Er, Tiger, Lion and Blake were six-inch gun cruisers; Tiger and Blake (but not, I think, Lion) were indeed converted to carry a very few helicopters, but they were not aircraft carriers in the usual sense of being able to deploy fixed-wing aircraft.
Ssh! Don't tell Junior's dad. He thinks Spain has more than us....
There has been a lot of inter county cooperation on this, brigades from all over the country have been sending crews and equipment to bolster the areas involved, but there could have been much more use of the Fire Service in this time of national emergency. Most of my brigade let it be known to SMT that we'd like to get involved in the relief and rescue effort. We've got the skills, got the equipment, got the motivation, and we damned sure have the time, we're under utilised. There needs to be a serious rethink on our strategies.
Maybe part of the problem here is that Britain has too many of these piddling little counties. If instead of all those piddling little ones they'd had one county with immediate access to the fire brigades of the former Somerset, Dorset, Wiltshire and Gloucester (the latter being renowned for its stepping in a puddle right up to his middle experience) they'd have had an easier time responding.
Surely fire brigades need to be managed locally, if your house catches fire in Malmesbury you don't want the fire engine to be coming from taunton. Flood relief is probably different though - flooding happens every year although (mostly) not in the same bits of the country, so it would be difficult to maintain the level of knowledge and expertise locally. Apart from Somerset. maybe. That's where you need a national organisation with the ability to command local assets.
I don't mean you'd keep all the fire engines in one place, I mean you'd have one bloke with the authority to tell all the firemen in the area where to go and what to do. That's pretty much what counties are designed for, except that the British ones are too small. In a normal country you'd fix this by merging the counties together into more sensible sizes. But instead, the British make loads of weird exception cases like police authorities spanning multiple counties, with the result that nobody knows who the hell is responsible for anything.
" Let us do the lot, fire, ambulance, mines, caves
Noooooo. The charity bits like the RNLI work really well. Let the government take them over costs will go through the roof and the level of service will fall.
I understand your point, but I think we'd make a go of it. We run UKISAR very, very well, and I think domestic rescue would dovetail easily into that model.
<
Mr. Stopper I have nothing but the utmost respect and admiration for the junior members of the fire and rescue service, their professionalism, training, motivation and bravery is unrivalled outside the armed services. The quality of the senior management as managers and away from an operational role is, in my experience, appalling. They are great at running a big fire ground, organising a rescue and suchlike but as strategic managers and leaders clueless to the point of incompetence and so parochial they make the police look good. Putting them in charge of organising a national rescue service would be a disaster of epic proportions and cost billions.
We dont like SMT getting involved in operations. You've heard of the Fire Triangle? We use the Fire Square. It comprises Oxygen, Fuel, Heat and Managers. If you take any one of those four away from a fire, the fire WILL go out!
I understand your reluctance, and it would take a serious attitude change in government and Fire Service management, but I think it'd work, if it was free of politics! It's just something I'm passionate about, I guess.
Er, Tiger, Lion and Blake were six-inch gun cruisers; Tiger and Blake (but not, I think, Lion) were indeed converted to carry a very few helicopters, but they were not aircraft carriers in the usual sense of being able to deploy fixed-wing aircraft.
Ssh! Don't tell Junior's dad. He thinks Spain has more than us....
As I said in an edit which you just missed, it doesn't much affect your argument anyway!
Mr. Monksfield, it's worth pointing out that (from what can gather from the low frequency and prominence this has in the reporting) flood defences have actually saved very many homes from being flooded. Naturally the focus is on those in distress, but when the floods recede it'd be very interesting and sueful to assess how much good (or not) has been done by the defences that were already in place.
Mr Dancer makes a good point here. Certainly in the South Notts area we're as dry as a bone and we had flood defences finished a couple of years ago.There is probably a causative link.
Downthread someone asks critically why we have to borrow gear from the Dutch. Why not? They're acknowledged experts on the issue, they've been tackling it systematically for decades, and if we've got a crisis and they haven't, it makes absolute sense to bring in not just the gear but the experts too. That, surely, is the kind of cooperation with neighbours that even the most zealous Better Off Out supporter would feel made sense? (Should the Netherlands have a crisis shortage of crappy reality TV shows, we could rush to the rescue in the same way.)
I'm a BOO and I agree completely with you Nick, though I'm not sure why you would need to be a member of the EU to ask the Dutch experts for help. However that is beside the point, we should get them over here as soon as possible, to help now and to advise how to prevent it in future.
Also agree that reality TV is rubbish, however I've made a few quid out of it recently so in my view it should be a protected species!
Mr. Charles, I suspect the West Country/South distinction (being different as opposed to the West Country being a distinct area within the South) is not one that is generally held further north.
One is Saxon, one is Briton! You are Danes...
Living in Hampshire (and quite close to Surrey I have to add) I get annoyed when it appears in the South East rather than South. After all, Dorset is the next county.
I grew up in NW Hampshire* so I know how you feel.
* North of the preston candover valley, I hasten to stress ;-)
Good example of politician solidarity in Germany. As i understand it, an SPD (socialist) MP is accused of downloading child porn, before the coalition was formed. A CSU (hard right) Minister was told about the ongoing enquiries. He immediately tipped off SPD colleagues, even though the investigation was in progress and he'd been told in confidence. The SPD MP had been in line for possible promotion and this helped the SPD avoid the resulting embarrassment, The minister has now resigned, but says hey, he was just trying to be helpful to a potential coalition partner. I haven't followed it closely enough to be sure of the details, let alone have a view, but it's the kind of rallying round that we saw in Westminster too during the expenses scandal, when one element not seen was politicians scoring off each other about it.
Unfortunately it also reinforces the "they're all in it together" meme of the wider public.
The polls indicate that the tyres supporting the Ukip vehicle have a puncture,albeit a slow one.There has been a significant betting move on the Euros with Lab into 11/10fav. from 6-4,which also indicates that Ukip have peaked.Many of the local elections are in areas like Wythenshawe,without Ukip presence on the ground.Not much low-hanging fruit there either. Maybe the Ukip star is gradually beginning to wane.
There has been a lot of inter county cooperation on this, brigades from all over the country have been sending crews and equipment to bolster the areas involved, but there could have been much more use of the Fire Service in this time of national emergency. Most of my brigade let it be known to SMT that we'd like to get involved in the relief and rescue effort. We've got the skills, got the equipment, got the motivation, and we damned sure have the time, we're under utilised. There needs to be a serious rethink on our strategies.
