillite centrists.
In many ways the politics of the SNP (apart from separatism) and SLAB match the attitudes and aspirations of the post war consensus on social policy that held until shattered by the twin demons of Thatcherism and Blairism that have taken over the Unionist parties. I think the division on this is a more genuine one, and a sounder reason for independence, than any amount of Braveheartism and flag waving by either side of the Indy ref.
Any New suite or kitchen would be recogniseable, and Mrs T was always a housewife as well, even when she was PM.
Asblockquote>
Fox, that is exactly the reason for it and why it will happen. The braveheart stuff is just an imagination of the southern media, this has nothing to do with any dislike of the English and is totally about how the UK is going in a different direction from what people in Scotland want. Only fools like Scottp try to conflate the move with hating English. Most of the English people living here and there are huge amounts are for independence.
Going to grammar school changed my life chances completely. But I did not originally get in, despite passing my 11 plus and literally living down the road from the school. There was an interview process too, which clearly I did not pass. The same thing happened to the boy who lived second closest to the school. Coincidentally - or not - we were both working/lower middle class. We both got in eventually because a couple of boys who had been accepted ended up going to Highgate, the private school up the hill.
''Now the Welsh Government wishes to throw more money at poor performing schools.''
The conservatives should be doing far, far more to hang the dead albatross of Welsh education around labour's neck.
The coalition need to do something radical and aggressive like threaten to try to remove the education brief from the Welsh government if they don't pull their socks up. What are the tories afraid of? Its almost like this is labour's business, we shouldn;t go poking our noses in.
Something should be done to really force this issue, which labour are desperate to keep quiet, out into the open, for the benefit of children in Wales and in England.
Apparently one of my my grandfathers passed the eleven plus in 1932 but wasn't able to go to grammar school because the family couldn't afford it. After the war he ended up working on a slag heap in Birmingham.
Going to grammar school changed my life chances completely. But I did not originally get in, despite passing my 11 plus and literally living down the road from the school. There was an interview process too, which clearly I did not pass. The same thing happened to the boy who lived second closest to the school. Coincidentally - or not - we were both working/lower middle class. We both got in eventually because a couple of boys who had been accepted ended up going to Highgate, the private school up the hill.
I am glad you mentioned that SO. I had it in my mind that at least one of the left leaning contributors on here had a positive experience with Grammars and whilst I thought it was yourself and didn't want to be putting words into your mouth. :-)
One of the things that was important about Grammar schools in the past and I think is lacking today is the fact that failure at 11+ was not the end of the matter when Grammars were widespread. Plenty of children who did not pass the 11+ could move up into the Grammar system if they showed greater potential later in their school lives.
It is noticeable that the SNP/SLAB electoral map does show the SNP have picked up support mostly in the areas of Scotland that used to vote Tory. The SNP does seem to include both leftist elements (wasn't Salmond once suspended for being in the leftist 79 group?) and large elements of Butskillite centrists.
In many ways the politics of the SNP (apart from separatism) and SLAB match the attitudes and aspirations of the post war consensus on social policy that held until shattered by the twin demons of Thatcherism and Blairism that have taken over the Unionist parties. I think the division on this is a more genuine one, and a sounder reason for independence, than any amount of Braveheartism and flag waving by either side of the Indy ref.
Fox, that is exactly the reason for it and why it will happen. The braveheart stuff is just an imagination of the southern media, this has nothing to do with any dislike of the English and is totally about how the UK is going in a different direction from what people in Scotland want. Only fools like Scottp try to conflate the move with hating English. Most of the English people living here and there are huge amounts are for independence.
Both of you have got it very nearly right, is my gut feeling, about the situation here in Scotland, which is nothing like the picture of Blut und Boden style racists obsessed with 1314 so beloved by the DT and its allies in the media.
Mr Salmond was actually chucked out of the SNP for a while like Mr MacAskill as I find on checking. But today Mr Swinney's economic prudence would put to shame any recent UK C of the E. Okay, he only gets so much pocket money by Barnett but the refusal to indulge in PPP/PFI is to my mind a huge plus when running a country rather than selling it off to the chums of the party in power.
However, there is no Scottish Labour Party and until there is one, Labour in Scotland will have to obey the (relatively) Blairite views of London HQ - logically enough for a Unionist party, I hasten to add. There are undoubtedly tensions and I will be very interested to see how the impending party conference goes.
On a related matter also relevant o the thread I deeply deplore the way in which some people comment on the Scottish position on university fees - which is exactly as it was across the UK for so much of the postwar consensus. It is so important for bright children from whatever background to be given that chance of further education. And the present system based on residence is vital to make sure that Scottish children - who mostly need to go to Scottish universities because of the school exam and degree system - have some hope of a place. Yet some people here can only express Schadenfreude at the thought of the horrendous damage that will be done if this system is subverted. I think such glee is utterly misplaced.
''Now the Welsh Government wishes to throw more money at poor performing schools.''
The conservatives should be doing far, far more to hang the dead albatross of Welsh education around labour's neck.
The coalition need to do something radical and aggressive like threaten to try to remove the education brief from the Welsh government if they don't pull their socks up. What are the tories afraid of? Its almost like this is labour's business, we shouldn;t go poking our noses in.
Something should be done to really force this issue, which labour are desperate to keep quiet, out into the open, for the benefit of children in Wales and in England.
It is Labour's business - they're the government in Wales and it's for the Welsh people to demand better if they want it at an election. In the meantime, it's for the other parties to hold them to account. You can't have Westminster threatening to take powers away just because you don't like the policy (well, you can but I don't think it's the right thing to do). It'd be just another form of Nanny Stateism.
I agree with the first part - the UK government should be making far more of Labour's failures there. I wonder whether it's partly because they think such an attack might be seen as anti-Welsh and partly because you would inevitably get calls to 'do something', which then leads to a sterile debate on principles of governance at which point most people would turn off.
''Now the Welsh Government wishes to throw more money at poor performing schools.''
The conservatives should be doing far, far more to hang the dead albatross of Welsh education around labour's neck.
The coalition need to do something radical and aggressive like threaten to try to remove the education brief from the Welsh government if they don't pull their socks up. What are the tories afraid of? Its almost like this is labour's business, we shouldn;t go poking our noses in.
Something should be done to really force this issue, which labour are desperate to keep quiet, out into the open, for the benefit of children in Wales and in England.
It is Labour's business - they're the government in Wales and it's for the Welsh people to demand better if they want it at an election. In the meantime, it's for the other parties to hold them to account. You can't have Westminster threatening to take powers away just because you don't like the policy (well, you can but I don't think it's the right thing to do). It'd be just another form of Nanny Stateism.
I agree with the first part - the UK government should be making far more of Labour's failures there. I wonder whether it's partly because they think such an attack might be seen as anti-Welsh and partly because you would inevitably get calls to 'do something', which then leads to a sterile debate on principles of governance at which point most people would turn off.
Er, your last para - do you mean literally the UK gmt or rather the Tories and LDs as parties, please? The former I can't quite reconcile with the rest of your comments.
Apparently one of my my grandfathers passed the eleven plus in 1932 but wasn't able to go to grammar school because the family couldn't afford it. After the war he ended up working on a slag heap in Birmingham.
Same thing happened to my Mum, she passed but couldn't afford to go. Her Mum died, her step mum was a wicked old cow, so she left home lied about her age and joined the war effort in 1939.
Going to grammar school changed my life chances completely. But I did not originally get in, despite passing my 11 plus and literally living down the road from the school. There was an interview process too, which clearly I did not pass. The same thing happened to the boy who lived second closest to the school. Coincidentally - or not - we were both working/lower middle class. We both got in eventually because a couple of boys who had been accepted ended up going to Highgate, the private school up the hill.
I am glad you mentioned that SO. I had it in my mind that at least one of the left leaning contributors on here had a positive experience with Grammars and whilst I thought it was yourself and didn't want to be putting words into your mouth. :-)
One of the things that was important about Grammar schools in the past and I think is lacking today is the fact that failure at 11+ was not the end of the matter when Grammars were widespread. Plenty of children who did not pass the 11+ could move up into the Grammar system if they showed greater potential later in their school lives.
It is still possible to do that in Buckinghamshire.
"On a related matter also relevant o the thread I deeply deplore the way in which some people comment on the Scottish position on university fees - which is exactly as it was across the UK for so much of the postwar consensus. It is so important for bright children from whatever background to be given that chance of further education. And the present system based on residence is vital to make sure that Scottish children - who mostly need to go to Scottish universities because of the school exam and degree system - have some hope of a place. Yet some people here can only express Schadenfreude at the thought of the horrendous damage that will be done if this system is subverted. I think such glee is utterly misplaced."
EU law is such that rUK students would not pay tuition fees, provided both Scotland and rUK are in the EU, unless Scotland charges its own residents. This need not be a bar to access. The evidence in England is that there has been little effect on either the numbers or social mix of students going to university.
Scotland should be more positive about this. English undergraduates at Scottish Universities are going to be a source of migrants attuned to Scottish values, well educated and comfortable in Scottish culture. Scotland just needs to be welcoming to them and encourage them to stay on afterwards. It would be Scotlands gain and Englands loss.
Don't forget my tip, Everton to win the Cup, now 13/2
For sure the manager knows how to win it but will still possible 4th place in the PL be the priority? This is why I prefer Southampton,now playing away at Sunderland,currently available at 12-1.
My old tipster pal Farringdon,is on Red Rocco 2.25 Haydock 20-1.He also likes old boy Mia's Boy in the 3.25 Lingfield at 20-1.At shorter odds he fancies Presberg Lingfield 2.15 at 13-2. There's my 1point ew Round Robin. Happy punting everyone.
If Grammar schools benefited the poor so much, why is it that the only calls for their return come from the parties canvassing support from the right?
What a ridiculous statement.
We all know that the Left hate grammar school education, they have done so much to absolutely destroy what was once a first class education system.
As someone on here said, they don't care if kids have a crap education, just so long as they all have the same crap education.
Support for grammar schools from the right is probably from those who can't quite afford private school but would like their kids to be educated away from the perceived riff raff in bog standard schools, avoiding picking up bad habits etc.
I do wonder how John Majors period as PM will be reported in history books. I expect that it will be very unfair and concentrate on the bstards with the Tory party causing disunity. It probably won't mention much the 14.5 million votes he helped win the Tories in 1992. It was not really Majors fault, that the Tories went on to lose to a landslide in 1997. It was the bstards in the Tory party constantly going on about the EU who caused that. Similar is happening at the moment, but so far Cameron is keeping ministers on his side.
I didn't worry too much about Cameron's background when he became Tory leader and it wasn't much of an issue. However the sense of a privileged clique is rather different. The big concern to me and I think most people is of a Conservative that is again being overtaken by very wealthy, very privileged individuals. This matters firstly because people will question whether they can really grasp the many difficult challenges people face in life if you've always had it easy (personally I don't think this matters so long as you are prepared to learn) and secondly because it just looks like an exclusive clique that wants to keep 'people not like them' on the outside. I've heard Tories blame this on the schools system, so now overwhelmingly only people from the top public schools have the qualifications to be at the top of politics but this won't rub. 60% of Oxbridge students are state educated. Even in the Thatcher years it was 50%.
Can the Tories find another Major? I'm not sure. They do have some working class representatives but they seem more like people inspired by Norman Tebbit not Major. This is a Party that largely treats John Major as an embarrassing aberration they'd like to forget, so they're unlikely to find another one.
EU law is such that rUK students would not pay tuition fees, provided both Scotland and rUK are in the EU, unless Scotland charges its own residents. This need not be a bar to access. The evidence in England is that there has been little effect on either the numbers or social mix of students going to university.
Scotland should be more positive about this. English undergraduates at Scottish Universities are going to be a source of migrants attuned to Scottish values, well educated and comfortable in Scottish culture. Scotland just needs to be welcoming to them and encourage them to stay on afterwards. It would be Scotlands gain and Englands loss.