Maybe part of the problem here is that Britain has too many of these piddling little counties. If instead of all those piddling little ones they'd had one county with immediate access to the fire brigades of the former Somerset, Dorset, Wiltshire and Gloucester (the latter being renowned for its stepping in a puddle right up to his middle experience) they'd have had an easier time responding.
Surely fire brigades need to be managed locally, if your house catches fire in Malmesbury you don't want the fire engine to be coming from taunton. Flood relief is probably different though - flooding happens every year although (mostly) not in the same bits of the country, so it would be difficult to maintain the level of knowledge and expertise locally. Apart from Somerset. maybe. That's where you need a national organisation with the ability to command local assets.
I don't mean you'd keep all the fire engines in one place, I mean you'd have one bloke with the authority to tell all the firemen in the area where to go and what to do. That's pretty much what counties are designed for, except that the British ones are too small. In a normal country you'd fix this by merging the counties together into more sensible sizes. But instead, the British make loads of weird exception cases like police authorities spanning multiple counties, with the result that nobody knows who the hell is responsible for anything.
In any case I am not sure why you think English counties are "too small" - Hampshire has a bigger population than many States of the USA, would make a reasonable size Land in Germany, etc etc
When it comes to telling "all the firemen in the area where to go and what to do" surely that is different for fires (happen all the time) and floods (happen every 2-3 years). I would argue that floods should be managed nationally, not regionally - for example, at the moment we should be deploying Yorkshire flood defence assets in the Thames Valley or Somerset.
In any case, given the views of TFS on fire brigade senior management, we do not want to be giving them bigger areas to look after!
Mr. Charles, I suspect the West Country/South distinction (being different as opposed to the West Country being a distinct area within the South) is not one that is generally held further north.
One is Saxon, one is Briton! You are Danes...
Living in Hampshire (and quite close to Surrey I have to add) I get annoyed when it appears in the South East rather than South. After all, Dorset is the next county.
I grew up in NW Hampshire* so I know how you feel.
* North of the preston candover valley, I hasten to stress ;-)
Mr. Charles, I suspect the West Country/South distinction (being different as opposed to the West Country being a distinct area within the South) is not one that is generally held further north.
One is Saxon, one is Briton! You are Danes...
Living in Hampshire (and quite close to Surrey I have to add) I get annoyed when it appears in the South East rather than South. After all, Dorset is the next county.
I grew up in NW Hampshire* so I know how you feel.
* North of the preston candover valley, I hasten to stress ;-)
Good example of politician solidarity in Germany. As i understand it, an SPD (socialist) MP is accused of downloading child porn, before the coalition was formed. A CSU (hard right) Minister was told about the ongoing enquiries. He immediately tipped off SPD colleagues, even though the investigation was in progress and he'd been told in confidence. The SPD MP had been in line for possible promotion and this helped the SPD avoid the resulting embarrassment, The minister has now resigned, but says hey, he was just trying to be helpful to a potential coalition partner. I haven't followed it closely enough to be sure of the details, let alone have a view, but it's the kind of rallying round that we saw in Westminster too during the expenses scandal, when one element not seen was politicians scoring off each other about it.
Unfortunately it also reinforces the "they're all in it together" meme of the wider public.
To me, there seems to be a big difference between letting innocent people know of a guilty person within their ranks, and going easy on the guilty party for the sake of class interests. The former is noble, whereas the latter is rightfully castigated.
Good example of politician solidarity in Germany. As i understand it, an SPD (socialist) MP is accused of downloading child porn, before the coalition was formed. A CSU (hard right) Minister was told about the ongoing enquiries. He immediately tipped off SPD colleagues, even though the investigation was in progress and he'd been told in confidence. The SPD MP had been in line for possible promotion and this helped the SPD avoid the resulting embarrassment, The minister has now resigned, but says hey, he was just trying to be helpful to a potential coalition partner. I haven't followed it closely enough to be sure of the details, let alone have a view, but it's the kind of rallying round that we saw in Westminster too during the expenses scandal, when one element not seen was politicians scoring off each other about it.
Unfortunately it also reinforces the "they're all in it together" meme of the wider public.
To me, there seems to be a big difference between letting innocent people know of a guilty person within their ranks, and going easy on the guilty party for the sake of class interests. The former is noble, whereas the latter is rightfully castigated.
But (a) he had only been accused, not charged or proven guilty and yet his career was damaged out of some sense of "solidarity" and (b) the CSU minister was told in confidence - as part of this job? - either breaching protocol or, at the least, proving himself untrustworthy.
In any case I am not sure why you think English counties are "too small" - Hampshire has a bigger population than many States of the USA, would make a reasonable size Land in Germany, etc etc
Hampshire would be smaller than all but a couple of the littlest Lande. The whole of Germany has something like 16 with a higher population than England. The US has a few teensy states for obscure historical reasons, but the average is way higher than the average English county.
France has quite a few prefectures, but they're specifically designed to divide and rule to help squish rural rebellions, and they have a regional tier on top.
When it comes to telling "all the firemen in the area where to go and what to do" surely that is different for fires (happen all the time) and floods (happen every 2-3 years). I would argue that floods should be managed nationally, not regionally - for example, at the moment we should be deploying Yorkshire flood defence assets in the Thames Valley or Somerset.
Dunno, often you get a lot of different overlapping problems happening in the same place, so wouldn't you normally want to put the local authority in charge of the whole kaboodle then have them call in help from whatever national resources are available?
But thanks for perfectly demonstrating the social democrat response to such an appalling failure of their social model. Rather than acknowledge the problem and modify their beliefs, you just try to divert attention elsewhere. It's the old Soviet Union response to criticism.
Hampshire would be smaller than all but a couple of the littlest Lande. The whole of Germany has something like 16 with a higher population than England. The US has a few teensy states for obscure historical reasons, but the average is way higher than the average English county.
France has quite a few prefectures, but they're specifically designed to divide and rule to help squish rural rebellions, and they have a regional tier on top.
Ergo: Correlation =/= Causation. Especially given the complex nature of the English language....
"European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso has said it would be "extremely difficult, if not impossible" for an independent Scotland to join the European Union."
'"European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso has said it would be "extremely difficult, if not impossible" for an independent Scotland to join the European Union."
"European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso has said it would be "extremely difficult, if not impossible" for an independent Scotland to join the European Union."
The Commission has been saying the same thing for a fair while. There is just no way Scotland will automatically become an EU member state upon independence.
I may have been wrong about Romney. I have been 100% right about this.
@benedictbrogan: Killer from Barroso: chance of an independent Scotland joining EU? 'Extremely difficult if not impossible' #IndyRef #Marr Big intervention
Bluster, bluff and bullying by Brussels bureaucrat Barroso
'"European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso has said it would be "extremely difficult, if not impossible" for an independent Scotland to join the European Union."
Surely just more bluff,bluster & bullying?
They can make that argument against Labour and the Tories, but it's pretty difficult to do it to Barroso, who has no particular beef with Scottish independence.
58% of people in England and Wales now oppose allowing an independent Scotland to continue to use the pound, up 15 points from late November
Following a week of sniping between Westminster and the Scottish National Party over the matter of whether Scotland could retain the pound as its currency if it became independent, a new YouGov poll finds a majority of the public in England and Wales now oppose allowing an independent Scotland to use the pound.
When the question was last asked in late November last year, people in England and Wales only narrowly opposed a currency union, by 43% to 38% in support. But now, opposition is at 58% and support is at just 23%.
"European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso has said it would be "extremely difficult, if not impossible" for an independent Scotland to join the European Union."
The Commission has been saying the same thing for a fair while. There is just no way Scotland will automatically become an EU member state upon independence.
If the BBC reporting is right he's saying more than that, he's saying that it will be extremely difficult, if not impossible, for them to join at all, because it would be hard to get all 28 members to agree to it.
'"European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso has said it would be "extremely difficult, if not impossible" for an independent Scotland to join the European Union."
Surely just more bluff,bluster & bullying?
Iain Martin tweets:
Barroso has obviously been put up to this by his Tory Eurosceptic Unionist chums. Oh, hold on... #bbcsp
@Socrates - Are you seriously suggesting that the 1979-1997 government was social democratic?
No. I'm suggesting that the social policy of the 1997-2010 was social democratic, particularly on immigration and integration matters. i.e. open borders to all and sundry and no push to adopt British values.
"European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso has said it would be "extremely difficult, if not impossible" for an independent Scotland to join the European Union."
The Commission has been saying the same thing for a fair while. There is just no way Scotland will automatically become an EU member state upon independence.
If the BBC reporting is right he's saying more than that, he's saying that it will be extremely difficult, if not impossible, for them to join at all, because it would be hard to get all 28 members to agree to it.
In the short-term I imagine that is correct. But ways will be found eventually. Spain will need to make the process as painful and as long as possible. But, in the end, Spain will be fine - it just needs time to sort out its Catalan problem. And that will happen once there is a change of government in Madrid.
"European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso has said it would be "extremely difficult, if not impossible" for an independent Scotland to join the European Union."
The Commission has been saying the same thing for a fair while. There is just no way Scotland will automatically become an EU member state upon independence.
I may have been wrong about Romney. I have been 100% right about this.
No you haven't, you've been saying "the momentum is with YES" and YES is going to win. You said it was a "sad but exciting time" as Scotland seceded.
With the £ ruled out and now this euro-bombshell, would you like to reiterate those remarks?
I guess not. YES looks all but impossible now, unless the Scots go totally postal and vote YES just to show everyone they won't be bullied by reality.
I have been saying it will be close. And it will be.
If you wish to deny I have been making the point about the Commission and Spain for at least a couple of years, then that's fine. Whatever makes you feel better.
@Socrates - Are you seriously suggesting that the 1979-1997 government was social democratic?
No. I'm suggesting that the social policy of the 1997-2010 was social democratic, particularly on immigration and integration matters. i.e. open borders to all and sundry and no push to adopt British values.
But the British suicide bomber grew up in this country in the 1980s and 1990s. He could only speak English. How many of the British citizens fighting in Syria are the same? Do you know?
"European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso has said it would be "extremely difficult, if not impossible" for an independent Scotland to join the European Union."
The Commission has been saying the same thing for a fair while. There is just no way Scotland will automatically become an EU member state upon independence.
I may have been wrong about Romney. I have been 100% right about this.
No you haven't, you've been saying "the momentum is with YES" and YES is going to win. You said it was a "sad but exciting time" as Scotland seceded.
With the £ ruled out and now this euro-bombshell, would you like to reiterate those remarks?
I guess not. YES looks all but impossible now, unless the Scots go totally postal and vote YES just to show everyone they won't be bullied by reality.
I have been saying it will be close. And it will be.
If you wish to deny I have been making the point about the Commission and Spain for at least a couple of years, then that's fine. Whatever makes you feel better.
I was the first person on pb to make the point about the EU and Scottish independence, back in 2008, when I linked to this article in the FT.
My original point was not actually aimed at you. It was aimed at one of our Scottish brothers, who has taken to calling me a PB Romney over recent days.
Who cares who posted about it first? All SO said was that he has been consistently saying that there would be trouble regarding Scotland and the EU. This is something you agree on, jeez!
I don't see why that would be a negative. Setting out positions that differ from Con/Lab/LD is necessary for UKIP, and handguns is as good a choice as any.
The shooting/hunting/fishing community might like having a party on their side. They have votes too.
Dave, I know what you mean about setting out a different position + the Countryside Alliance vote... but I'm pretty confident that if there were any 'national debate' about the reintroduction of handguns Farage would get metaphorically massacred.
I've probably mucked up the html in my blockquotes, which makes me think that maybe UKIP would be better off backing the Tories on introduction of coding in schools, perhaps taking it a step further and adding engineering to the curriculum. Something like that, but not guns - it would be madness.
My original point was not actually aimed at you. It was aimed at one of our Scottish brothers, who has taken to calling me a PB Romney over recent days.
That's not an accurate description of the policy. It was New Labour that brought in the Citizenship Test, for example. The result may be a load of old wank, but it's a load of old wank explicitly aimed at pushing people to adopt British values, whatever that means.
My original point was not actually aimed at you. It was aimed at one of our Scottish brothers, who has taken to calling me a PB Romney over recent days.
Why the politeness...?
:
It won't be polite when the PB Barrosos get banded around ;-)
My wife was polled on Scottish Independence (among a large number of other topics) by phone by Ipsos Mori last night. Quite detailed questions going into all the latest currency shennanigans. It will be interesting to see what the views are when this comes out.
'If Scotland is not in the EU, it can charge English students whatever it wants to go to university in Scotland.'
Not disputing that,the claim was that an independent Scotland in the EU would still be able to charge English students tuition fees.