I have no problem with that at all and absolutely agree about the benefits as indeed the SNP and others do. The problem is the intensity of likely cross-border migration because of the fees differential. At the moment the fees are roughly comparable (year for year), so there is a real choice for an EWNI resident in whether to stay in England (or Wales or NI) or go to Scotland (etc.). But if things change and an English (etc., by residence) child has the option of going to Scotland and saving £27K or similar over a comparable English degree, then what do you think will happen? Given the relative populations of EWNI and Scotland, either up to 92% of the potential Scottish university entrants would lose out when they would otherwise have got in, or the undergraduate pool has to expand by a factor of 12 at the Scottish taxpayer cost - of course those are extremes and it wouldn't go that far, but equally there is nothing to stop that happening well on the way to those figures.
Now those excluded Scottish children cannot all simply go to university down south (at a price!), as the English degree system is not very compatible with the Scottish higher system either in terms of timing of university entrance, qualifications or, arguably, underlying philosophy (vide the recent TV debate between Mr Aaronovitch and Ms Riddoch inter aliis, for those interested). That is why I find some posters' and newspapers' glee so misplaced and distasteful.
This is a genuine worry and I can't see how it can be resolved other than by differential treatment. It is already a known problem for Germany vs Austria and that is with German tuition fees, I believe, much lower than UK (other than Scotland). I'm not sure how it was resolved but at one point 50% of medic students at one Austrian university were German.
I know that EU students are coming here but this is not too much of an issue at the moment as people tend to stay in the language of birth.
It's a bit like not bothering to give EWNI residents free medical treatment because they can always travel to Scotland to get it free ...
Of course the problem is unlikely to happen, as the Unionists tell us. Either Scotland or EWNI won't be in the EU ... [needle on irony meter flicks up]
If Grammar schools benefited the poor so much, why is it that the only calls for their return come from the parties canvassing support from the right?
What a ridiculous statement.
We all know that the Left hate grammar school education, they have done so much to absolutely destroy what was once a first class education system.
As someone on here said, they don't care if kids have a crap education, just so long as they all have the same crap education.
Support for grammar schools from the right is probably from those who can't quite afford private school but would like their kids to be educated away from the perceived riff raff in bog standard schools, avoiding picking up bad habits etc.
You mean bad habits like ill informed left wing stereotyping?
I do wonder how John Majors period as PM will be reported in history books. I expect that it will be very unfair and concentrate on the bstards with the Tory party causing disunity. It probably won't mention much the 14.5 million votes he helped win the Tories in 1992. It was not really Majors fault, that the Tories went on to lose to a landslide in 1997. It was the bstards in the Tory party constantly going on about the EU who caused that. Similar is happening at the moment, but so far Cameron is keeping ministers on his side.
It was Major's own actions when he was Chancellor that led to his downfall as PM. How different might things have been if he hadn't played cheerleader for joining the ERM in 1990.
I do wonder how John Majors period as PM will be reported in history books. I expect that it will be very unfair and concentrate on the bstards with the Tory party causing disunity. It probably won't mention much the 14.5 million votes he helped win the Tories in 1992. It was not really Majors fault, that the Tories went on to lose to a landslide in 1997. It was the bstards in the Tory party constantly going on about the EU who caused that. Similar is happening at the moment, but so far Cameron is keeping ministers on his side.
It was Major's own actions when he was Chancellor that led to his downfall as PM. How different might things have been if he hadn't played cheerleader for joining the ERM in 1990.
That might have been the source of their anger. But ultimately the b'stards showed no real awareness or perhaps interest in what the splits were doing to the Party's image at large. Not much seems to have changed.
If Cameron wins next year, it will almost certainly be a small majority, with still more public spending cuts and the EU renegotiation, I predict a similar parliament to 92-97.
I can see no way out of the situation that you describe, provided we both stay in the EU.
I would suggest charging Scottish student fees, but having a repayment system set so that fee repayments were 100% tax deductable against Scottish income tax, in effect meaning that they are never repaid.
Ask John Prescott. What was it Nicholas Soames used to taunt him about?
His poor effort at being a lardy-arse?
Something about mine's a gin Giovanni.
Use of "Fatcha" is another Tory sneer at the lower orders, as is 'Elf and Safety, and "innit". The plebs cannot even pronounce words properly. Aren't they ridiculous?
Everyone does it. Not just those on the left. The UK is the most class ridden, class conscious, class obsessed country on earth.
Soames's wind up only worked because Prescott was so Class Obsessed.
EU law is such that rUK students would not pay tuition fees, provided both Scotland and rUK are in the EU, unless Scotland charges its own residents. This need not be a bar to access. The evidence in England is that there has been little effect on either the numbers or social mix of students going to university.
Scotland should be more positive about this. English undergraduates at Scottish Universities are going to be a source of migrants attuned to Scottish values, well educated and comfortable in Scottish culture. Scotland just needs to be welcoming to them and encourage them to stay on afterwards. It would be Scotlands gain and Englands loss.
Of course the problem is unlikely to happen, as the Unionists tell us. Either Scotland or EWNI won't be in the EU ... [needle on irony meter flicks up]
No, independence is a choice - and it comes with both advantages and disadvantages. This is one of the disadvantages - something the SNP have been very reluctant to concede - and as we saw this week, currency is nowhere near as "obvious" as the SNP would wish - having set out the disadvantages to rUK of a currency union it would be a very "brave" CoE who agreed to one.
You could equally have argued that three leaders had led to massive defeats for the party: Major, Hague and Howard. The common factor is that they were all state educated.