'Could Scottish independence kill off free tuition fees? | Politics ... www.theguardian.com › News › Politics › Scottish independence blog 14 Jan 2014 - Alex Salmond's insistence that Scotland could still charge students from the rest of the UK university fees after independence is being severely ...
Just to pick up on this bit as well: Can you be a bit more specific about the period during which you think Britain had open borders to all and sundry?
The reason I ask is that I think open borders might be a good idea, but people say that they might cause a huge influx of poor people that would destroy the welfare state etc etc, which gives me pause for thought. But if, as you say, Britain has already had open borders fairly recently, maybe it's not as bad as they're making out?
Just to pick up on this bit as well: Can you be a bit more specific about the period during which you think Britain had open borders to all and sundry?
The reason I ask is that I think open borders might be a good idea, but people say that they might cause a huge influx of poor people that would destroy the welfare state etc etc, which gives me pause for thought. But if, as you say, Britain has already had open borders fairly recently, maybe it's not as bad as they're making out?
I believe there maybe a definitional clash. From Wikipedia:
An open border is a border that enables free movement of people between different jurisdictions with limited or no restrictions to movement.
I am referring to "limited restrictions to movement", whereas you seem to be referring to "no restrictions to movement".
My wife was polled on Scottish Independence (among a large number of other topics) by phone by Ipsos Mori last night. Quite detailed questions going into all the latest currency shennanigans. It will be interesting to see what the views are when this comes out.
I can see a slight surge in YES over the currency issue, initially, on the grounds of English Bullying, but in the longer term the currency problem, and now the EU problem, are surely fatal for YES.
Doubt kills referendum campaigns which are seeking change, as everyone knows. There is now a HUGE element of doubt for any Scots considering a YES. If you were a Scottish mortgage holder, or someone with a pension, or a businessman, or basically anyone with a job north of the Border, would you risk your prosperity on the basis that Alex Salmond Knows Best and Everyone Else in the UK and Europe is Lying?
The whole SNP message seems to be that it will just be a short, simple step to independence and nothing much will change. Whatever else has happened this week, that message is no longer tenable. To be fair, it would be a huge surprise if the SNP leadership truly believed that, it's just that they have a referendum to win. What happens after a Yes is very much of secondary importance to them. However, as I think you and others have said it is pretty extraordinary that they did not anticipate these issues cropping up. It's not as if they have not been loudly trailed and clearly signposted for a very long time.
But thanks for perfectly demonstrating the social democrat response to such an appalling failure of their social model. Rather than acknowledge the problem and modify their beliefs, you just try to divert attention elsewhere. It's the old Soviet Union response to criticism.
Half the FSA are also Islamists funded by Saudi Arabia. Ironically, the "only" group whic h has shown tolerance to minorities e.g. Christians, is the Assad government. Christians in Syria back the Damascus government totally.
The same was the case in Iraq. It was under Saddam that Christians felt safe !
That's not an accurate description of the policy. It was New Labour that brought in the Citizenship Test, for example. The result may be a load of old wank, but it's a load of old wank explicitly aimed at pushing people to adopt British values, whatever that means.
New Labour's citizenship test largely consisted of asking people how many European MEPs we had, or how you claim Jobseeker's Allowance. I'm not aware of anything values being in it. The main values-related argument of the Labour party at the time was "multiculturalism": the idea that all cultures are equal and should be accommodated.
On Thread; didn't UK (and most other places) have open borders prior to WWI? Or thereabouts?
On Topic; I don't think it's the floods which will damage the Tories; I think it's there apparent headless chicken act. It was that which, IIRC, so ruined both the latter days of the Brown and Major administrations.
OGH is only now catching up with what I have been saying on this blog, a week ago: namely that that Cammo and the Coalition are going to suffer long term damage.
@Socrates - Are you seriously suggesting that the 1979-1997 government was social democratic?
No. I'm suggesting that the social policy of the 1997-2010 was social democratic, particularly on immigration and integration matters. i.e. open borders to all and sundry and no push to adopt British values.
But the British suicide bomber grew up in this country in the 1980s and 1990s. He could only speak English. How many of the British citizens fighting in Syria are the same? Do you know?
Yet strangely, there weren't hundreds of Britons going off to fight a jihad in the 1980s and 1990s. That's happened after a decade or so of New Labour alienation due to the philosophy of multiculturalism. There's also the issue that fresh migration meant less need to integrate from those already here.
However, I accept part of the problems come from problems with post-war immigration. The Thatcher years, however, saw the social tension coming and sensibly clamped down on immigration. Unlike the idiots from 1997 onwards.
"I seriously think that the these flood disasters may turn out as bad for Cameron's government as BlacK Wednesday did for for the Tory government of John Major. In this instance the votes lost being split between UKIP and Labour."
OGH is only now catching up with what I have been saying on this blog, a week ago: namely that that Cammo and the Coalition are going to suffer long term damage.
On Thread; didn't UK (and most other places) have open borders prior to WWI? Or thereabouts?
I'd guess that the British Empire had open-borders up-and-until 1969.* Once we could not export our criminal underclasses to Oz then it became pointless....
* EEC-accession in 1973 would have been a probable downer....
Can't do much harm, and may even find some potential problems. However it'd be interesting to see what the 'inspection' comprises: it sounds like it might just be similar to the standard inspections.
As an aside, I wonder if bridge inspections are going to be brought forward in the flooded rivers? By law every bridge that has a pier in water must be inspected annually to check for scour, and I wonder if those inspections are brought forward after the rivers have been in severe flood?
My wife was polled on Scottish Independence (among a large number of other topics) by phone by Ipsos Mori last night. Quite detailed questions going into all the latest currency shennanigans. It will be interesting to see what the views are when this comes out.
I can see a slight surge in YES over the currency issue, initially, on the grounds of English Bullying, but in the longer term the currency problem, and now the EU problem, are surely fatal for YES.
Doubt kills referendum campaigns which are seeking change, as everyone knows. There is now a HUGE element of doubt for any Scots considering a YES. If you were a Scottish mortgage holder, or someone with a pension, or a businessman, or basically anyone with a job north of the Border, would you risk your prosperity on the basis that Alex Salmond Knows Best and Everyone Else in the UK and Europe is Lying?
As I have been saying on here for a long time Sean Yes has minimal support amongst these groups anyway. The haves know how their bread is buttered. But the have nots (who are more numerous) by definition have a lot less to lose and have been much more in favour. Will they be that bothered by these slightly inconvenient turns of events? I doubt it.
I am reminded of the film "Meet the Robinsons" where the running joke was that everyone who was roped into assisting the villan expresses the view that this plan has not been properly thought through. We have for years been told that Salmond was the most skilfull politician in Britain and after 2011 it even looked true for a while but, boy, have they made a mess of the most important campaign of his life.
But thanks for perfectly demonstrating the social democrat response to such an appalling failure of their social model. Rather than acknowledge the problem and modify their beliefs, you just try to divert attention elsewhere. It's the old Soviet Union response to criticism.
Half the FSA are also Islamists funded by Saudi Arabia. Ironically, the "only" group whic h has shown tolerance to minorities e.g. Christians, is the Assad government. Christians in Syria back the Damascus government totally.
The same was the case in Iraq. It was under Saddam that Christians felt safe !
I never said there weren't Islamists in the FSA. There are some within that grouping, although they are more moderate. I just said the people Cameron wanted to support weren't the same as the extreme anti-FSA Islamists that British citizens are going out to fight for. That is what you claimed and you were completely wrong about. Therefore it wasn't just a transparent effort to change the subject from the outrage of hundreds of British citizens willing to fight against everything British liberal values stand for, it was also inaccurate.
That's not an accurate description of the policy. It was New Labour that brought in the Citizenship Test, for example. The result may be a load of old wank, but it's a load of old wank explicitly aimed at pushing people to adopt British values, whatever that means.
New Labour's citizenship test largely consisted of asking people how many European MEPs we had, or how you claim Jobseeker's Allowance. I'm not aware of anything values being in it. The main values-related argument of the Labour party at the time was "multiculturalism": the idea that all cultures are equal and should be accommodated.
They brought in an English requirement, a pledge to "respect [Britain's] rights and freedoms" and "uphold its democratic values", a test with questions about Saints' Days, the Magna Carta etc. I think it's a load of wank, and you may think it's insufficient, but saying they did nothing in that direction is ridiculous.
Yet strangely, there weren't hundreds of Britons going off to fight a jihad in the 1980s and 1990s.
You need to revisit some contemporary history: Case-in-point, 'The Satanic Verses'. Muzzie-militants burning books on the streets of Birmingham. And - I kid you not - outside a mosque funded by the "secular" Saddam Hussien.
On Thread; didn't UK (and most other places) have open borders prior to WWI? Or thereabouts?
I'd guess that the British Empire had open-borders up-and-until 1969.* Once we could not export our criminal underclasses to Oz then it became pointless....
* EEC-accession in 1973 would have been a probable downer....
A sensible pragmatic policy maker adjusts policy to deal with changing circumstances. In the early 20th Century, the high cost of travel relative to incomes meant rather few people could migrate and could thus be easily integrated. Now high numbers can travel and are coming faster than we can integrate them. The sensible policy reaction is to bring in limits to reduce immigration to the tens of thousands, and also to limit it to those most likely to integrate.
@Socrates - Are you seriously suggesting that the 1979-1997 government was social democratic?
No. I'm suggesting that the social policy of the 1997-2010 was social democratic, particularly on immigration and integration matters. i.e. open borders to all and sundry and no push to adopt British values.
But the British suicide bomber grew up in this country in the 1980s and 1990s. He could only speak English. How many of the British citizens fighting in Syria are the same? Do you know?
Yet strangely, there weren't hundreds of Britons going off to fight a jihad in the 1980s and 1990s. That's happened after a decade or so of New Labour alienation due to the philosophy of multiculturalism. There's also the issue that fresh migration meant less need to integrate from those already here.
However, I accept part of the problems come from problems with post-war immigration. The Thatcher years, however, saw the social tension coming and sensibly clamped down on immigration. Unlike the idiots from 1997 onwards.
Strangely enough, the concept of jihad did not really exist in the 80s. However, I think you'll find that it began in the early to mid-90s around the failure of the UK and other countries to intervene in Bosnia.
There has never been an "integration policy" in the UK. Different communities have been left to get on with it. That applied under both Conservative and Labour regimes. That's how we have ended up with 41 year olds born and raised in the UK going off to blow themselves up in a civil war in Syria. As I recall, three of the four 2005 London bombers were also born in the UK. The other one was born in Jamaica.
I agree that the small minority of Scots who really are just chain smoking benefit Bravehearts guzzling Buckie in Glasgae won't give a toss, but they are probably too stupid and drunk to even vote.
They'll vote however Scottish Labour tells them to.
Yet strangely, there weren't hundreds of Britons going off to fight a jihad in the 1980s and 1990s.
You need to revisit some contemporary history: Case-in-point, 'The Satanic Verses'. Muzzie-militants burning books on the streets of Birmingham. And - I kid you not - outside a mosque funded by the "secular" Saddam Hussien.
Folks; grow-up and do some learning....
Yes, I accept there was a problem caused by the 1940s and 1950s immigrations. But there has been a rise in alienation causing people to go from book-burning protests to murder and torture to prevent a democratic state.
Is Salmond as overrated as Gordon was ? The man who saved the world turned out to be a mad spendaholic.
It would appear that Salmond has not used a dictionary to discover the real meaning of the word - 'Independence'.
To Salmond, independence is being independent in the things you want to have independence over, but having all the social, commercial and financial advantages you had before you were independent - in other words he does not want indpendence at all but a form of devo-max. So why is he just not honest and say what he means?
"In the early 20th Century, the high cost of travel relative to incomes meant rather few people could migrate and could thus be easily integrated"
This is not true. See mass Jewish immigration into the UK and the Aliens Act 1905. See also emigration from the UK to various parts of the Empire and the US. if you wanted to move to another country in the late 19th and early 20th century you could do so for a relatively low amount.
It is not going to change my vote but my guess is that if Scotland were denied membership of the EU the momentum towards rUK leaving the EU would be absolutely irresistible.
Barrosso is a Eurocrat par excellance. By definition he is therefore not to be trusted. I will be happy to use this entirely undemocratic intervention because the Union is important to me and it demostrates the absurdity of so many SNP positions but, bluntly, who the hell does he think he is?
Mr. Monksfield, it's worth pointing out that (from what can gather from the low frequency and prominence this has in the reporting) flood defences have actually saved very many homes from being flooded. Naturally the focus is on those in distress, but when the floods recede it'd be very interesting and sueful to assess how much good (or not) has been done by the defences that were already in place.
Mr Dancer makes a good point here. Certainly in the South Notts area we're as dry as a bone and we had flood defences finished a couple of years ago.There is probably a causative link.