If only it was just a problem of the leader then it would be relatively easy for the Tories to change their image. However, if one looks at the socio-economic class crossbreaks in Ashcrofts last Project Blue print poll one finds the split between Upper Class (ABC1) and Lower class (C2DE) for each party is (Upper Class:Lower Class):
Con 68:32 LD 66:34 Lab 54:46 UKIP 48:52
Clearly in such circumstances the Tories and the Libdems run the risk of further damaging their support (by losing upper class voters) if they appoint a "working class" leader and or adopt working class policies (as opposed to being patronising and disingenuous to the working classes) which has often been the establishment parties' attitude in the past (e.g. promises on EU referendums). It may well be the case that the Tories support within the party as well as without is now so imbalanced that they will not countenance a Thatcher or a Major. Certainly the destructive and abusive language of many leading Tories, not just Cameron, suggest they are not really interested in courting a big tent approach preferring their own brand of elitism. As in many other ways it could well be that the Tories worst enemy are in fact The Tories.
Which means that the real battle for the lower classes at the next election will be between Labour ( who intriguingly were more upper than lower class) and UKIP (who had the most balanced support despite those increasingly publicised Ford and Goodwin's assertions).
having set out the disadvantages to rUK of a currency union it would be a very "brave" CoE who agreed to one.
Why would it be in rUK's interests to have Scotland follow Ireland into a German dominated currency union rather than stay in a Sterling zone? And if the eurozone would be happy to admit Scotland into a currency union why is it such a no-no for the UK? And why has HMT been told to argue against independence?
I would agree. The Tories wasted their time in the noughties rethinking their issues, but perhaps need to have another go.
With the economy improving, Ed Milliband may not be so bad. There is something to be said for a PM with no policies, as inaction is often the best approach!
I do wonder how John Majors period as PM will be reported in history books. I expect that it will be very unfair and concentrate on the bstards with the Tory party causing disunity. It probably won't mention much the 14.5 million votes he helped win the Tories in 1992. It was not really Majors fault, that the Tories went on to lose to a landslide in 1997. It was the bstards in the Tory party constantly going on about the EU who caused that. Similar is happening at the moment, but so far Cameron is keeping ministers on his side.
It was Major's own actions when he was Chancellor that led to his downfall as PM. How different might things have been if he hadn't played cheerleader for joining the ERM in 1990.
That might have been the source of their anger. But ultimately the b'stards showed no real awareness or perhaps interest in what the splits were doing to the Party's image at large. Not much seems to have changed.
If Cameron wins next year, it will almost certainly be a small majority, with still more public spending cuts and the EU renegotiation, I predict a similar parliament to 92-97.
Kellner: "the conservatives should be terrified of UKIP"
Kellner has a point but it's not just the Conservatives who should be terrified. The Lib Dems have seen their position as the NOTA protest vote party completely snatched away from them, and Labour shouldn't be too complacent either. Kellner is simplifying massively by using just one left-right axis and placing UKIP to the right of the Tories.
In doing so, he implies that they're a long way from Labour and Labour voters, which is not necessarily true in WWC socially conservative areas. Many of those areas have a culture that would not countenance voting Tory this side of the 22nd century but a newcomer like UKIP doesn't carry that baggage and isn't affected by the culture to anything liken the same extent. That may not matter so much now, with Labour in opposition, but it may well very much matter were they to return to government next year.
Kellner also concentrates in those comments too much on vote share. Pollsters love vote share and of course it is important but it can also be misleading. Yes, Labour's share went up but their vote received fell from just shy of 18k to not much more than 13k. There will have been churn - given the scale of LD vote loss, and what we know from opinion polls, there probably was a sizable shift from Lib Dem to Labour - but that was all swamped by the miserable turnout. I don't think it's implausible to suggest a small net swing from Lab to UKIP in real votes, as well as nominally, as calculated by vote share.
having set out the disadvantages to rUK of a currency union it would be a very "brave" CoE who agreed to one.
Why would it be in rUK's interests to have Scotland follow Ireland into a German dominated currency union rather than stay in a Sterling zone? And if the eurozone would be happy to admit Scotland into a currency union why is it such a no-no for the UK? And why has HMT been told to argue against independence?
1) Asymmetry of risk - only one of the parties could bail out the other. Let the EU bail them out. 2) Decades of poisoned relations as the Scots piss & moan about the conditions imposed on them by Westminster to make the thing work. Let the EU tell them what to do. 3) No evidence that any likely future Scottish administration would have the fiscal discipline required. See 2. 4) for the same reason that the Scottish civil service has been told to argue for independence. Both are government policy
I do wonder how John Majors period as PM will be reported in history books. I expect that it will be very unfair and concentrate on the bstards with the Tory party causing disunity. It probably won't mention much the 14.5 million votes he helped win the Tories in 1992. It was not really Majors fault, that the Tories went on to lose to a landslide in 1997. It was the bstards in the Tory party constantly going on about the EU who caused that. Similar is happening at the moment, but so far Cameron is keeping ministers on his side.
It was Major's own actions when he was Chancellor that led to his downfall as PM. How different might things have been if he hadn't played cheerleader for joining the ERM in 1990.
That might have been the source of their anger. But ultimately the b'stards showed no real awareness or perhaps interest in what the splits were doing to the Party's image at large. Not much seems to have changed.
If Cameron wins next year, it will almost certainly be a small majority, with still more public spending cuts and the EU renegotiation, I predict a similar parliament to 92-97.
I wasn't talking about the source of their anger I was talking about the train wreck of the economy and the subsequent loss of reputation as being economically sound that the Tories suffered as a direct result of Major and Hurd pushing the ludicrous idea of the UK joining the ERM.
Even had the whole Tory party been united, Major still deserved to be destroyed because he was directly responsible for dragging us into the ERM with all the subsequent misery tat caused the country.
I would agree. The Tories wasted their time in the noughties rethinking their issues, but perhaps need to have another go.
With the economy improving, Ed Milliband may not be so bad. There is something to be said for a PM with no policies, as inaction is often the best approach!
I do wonder how John Majors period as PM will be reported in history books. I expect that it will be very unfair and concentrate on the bstards with the Tory party causing disunity. It probably won't mention much the 14.5 million votes he helped win the Tories in 1992. It was not really Majors fault, that the Tories went on to lose to a landslide in 1997. It was the bstards in the Tory party constantly going on about the EU who caused that. Similar is happening at the moment, but so far Cameron is keeping ministers on his side.