Downthread someone asks critically why we have to borrow gear from the Dutch. Why not? They're acknowledged experts on the issue, they've been tackling it systematically for decades, and if we've got a crisis and they haven't, it makes absolute sense to bring in not just the gear but the experts too. That, surely, is the kind of cooperation with neighbours that even the most zealous Better Off Out supporter would feel made sense? (Should the Netherlands have a crisis shortage of crappy reality TV shows, we could rush to the rescue in the same way.)
A rather parochial view there Nick. The Trent and Devon around Newark are certainly not 'dry as a bone'.
It is also worth pointing out that South and East Nottinghamshire gets one of the lowest rainfalls in England
Why can't the Army help out in emergencies ? They are being paid to do what in peacetime ? And why are paying the TAs / Again, they could help out in emergencies.
In the US, they call out the National Guard.
Prepare to fight and defend English Laws and Liberties. Just so asshats like you can sit and squeem about politics....
:muppet-watch:
LOL, your best yet fluffy, they have spent last ten years on illegal wars getting whupped by peasants with towels round their heads. Cannon fodder for politicians and cannot even beat a few rebels, pointless waste of time and money and would be far better utilised filling sandbags.
That's not an accurate description of the policy. It was New Labour that brought in the Citizenship Test, for example. The result may be a load of old wank, but it's a load of old wank explicitly aimed at pushing people to adopt British values, whatever that means.
New Labour's citizenship test largely consisted of asking people how many European MEPs we had, or how you claim Jobseeker's Allowance. I'm not aware of anything values being in it. The main values-related argument of the Labour party at the time was "multiculturalism": the idea that all cultures are equal and should be accommodated.
They brought in an English requirement, a pledge to "respect [Britain's] rights and freedoms" and "uphold its democratic values", a test with questions about Saints' Days, the Magna Carta etc. I think it's a load of wank, and you may think it's insufficient, but saying they did nothing in that direction is ridiculous.
Ok, I'll happily adapt my claim to "next to nothing", but the fact the odd question about Saints' Days in a quiz that equally had questions about the age you can bet on the high street shows we are scraping the barrel here.
Out of interest, would you just happily accept those with, say, pro-Al Qaeda views from coming here, and what would you do to combat those views once they were here?
Wouldn't any government be criticised as doing badly in these situations? Things, though devastating for the thousands affected, have really not been that bad on a national scale compared to past events.
"In the early 20th Century, the high cost of travel relative to incomes meant rather few people could migrate and could thus be easily integrated"
This is not true. See mass Jewish immigration into the UK and the Aliens Act 1905. See also emigration from the UK to various parts of the Empire and the US. if you wanted to move to another country in the late 19th and early 20th century you could do so for a relatively low amount.
British people moving to Australia would have had relatively high incomes for the world population at the time. Compare them to, say, Mirpuri or Nigerian agricultural workers of the time. Russian Jews, while on lower incomes, woudl have been higher than those two groups, and also had lower distances to travel.
@benedictbrogan: Killer from Barroso: chance of an independent Scotland joining EU? 'Extremely difficult if not impossible' #IndyRef #Marr Big intervention
More bollocks mibbes aye mibbes naw from Barroso, next you will be telling us we will not be able to use the pound. Toom Tabard posts again.
It is not going to change my vote but my guess is that if Scotland were denied membership of the EU the momentum towards rUK leaving the EU would be absolutely irresistible.
Barrosso is a Eurocrat par excellance. By definition he is therefore not to be trusted. I will be happy to use this entirely undemocratic intervention because the Union is important to me and it demostrates the absurdity of so many SNP positions but, bluntly, who the hell does he think he is?
Quite so. Barrosso seems to be among the worst of the eurocrats, and often makes statements that makes peope like me, who are affected by the fear of the cost of leaving the EU, consider alternatives due to his arrogance and dismissal of nations.
@Socrates - Are you seriously suggesting that the 1979-1997 government was social democratic?
No. I'm suggesting that the social policy of the 1997-2010 was social democratic, particularly on immigration and integration matters. i.e. open borders to all and sundry and no push to adopt British values.
But the British suicide bomber grew up in this country in the 1980s and 1990s. He could only speak English. How many of the British citizens fighting in Syria are the same? Do you know?
Yet strangely, there weren't hundreds of Britons going off to fight a jihad in the 1980s and 1990s.
Do you have any evidence for that claim? Muslim British volunteers in Afghanistan in the 1980s wouldn't have been picked up by the tabloids as something to get outraged about because they'd have been fighting the Soviets which trumped all else. This reporting is from Jan 1999, before a lot of people had time to have their souls corrupted by the evil Blairite doctrine of tolerance:
A Harkut-ul-Mujahideen official said last week that it had Germans and Britons fighting for the cause, as well as Egyptians, Palestinians and Saudis. Muslims from the West as well as from the Middle East and North Africa are regularly stopped by Pakistani police on the road up the Khyber Pass heading for the camps. Hundreds get through. Afghan veterans have now joined bin Laden's al-Qaeda group.
I largely agree, but I am not sure the Have Nots outnumber the Haves in Scotland. I believe it's the third most prosperous region in the UK, after London and the SE, no?
GDP does not automatically translate to household wealth.
It is not going to change my vote but my guess is that if Scotland were denied membership of the EU the momentum towards rUK leaving the EU would be absolutely irresistible.
Barrosso is a Eurocrat par excellance. By definition he is therefore not to be trusted. I will be happy to use this entirely undemocratic intervention because the Union is important to me and it demostrates the absurdity of so many SNP positions but, bluntly, who the hell does he think he is?
Under EU law it's the Commission that has to deal with this issue - at least at the outset.
I think I might take issue with your use of the term "mass" there, Mr. Observer. It may have seemed a lot at the time but the total Jewish immigration into the UK in the 19th century was rather less than the numbers of immigrants let in each year in recent times.
"European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso has said it would be "extremely difficult, if not impossible" for an independent Scotland to join the European Union."
'"European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso has said it would be "extremely difficult, if not impossible" for an independent Scotland to join the European Union."
Surely just more bluff,bluster & bullying?
John, best just to let the frothers get excited and wee their pants again.
That's not an accurate description of the policy. It was New Labour that brought in the Citizenship Test, for example. The result may be a load of old wank, but it's a load of old wank explicitly aimed at pushing people to adopt British values, whatever that means.
New Labour's citizenship test largely consisted of asking people how many European MEPs we had, or how you claim Jobseeker's Allowance. I'm not aware of anything values being in it. The main values-related argument of the Labour party at the time was "multiculturalism": the idea that all cultures are equal and should be accommodated.
They brought in an English requirement, a pledge to "respect [Britain's] rights and freedoms" and "uphold its democratic values", a test with questions about Saints' Days, the Magna Carta etc. I think it's a load of wank, and you may think it's insufficient, but saying they did nothing in that direction is ridiculous.
Ok, I'll happily adapt my claim to "next to nothing", but the fact the odd question about Saints' Days in a quiz that equally had questions about the age you can bet on the high street shows we are scraping the barrel here.
Out of interest, would you just happily accept those with, say, pro-Al Qaeda views from coming here, and what would you do to combat those views once they were here?
I wouldn't try to screen people trying to get into the country based on their political opinions, not least because they'll just lie about their political opinions to get in, making the whole thing a futile box-ticking exercise. Once somebody's in the country you'd treat them like anyone else regardless of what bonkers ideology they might hold: If there's evidence that they're dangerous, try keep an eye on them in the hope of catching them before they do something bonkers. If they're peacefully bonkers, let them go about their lawful bonkers business.
If the Scots aren't allowed in the Euro and perhaps go for a new currency I can see hedge funds lining up to sink em...
Or, maybe not. There was a paper once written which suggested that the Scot£ could actually appreciate !
I think, in the unlikely event of a "Yes" vote, Salmond will go for exactly this. He will then play the Braveheart card ! He can't propose it now as the SNP would be shred apart. But a Scot£ is no more unlikely to succeed than any other countries currency. Denmark, Norway, Sweden have their own. Why can't the Scots ?
Ultimately, it will be the performance of the economy that will decide a currency's fate !
@Socrates - Are you seriously suggesting that the 1979-1997 government was social democratic?
No. I'm suggesting that the social policy of the 1997-2010 was social democratic, particularly on immigration and integration matters. i.e. open borders to all and sundry and no push to adopt British values.
But the British suicide bomber grew up in this country in the 1980s and 1990s. He could only speak English. How many of the British citizens fighting in Syria are the same? Do you know?
Yet strangely, there weren't hundreds of Britons going off to fight a jihad in the 1980s and 1990s. That's happened after a decade or so of New Labour alienation due to the philosophy of multiculturalism. There's also the issue that fresh migration meant less need to integrate from those already here.
However, I accept part of the problems come from problems with post-war immigration. The Thatcher years, however, saw the social tension coming and sensibly clamped down on immigration. Unlike the idiots from 1997 onwards.
Strangely enough, the concept of jihad did not really exist in the 80s. However, I think you'll find that it began in the early to mid-90s around the failure of the UK and other countries to intervene in Bosnia.
It is not going to change my vote but my guess is that if Scotland were denied membership of the EU the momentum towards rUK leaving the EU would be absolutely irresistible.
Barrosso is a Eurocrat par excellance. By definition he is therefore not to be trusted. I will be happy to use this entirely undemocratic intervention because the Union is important to me and it demostrates the absurdity of so many SNP positions but, bluntly, who the hell does he think he is?
Under EU law it's the Commission that has to deal with this issue - at least at the outset.
I know SO but that does not mean that he is not an unelected, overpaid bureaucrat who should under any system worth keeping be told what to do by democratically accountable politicians.
As I say it rounds off a really bad week for Yes which cheers me greatly but it also turns my stomach more than just a little. I said on here recently I genuinely swither about our EU membership. Interventions like this one, however helpful, push me towards the door.
'"European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso has said it would be "extremely difficult, if not impossible" for an independent Scotland to join the European Union."
Surely just more bluff,bluster & bullying?
What more would you expect from the Westmin - sorry, Brussels, elite? They'll soon change their tune when Scotland votes Yes and the haggis shortage hits home in Strasbourg.
So what is Plan B for the Nats? Are there any on here to tell us? They can't use the pound with the UK, and now it turns out they can't join the EU, either. Perhaps they could confederate with Malawi and use a currency based on yams?
Perhaps if you were half as smart as you think you are you would have read it by now. The details are printed in many places including the Adam Smith Institute, the White paper , Deutsche Bank this week , etc etc. Sad little person that you are.
I think I might take issue with your use of the term "mass" there, Mr. Observer. It may have seemed a lot at the time but the total Jewish immigration into the UK in the 19th century was rather less than the numbers of immigrants let in each year in recent times.
Strangely enough, the concept of jihad did not really exist in the 80s. However, I think you'll find that it began in the early to mid-90s around the failure of the UK and other countries to intervene in Bosnia.
Not saying you're wrong, but at the very least the non-Afghan Muslim volunteers fighting with the Afghans against the Soviets were doing something similar, weren't they?
'"European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso has said it would be "extremely difficult, if not impossible" for an independent Scotland to join the European Union."
Surely just more bluff,bluster & bullying?
They can make that argument against Labour and the Tories, but it's pretty difficult to do it to Barroso, who has no particular beef with Scottish independence.
Comments
Also agree that reality TV is rubbish, however I've made a few quid out of it recently so in my view it should be a protected species!
Lab 37
Con 28
Ukip 17
LD 8
* North of the preston candover valley, I hasten to stress ;-)
Unfortunately it also reinforces the "they're all in it together" meme of the wider public.
Maybe the Ukip star is gradually beginning to wane.
When it comes to telling "all the firemen in the area where to go and what to do" surely that is different for fires (happen all the time) and floods (happen every 2-3 years). I would argue that floods should be managed nationally, not regionally - for example, at the moment we should be deploying Yorkshire flood defence assets in the Thames Valley or Somerset.
In any case, given the views of TFS on fire brigade senior management, we do not want to be giving them bigger areas to look after!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26214793
What a devastating indictment of integration policies over recent decades. Has anyone even approached an apology for their utter failure yet?
France has quite a few prefectures, but they're specifically designed to divide and rule to help squish rural rebellions, and they have a regional tier on top. Dunno, often you get a lot of different overlapping problems happening in the same place, so wouldn't you normally want to put the local authority in charge of the whole kaboodle then have them call in help from whatever national resources are available?
The Doctor for whom Cameron came out in support, who do you think he was supporting ?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2556616/British-jihadists-fighting-Syria-post-Facebook-torture-footage-caption-Cant-wait-feeling-U-just-killed-some1.html
But thanks for perfectly demonstrating the social democrat response to such an appalling failure of their social model. Rather than acknowledge the problem and modify their beliefs, you just try to divert attention elsewhere. It's the old Soviet Union response to criticism.