It was Major's own actions when he was Chancellor that led to his downfall as PM. How different might things have been if he hadn't played cheerleader for joining the ERM in 1990.
That might have been the source of their anger. But ultimately the b'stards showed no real awareness or perhaps interest in what the splits were doing to the Party's image at large. Not much seems to have changed.
If Cameron wins next year, it will almost certainly be a small majority, with still more public spending cuts and the EU renegotiation, I predict a similar parliament to 92-97.
Do not confuse having no policies with inaction. The contrary is more likely: having no policies tends to result in hyperactivity as without a firm direction, the government tries to micromanage each issue as it comes up. Miliband and his type are inveterate interveners anyway.
If Grammar schools benefited the poor so much, why is it that the only calls for their return come from the parties canvassing support from the right?
What a ridiculous statement.
We all know that the Left hate grammar school education, they have done so much to absolutely destroy what was once a first class education system.
As someone on here said, they don't care if kids have a crap education, just so long as they all have the same crap education.
Support for grammar schools from the right is probably from those who can't quite afford private school but would like their kids to be educated away from the perceived riff raff in bog standard schools, avoiding picking up bad habits etc.
Well one can certainly tell that you weren't brought up in a Grammar School area. As it goes it was more a case that grammar school kids sneered at the riff raff whose parents had to pay to get their kids an education.
So no really good reason to see a significant market drift off from Sterling to the Euro then? It cant be great for trade prospects long term. The unionist parties are clearly all about winning the referendum regardless of whether anything they say or do makes sense. And when it comes to their position on the Euro the Lib Dems almost ridiculously so.
According to Amy Chua's new book, The Triple Package, the keys to success are (a) a sense of group superiority, (b) a sense of group inferiority (paradoxically), (c) impulse control.
The single greatest predictor of later life success is the ability to delay gratification.
There was an experiment done about 40 years ago in the US, where four year old kids were placed in a room with a sweet. They are told that if they can wait just a few minutes they will get two sweets.
The kids are left on their own.
All eventually succumb and eat the sweet.
But 40 years later there was an almost perfect correlation (and much better than with 'IQ') between those kids that could wait a long time for the promised second sweet and academic and professional success.
On topic, having checked the figures, I think Isabel Hardman's comments are a bit harsh. Yes, the Conservatives did win Wythenshaw in the 1950s but that ignores the additional housing programmes of the 1960s which changed the constituency's nature. While there shouldn't be any no go areas for any party, it's inevitable that some are just more promising territory than others.
To put it into context, in Thatcher's two landslide victories in the 1980s, Labour still held Wythenshawe by five-figure majorities with more than half the vote.
You may be right, but hopefully we will have a Labour minority govt, with or without coalition with the LDs that cannot pass any really damaging legislation.
I would agree. The Tories wasted their time in the noughties rethinking their issues, but perhaps need to have another go.
With the economy improving, Ed Milliband may not be so bad. There is something to be said for a PM with no policies, as inaction is often the best approach!
<
Do not confuse having no policies with inaction. The contrary is more likely: having no policies tends to result in hyperactivity as without a firm direction, the government tries to micromanage each issue as it comes up. Miliband and his type are inveterate interveners anyway.
The result that sticks out to me like a sore thumb there is not Eastleigh but Oldham East and Saddleworth.
Why did the Lib Dems do so well there, when they've tanked utterly elsewhere in the North.
1. the circumstances of the by-election 2. the decision by the Tories to not campaign very hard (quite a few seemed to vote tactically for their new coalition partners) 3. before the rise of UKIP
If there was another by-election there now I imagine the Lib Dems would do worse.
They've had some reasonable results in locals though.
EU law is such that rUK students would not pay tuition fees, provided both Scotland and rUK are in the EU, unless Scotland charges its own residents. This need not be a bar to access. The evidence in England is that there has been little effect on either the numbers or social mix of students going to university.
Scotland should be more positive about this. English undergraduates at Scottish Universities are going to be a source of migrants attuned to Scottish values, well educated and comfortable in Scottish culture. Scotland just needs to be welcoming to them and encourage them to stay on afterwards. It would be Scotlands gain and Englands loss.
Of course the problem is unlikely to happen, as the Unionists tell us. Either Scotland or EWNI won't be in the EU ... [needle on irony meter flicks up]
No, independence is a choice - and it comes with both advantages and disadvantages. This is one of the disadvantages - something the SNP have been very reluctant to concede - and as we saw this week, currency is nowhere near as "obvious" as the SNP would wish - having set out the disadvantages to rUK of a currency union it would be a very "brave" CoE who agreed to one.
You're missing the point I am making. Which is that those who use the student fees issue are urging real (though still so far only potential) distress upon real people and real families, just to make their gleeful political points. If independence is seen by the Unionists as a way for EWNI to exploit its neighbours and do harm to its neighbour's citizens as well as its own subjects, then it does not reflect well on the Unionist philosophy. It's one thing to have to address the anomalies of a situation, but another to be positively crowing about it, after having deprived one's own subjects. I got a free university education from a background that couldn't have afforded one and I am always deeply mindful of it.
EU law is such that rUK students would not pay tuition fees, provided both Scotland and rUK are in the EU, unless Scotland charges its own residents. This need not be a bar to access. The evidence in England is that there has been little effect on either the numbers or social mix of students going to university.
Scotland should be more positive about this. English undergraduates at Scottish Universities are going to be a source of migrants attuned to Scottish values, well educated and comfortable in Scottish culture. Scotland just needs to be welcoming to them and encourage them to stay on afterwards. It would be Scotlands gain and Englands loss.
Of course the problem is unlikely to happen, as the Unionists tell us. Either Scotland or EWNI won't be in the EU ... [needle on irony meter flicks up]
No, independence is a choice - and it comes with both advantages and disadvantages. This is one of the disadvantages - something the SNP have been very reluctant to concede - and as we saw this week, currency is nowhere near as "obvious" as the SNP would wish - having set out the disadvantages to rUK of a currency union it would be a very "brave" CoE who agreed to one.