'What a devastating indictment of integration policies over recent decades. Has anyone even approached an apology for their utter failure yet?'
Wasn't aware we had any.
:read-revision-revise: *
* Being an Essex-boy is no excuse....
'"European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso has said it would be "extremely difficult, if not impossible" for an independent Scotland to join the European Union."
Surely just more bluff,bluster & bullying?
I may have been wrong about Romney. I have been 100% right about this.
58% of people in England and Wales now oppose allowing an independent Scotland to continue to use the pound, up 15 points from late November
Following a week of sniping between Westminster and the Scottish National Party over the matter of whether Scotland could retain the pound as its currency if it became independent, a new YouGov poll finds a majority of the public in England and Wales now oppose allowing an independent Scotland to use the pound.
When the question was last asked in late November last year, people in England and Wales only narrowly opposed a currency union, by 43% to 38% in support. But now, opposition is at 58% and support is at just 23%.
http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/02/16/opposition-currency-union-rises-sharply-england-an/
The only region in favour is.....Scotland:
http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/s1ec3emgrq/YG-Archive-140214-Scotland-Pound.pdf
Barroso has obviously been put up to this by his Tory Eurosceptic Unionist chums. Oh, hold on... #bbcsp
'They can't use in the pound with the UK, and now it turns out they can't join the EU, either. Perhaps they could'
Two of the Nats key demands demolished in a week & there's another 7 months until the vote,what's next university fees?
If you wish to deny I have been making the point about the Commission and Spain for at least a couple of years, then that's fine. Whatever makes you feel better.
Least surprising outcome of this weeks events...
My original point was not actually aimed at you. It was aimed at one of our Scottish brothers, who has taken to calling me a PB Romney over recent days.
I've probably mucked up the html in my blockquotes, which makes me think that maybe UKIP would be better off backing the Tories on introduction of coding in schools, perhaps taking it a step further and adding engineering to the curriculum. Something like that, but not guns - it would be madness.
'If Scotland is not in the EU, it can charge English students whatever it wants to go to university in Scotland.'
Not disputing that,the claim was that an independent Scotland in the EU would still be able to charge English students tuition fees.
'Could Scottish independence kill off free tuition fees? | Politics ...
www.theguardian.com › News › Politics › Scottish independence blog
14 Jan 2014 - Alex Salmond's insistence that Scotland could still charge students from the rest of the UK university fees after independence is being severely ...
The reason I ask is that I think open borders might be a good idea, but people say that they might cause a huge influx of poor people that would destroy the welfare state etc etc, which gives me pause for thought. But if, as you say, Britain has already had open borders fairly recently, maybe it's not as bad as they're making out?
An open border is a border that enables free movement of people between different jurisdictions with limited or no restrictions to movement.
I am referring to "limited restrictions to movement", whereas you seem to be referring to "no restrictions to movement".
The same was the case in Iraq. It was under Saddam that Christians felt safe !
On Topic; I don't think it's the floods which will damage the Tories; I think it's there apparent headless chicken act. It was that which, IIRC, so ruined both the latter days of the Brown and Major administrations.
However, I accept part of the problems come from problems with post-war immigration. The Thatcher years, however, saw the social tension coming and sensibly clamped down on immigration. Unlike the idiots from 1997 onwards.
"I seriously think that the these flood disasters may turn out as bad for Cameron's government as BlacK Wednesday did for for the Tory government of John Major. In this instance the votes lost being split between UKIP and Labour."
* EEC-accession in 1973 would have been a probable downer....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26214462
Can't do much harm, and may even find some potential problems. However it'd be interesting to see what the 'inspection' comprises: it sounds like it might just be similar to the standard inspections.
As an aside, I wonder if bridge inspections are going to be brought forward in the flooded rivers? By law every bridge that has a pier in water must be inspected annually to check for scour, and I wonder if those inspections are brought forward after the rivers have been in severe flood?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8374616.stm
http://www.nce.co.uk/news/structures/scour-revealed-as-cause-of-irish-bridge-collapse/5207460.article
I am reminded of the film "Meet the Robinsons" where the running joke was that everyone who was roped into assisting the villan expresses the view that this plan has not been properly thought through. We have for years been told that Salmond was the most skilfull politician in Britain and after 2011 it even looked true for a while but, boy, have they made a mess of the most important campaign of his life.
Folks; grow-up and do some learning....
There has never been an "integration policy" in the UK. Different communities have been left to get on with it. That applied under both Conservative and Labour regimes. That's how we have ended up with 41 year olds born and raised in the UK going off to blow themselves up in a civil war in Syria. As I recall, three of the four 2005 London bombers were also born in the UK. The other one was born in Jamaica.
To Salmond, independence is being independent in the things you want to have independence over, but having all the social, commercial and financial advantages you had before you were independent - in other words he does not want indpendence at all but a form of devo-max. So why is he just not honest and say what he means?
This is not true. See mass Jewish immigration into the UK and the Aliens Act 1905. See also emigration from the UK to various parts of the Empire and the US. if you wanted to move to another country in the late 19th and early 20th century you could do so for a relatively low amount.
Barrosso is a Eurocrat par excellance. By definition he is therefore not to be trusted. I will be happy to use this entirely undemocratic intervention because the Union is important to me and it demostrates the absurdity of so many SNP positions but, bluntly, who the hell does he think he is?
It is also worth pointing out that South and East Nottinghamshire gets one of the lowest rainfalls in England
Out of interest, would you just happily accept those with, say, pro-Al Qaeda views from coming here, and what would you do to combat those views once they were here?
http://tinyurl.com/obpvvzw
Best stick to you area of Scottish expertise, which is ...err...Michelin starred restaurants?
I think I might take issue with your use of the term "mass" there, Mr. Observer. It may have seemed a lot at the time but the total Jewish immigration into the UK in the 19th century was rather less than the numbers of immigrants let in each year in recent times.
I think, in the unlikely event of a "Yes" vote, Salmond will go for exactly this. He will then play the Braveheart card ! He can't propose it now as the SNP would be shred apart. But a Scot£ is no more unlikely to succeed than any other countries currency. Denmark, Norway, Sweden have their own. Why can't the Scots ?
Ultimately, it will be the performance of the economy that will decide a currency's fate !
As I say it rounds off a really bad week for Yes which cheers me greatly but it also turns my stomach more than just a little. I said on here recently I genuinely swither about our EU membership. Interventions like this one, however helpful, push me towards the door.
Sad little person that you are.