You're missing the point I am making. Which is that those who use the student fees issue are urging real (though still so far only potential) distress upon real people and real families, just to make their gleeful political points. If independence is seen by the Unionists as a way for EWNI to exploit its neighbours and do harm to its neighbour's citizens as well as its own subjects, then it does not reflect well on the Unionist philosophy.
Are they not just warning about the potential downside to voting 'yes'?
Comments
It's notable that both Thatcher and Major felt they needed to change the way they spoke in order to get on.
"some of these house are over...twenty...years...old..."
The seventies were the decade when white enameled cast iron coal
scuttles were stripped out and replaced with plastic bathroom suites in tropical avocado.
It was the skivertex decade.
Overall Grammar schools improve education and mobility. But of course you would rather that overall results dropped just as long as everything was on a level playing field.
Fashions change. I remember when Art Deco was considered naf, and only worthy of a skip. Modern furniture styles would fit well into the modernist early sixties.
Genuine Avocado bathroom suites will be in high demand in Islington in 10-15 years!
Suspect package found at Royal Mail sorting office in Chatham, Kent, prompting evacuation; army bomb disposal team at scene
Edited extra bit: copied and pasted from the BBC ticker.
One might think that the recent Scottsh Pmt vote for same-sex marriage seems to show a distribution of social conservatism across parties. But I suppose that is more to do with religious conservatism anyway and one could as well see a Free Kirk SNP activist as a Labour RC parishioner or Episcopalian Tory campaigning against it - or some completely different permutation thereof. It was certainly not much of a party issue if at all, except perhaps on some details (not sure about that).
Back to housing, I had forgotten that more Scots used to live in council houses - I believe - than the UK average, so yes of course you are quite right in your perceptions. The actual percentage sold off is another matter, and I'm just wondering, does anybody know of a simple answer to the percentage of council housing sold off in Scotland vs England, Wales, etc? (ignoring 'sales' and transfers to such things as social housing associations and the Glasgow Council agency)?
At one time many Chief Constables use to be ex-military men who had often seen action but had the experience of command. leadership and discernment.( as well as events). Today we have Chief Constables who have only the experience of the Police Force and their lack of experience shows not only in poor leadership but also in partisanship and political bias or influence.
Our governments (including devolved assemblies) set up committees to recommend on certain matters and fill those committees with politicians, public sector interested parties and leading academics. Again very few of those academics have any real experience outside of the hot-house of academia and so do not know what action is really required.
To put Cable in charge of Business is laughable as his very short terms as an economist with Shell was in a rarified atmosphere way short of reality.
Perhaps for an interim period we need to have a certain number of years of real experience in business or commerce etc before letting anyone loose on matters of importance - a move to compulsory apprenticeships?
Another patsy pushing self interest.
Malcolmg - as one of the most bullish posters here re: the indyref, what do you see the chances of a YES victory? I asked yesterday but didn't see a reply (might easily have missed it if it was later)
Thank you
Wasn't that Glyndebourne?
We need to check with the Nabavi.
For all his many talents and assets to the party, Farage cannot really make an effective attack on the 'establishment' in British politics whist his background is so similar to theirs.
If Grammar schools benefited the poor so much, why is it that the only calls for their return come from the parties canvassing support from the right?
Gove's reforms are more subtle than a return to the 1950's grammar and Sec Moderns. By creating a variety of schools that select in a variety of ways (religion and musical accomplishment are good proxies for middle class values that correlate with academic success) he is re-creating Grammar schools by the back door. He also has the intention of shattering the Local authority control over who goes to which school, whether geographic or by exam. That is why the teaching unions hate him so much.
Worse still - gold taps.
With onyx.
I saw recently that the house had been demolished. Some memories are so awful they just can't be repressed by home improvement alone....
The "it's not fair" attitude. Aspirational parents nowadays would take positive steps to take advantage of the system - therefore it shouldn't be allowed.
I suppose it's the same with public schools like Eton but worse; there, money makes the unfairness.
Various reports by the Sutton Trust are probably the best way to go with this. however, unsurprisingly, their results are not always straight forward. For example the report on social selection they commissioned from University of Durham in 2008 found that 83 of the top 100 most socially selective schools in England were not Grammars. Clearly there is some other factor than just the entrance exam in play which is resulting in social selectivity amongst non Grammar schools.
http://www.suttontrust.com/news/news/non-grammars-are-most-socially-selective-state-schools/
With the current system, it's all about money, via catchment areas.
P.S. Whatever happened to the Greek ships?
Interestingly the tutoring thing itself is not straight forward. Tutoring is very popular in areas bordering counties with Grammar schools since the Primary/Junior schools will not provide any support for 11+ aspirants. It is also the case that some schools in areas with grammars refuse in principle to provide any support or practice for 11+ aspirants. So tutoring again is common there.
In the end a tutor at the moment will cost about £15 a session and generally the child will have one session a week. Most of these tutors are also doing lessons for Comprehensive school kids to help them with day to day school work and improve their chances. I wonder if those who oppose people trying to help their kids get ahead also object to that?
In many ways the politics of the SNP (apart from separatism) and SLAB match the attitudes and aspirations of the post war consensus on social policy that held until shattered by the twin demons of Thatcherism and Blairism that have taken over the Unionist parties. I think the division on this is a more genuine one, and a sounder reason for independence, than any amount of Braveheartism and flag waving by either side of the Indy ref.
53 Technische Universität München
65 Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München
and next door:
12 ETH Zurich (Swiss Federal Institute of Technology)
Germany has many good technical universities whereas the UK has only one: Imperial College
It's possible UKIP come first in England but fourth or fifth in Scotland. That could be a big help to the Yes campaign in Scotland because it would show just how different the two countries have become recently.
What a ridiculous statement.
We all know that the Left hate grammar school education, they have done so much to absolutely destroy what was once a first class education system.
As someone on here said, they don't care if kids have a crap education, just so long as they all have the same crap education.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/26194618
Apparently the head of Scottish rugby has the target of winning next year's world cup.
Dzeko anytime scorer at 2/1 is also a good bet.
Only UKIP and the headbangers in the Conservative right want a return to Grammar schools, and UKIP knows this does not play well in working class areas.
Did UKIP emphasise a call for a return to grammar schools in their literature in Wythenshaw? I suspect they did not, knowing that it would go down like a lead balloon there.
In Wales (where there are no grammar schools and very few good private sector schools) this huge red herring is used to excuse poor education. In fact, in general, Wales lacks aspiration by parents and teachers and so has and is destroying the education of many of their children. Now the Welsh Government wishes to throw more money at poor performing schools.
My experience in Africa and Asia of schools who have very few financial resources and parents struggle to pay for their children's education (In many countries education - outside of mission schools - is not free), there is a huge united aspiration by children, parents and teachers to learn, to get qualified and to get a good job - overseas, if not in their own country.
In the UK we employ truancy officers - why and where have we gone so wrong?
I'm sure you had an exemplary education. I would also guess that your parents encouraged you.
I believe you were brought up and now live in Leicestershire. You do realise that all the intellectuals emigrated Eastwards 300 years ago when the Dutch drained the fens?
Thank you
Even given that I may be a bit biased, there does seem to be change afoot. BT have almost disappeared, Darling been seen on TV twice this year for maybe 20 seconds a time. Labour leader has made no comment on independence for many months , again never ever seen in public. Will be interesting head to head with Nichola Sturgeon on 25th on STV. Even the Daily Record was unhappy with the threats this week and call in yesterday on BBC propaganda radio was almost unanimously for yes and people registering to vote due to the insults, at least 3-1 were yes and this really irks the BBC.
I see changes , BT has no volunteers on the ground and only scare stories. YES have local groups all over Scotland , very vibrant etc. Labour backing Tories was the killer. I think it is downhill all the way for NO now. Trend is certainly away from NO if not yet all to YES.
There are children from poor backgrounds who get into Grammar schools. So what sets them apart from their classmates? I would hazard a guess that it is the importance their parents place on education and the willingness of those parents to make sacrifices in other areas to make sure their children get the best possible chance of success.
There are also primary schools in Grammar school areas that refuse point blank to help their pupils with their 11+ preparation. How is that helping any child? It is the politics of envy being played out in the classroom.
The divergence on this (Butskellist consensus vs Thatcherism/Blairism) is also why a post independence currency union with rUK would be doomed to failure. It could only work if Scotland and rUK were pursuing much the same economic and spending policies, which would preclude Scotland deviating from Thatcherism/Blairism.
The conservatives should be doing far, far more to hang the dead albatross of Welsh education around labour's neck.
The coalition need to do something radical and aggressive like threaten to try to remove the education brief from the Welsh government if they don't pull their socks up. What are the tories afraid of? Its almost like this is labour's business, we shouldn;t go poking our noses in.
Something should be done to really force this issue, which labour are desperate to keep quiet, out into the open, for the benefit of children in Wales and in England.
One of the things that was important about Grammar schools in the past and I think is lacking today is the fact that failure at 11+ was not the end of the matter when Grammars were widespread. Plenty of children who did not pass the 11+ could move up into the Grammar system if they showed greater potential later in their school lives.
Mr Salmond was actually chucked out of the SNP for a while like Mr MacAskill as I find on checking. But today Mr Swinney's economic prudence would put to shame any recent UK C of the E. Okay, he only gets so much pocket money by Barnett but the refusal to indulge in PPP/PFI is to my mind a huge plus when running a country rather than selling it off to the chums of the party in power.
However, there is no Scottish Labour Party and until there is one, Labour in Scotland will have to obey the (relatively) Blairite views of London HQ - logically enough for a Unionist party, I hasten to add. There are undoubtedly tensions and I will be very interested to see how the impending party conference goes.
On a related matter also relevant o the thread I deeply deplore the way in which some people comment on the Scottish position on university fees - which is exactly as it was across the UK for so much of the postwar consensus. It is so important for bright children from whatever background to be given that chance of further education. And the present system based on residence is vital to make sure that Scottish children - who mostly need to go to Scottish universities because of the school exam and degree system - have some hope of a place. Yet some people here can only express Schadenfreude at the thought of the horrendous damage that will be done if this system is subverted. I think such glee is utterly misplaced.
I agree with the first part - the UK government should be making far more of Labour's failures there. I wonder whether it's partly because they think such an attack might be seen as anti-Welsh and partly because you would inevitably get calls to 'do something', which then leads to a sterile debate on principles of governance at which point most people would turn off.
"On a related matter also relevant o the thread I deeply deplore the way in which some people comment on the Scottish position on university fees - which is exactly as it was across the UK for so much of the postwar consensus. It is so important for bright children from whatever background to be given that chance of further education. And the present system based on residence is vital to make sure that Scottish children - who mostly need to go to Scottish universities because of the school exam and degree system - have some hope of a place. Yet some people here can only express Schadenfreude at the thought of the horrendous damage that will be done if this system is subverted. I think such glee is utterly misplaced."
EU law is such that rUK students would not pay tuition fees, provided both Scotland and rUK are in the EU, unless Scotland charges its own residents. This need not be a bar to access. The evidence in England is that there has been little effect on either the numbers or social mix of students going to university.
Scotland should be more positive about this. English undergraduates at Scottish Universities are going to be a source of migrants attuned to Scottish values, well educated and comfortable in Scottish culture. Scotland just needs to be welcoming to them and encourage them to stay on afterwards. It would be Scotlands gain and Englands loss.
This is why I prefer Southampton,now playing away at Sunderland,currently available at 12-1.
My old tipster pal Farringdon,is on Red Rocco 2.25 Haydock 20-1.He also likes old boy Mia's Boy in the 3.25 Lingfield at 20-1.At shorter odds he fancies Presberg Lingfield 2.15 at 13-2.
There's my 1point ew Round Robin.
Happy punting everyone.
In a surprise move, US workers have voted against union representation at a Volkswagen car plant in the southern state of Tennessee.
The vote derails efforts by the United Auto Workers (UAW) to organise foreign-owned factories in the southern US.
Experts had expected the ballot to pass in favour of unionising, after Volkswagen tacitly supported the move.
The vote had faced resistance from Republican politicians, who argued it would slow economic growth.
It was the UAW's first attempt in 13 years to unionise a plant not run by one of the three big US carmakers - General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler.
Analysts say the result could significantly curtail future organisation efforts and further dent the union's reputation.
Membership is reported to have plummeted 75% since the late 1970s, leaving it with barely 400,000 supporters.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-26203784
Can the Tories find another Major? I'm not sure. They do have some working class representatives but they seem more like people inspired by Norman Tebbit not Major. This is a Party that largely treats John Major as an embarrassing aberration they'd like to forget, so they're unlikely to find another one.
Now those excluded Scottish children cannot all simply go to university down south (at a price!), as the English degree system is not very compatible with the Scottish higher system either in terms of timing of university entrance, qualifications or, arguably, underlying philosophy (vide the recent TV debate between Mr Aaronovitch and Ms Riddoch inter aliis, for those interested). That is why I find some posters' and newspapers' glee so misplaced and distasteful.
This is a genuine worry and I can't see how it can be resolved other than by differential treatment. It is already a known problem for Germany vs Austria and that is with German tuition fees, I believe, much lower than UK (other than Scotland). I'm not sure how it was resolved but at one point 50% of medic students at one Austrian university were German.
I know that EU students are coming here but this is not too much of an issue at the moment as people tend to stay in the language of birth.
It's a bit like not bothering to give EWNI residents free medical treatment because they can always travel to Scotland to get it free ...
Of course the problem is unlikely to happen, as the Unionists tell us. Either Scotland or EWNI won't be in the EU ... [needle on irony meter flicks up]
You might have something there I suppose.
http://youtu.be/XZyM2mKHRW4
If Cameron wins next year, it will almost certainly be a small majority, with still more public spending cuts and the EU renegotiation, I predict a similar parliament to 92-97.
I can see no way out of the situation that you describe, provided we both stay in the EU.
I would suggest charging Scottish student fees, but having a repayment system set so that fee repayments were 100% tax deductable against Scottish income tax, in effect meaning that they are never repaid.
Con 68:32
LD 66:34
Lab 54:46
UKIP 48:52
Clearly in such circumstances the Tories and the Libdems run the risk of further damaging their support (by losing upper class voters) if they appoint a "working class" leader and or adopt working class policies (as opposed to being patronising and disingenuous to the working classes) which has often been the establishment parties' attitude in the past (e.g. promises on EU referendums). It may well be the case that the Tories support within the party as well as without is now so imbalanced that they will not countenance a Thatcher or a Major. Certainly the destructive and abusive language of many leading Tories, not just Cameron, suggest they are not really interested in courting a big tent approach preferring their own brand of elitism. As in many other ways it could well be that the Tories worst enemy are in fact The Tories.
Which means that the real battle for the lower classes at the next election will be between Labour ( who intriguingly were more upper than lower class) and UKIP (who had the most balanced support despite those increasingly publicised Ford and Goodwin's assertions).
A bad day for fans of Labour nepotism!
http://youtu.be/Olc5C4SXAYM
With the economy improving, Ed Milliband may not be so bad. There is something to be said for a PM with no policies, as inaction is often the best approach!
In doing so, he implies that they're a long way from Labour and Labour voters, which is not necessarily true in WWC socially conservative areas. Many of those areas have a culture that would not countenance voting Tory this side of the 22nd century but a newcomer like UKIP doesn't carry that baggage and isn't affected by the culture to anything liken the same extent. That may not matter so much now, with Labour in opposition, but it may well very much matter were they to return to government next year.
Kellner also concentrates in those comments too much on vote share. Pollsters love vote share and of course it is important but it can also be misleading. Yes, Labour's share went up but their vote received fell from just shy of 18k to not much more than 13k. There will have been churn - given the scale of LD vote loss, and what we know from opinion polls, there probably was a sizable shift from Lib Dem to Labour - but that was all swamped by the miserable turnout. I don't think it's implausible to suggest a small net swing from Lab to UKIP in real votes, as well as nominally, as calculated by vote share.
2) Decades of poisoned relations as the Scots piss & moan about the conditions imposed on them by Westminster to make the thing work. Let the EU tell them what to do.
3) No evidence that any likely future Scottish administration would have the fiscal discipline required. See 2.
4) for the same reason that the Scottish civil service has been told to argue for independence. Both are government policy
Even had the whole Tory party been united, Major still deserved to be destroyed because he was directly responsible for dragging us into the ERM with all the subsequent misery tat caused the country.
So no really good reason to see a significant market drift off from Sterling to the Euro then? It cant be great for trade prospects long term. The unionist parties are clearly all about winning the referendum regardless of whether anything they say or do makes sense. And when it comes to their position on the Euro the Lib Dems almost ridiculously so.
There was an experiment done about 40 years ago in the US, where four year old kids were placed in a room with a sweet. They are told that if they can wait just a few minutes they will get two sweets.
The kids are left on their own.
All eventually succumb and eat the sweet.
But 40 years later there was an almost perfect correlation (and much better than with 'IQ') between those kids that could wait a long time for the promised second sweet and academic and professional success.
To put it into context, in Thatcher's two landslide victories in the 1980s, Labour still held Wythenshawe by five-figure majorities with more than half the vote.
http://t.co/VBgDNsxbwv
Why did the Lib Dems do so well there, when they've tanked utterly elsewhere in the North.
2. the decision by the Tories to not campaign very hard (quite a few seemed to vote tactically for their new coalition partners)
3. before the rise of UKIP
If there was another by-election there now I imagine the Lib Dems would do worse.
They've had some reasonable results in locals though.