Re Scotland: It's Game Over, isn't it? Salmond might as well call off the referendum.
Near perfect.
Obsequious Cameroons aren't out of touch with scottish public opinion at all. Currency - rated 8th with just 2% believing it was the important issue in the referendum.
You've got us there Mick, we've been spending too much time listening to blokes from Somerset telling us what Scots think.
I prefer the Gloucester branch, myself.....
Somerset's Bats in the Belfry has been publishing some excellent cartoons;
Re Scotland: It's Game Over, isn't it? Salmond might as well call off the referendum.
Financial Services account for about 12% of Scottish GDP. What more does anyone need to know?
Edit - And Nick P is right about an EU In/Out referendum. It doesn't matter whether the risk of (say) Honda decamping is really high or not: there will be contradictory statements from plausible people on both sides, and voters will conclude that it's a leap into the dark. That's why I've always thought an Out result is unobtainable.
But of course the BOO side have the perfect answer to that which is that - in the case of the EU - the companies have made this threat before and proved to be lying. A number of large companies threatened to leave the UK if we did not join the Euro. And when we did not, they not only didn't leave but they soon increased investment.
This argument also has the benefit of reminding the public that the same people arguing for staying in the EU were those who were so in favour of us joining the disastrous Euro a decade or more ago and that the arguments they are using now are exactly the same as those they used last time.
I would suggest that the BOO side will be positively hoping for some of these people to start making these dire warnings again as it will just help to show how consistently wrong they have been on almost every aspect of our relationship with the EU.
Please don't try explaining it to them. It just confuses the poor dears.
Oh! Look! A wolf! And another one! And there's another one!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!!... ad infinitum...
Mr. Observer, a close result would be a bad thing, whoever wins. Suspicions of vote-rigging (it'll be fun to see how many postal votes are doled out) could make things contentious. A clear Yes or No would be best.
And worst of all, a close result on very low turnout.
The consequences of the big turnout differential still hasn't sunk in for better together or indeed the PB tories. Sooner or later it will.
There is a reason for that. The PB Tories haven't got the foggiest idea of ground conditions in Scotland. They are totally, blissfully unaware of the non-existence of BT activists on the ground in vaste swathes of the country. Whereas there isn't even a village which hasn't been canvassed by the Yes team. And before September, they will be re-canvassed and re-canvassed and the gaps will be filled in. Meanwhile, GOTV folks over at BT will be looking at their empty databases and pulling their hair out.
The millions in the Yes warchest will also start being deployed soon enough with a concentrated effort on billboards and media spots. I pointed out last week that Yes was certainly not short of activist fundraising going by the huge response to some of the many ancillary fundraisers for various aspects of the Yes campaign.
It's incredible that some of the people commenting on a politics site don't seem to have a clue about campaign logistics and the importance of GOTV. If this is their complacent attitude for all campaigns then god help them in 2015.
Tasty. Very, very tasty. I assume that you are filling your pockets over at Shadsy's. He is offering a whopping 4/1 on Yes getting 35-40%. You'd be a fool not to re-mortgage your house.
I've taken the maximum Ladbrokes would allow me on that one.
Yikes. I hope that was just lazy Sunday, piggy bank stuff. Otherwise there will be tears before bedtime.
Mr. Observer, a close result would be a bad thing, whoever wins. Suspicions of vote-rigging (it'll be fun to see how many postal votes are doled out) could make things contentious. A clear Yes or No would be best.
And worst of all, a close result on very low turnout.
The consequences of the big turnout differential still hasn't sunk in for better together or indeed the PB tories. Sooner or later it will.
There is a reason for that. The PB Tories haven't got the foggiest idea of ground conditions in Scotland. They are totally, blissfully unaware of the non-existence of BT activists on the ground in vaste swathes of the country. Whereas there isn't even a village which hasn't been canvassed by the Yes team. And before September, they will be re-canvassed and re-canvassed and the gaps will be filled in. Meanwhile, GOTV folks over at BT will be looking at their empty databases and pulling their hair out.
There was quite a funny R4 interview last week with the BT HQ in Glasgow (after one with Yes Scotland for balance). Blair McDougall mentioned that they had several staff working in a unit deconstructing and challenging the White Paper. A whole unit, 4 months after it was published!
The one absolute certainty about this process is that if No wins it'll be in spite of Bettertogether, not because of it.
They were thinking that the currency issue is very difficult for us as there is no option that will allow us to maintain current public spending levels, let alone increase them, as an independent country; so we'll just pretend that, actually, there isn't an issue. And it may yet work
It would have worked better if they'd chosen an option which was within their power to deliver, and stuck to it. Probably a separate currency pegged to the pound would have been the most plausible. Instead, they've so far worked their way through 13 out of the 14 items in SeanT's brilliant list yesterday.
A separate currency is clearly the best long term option
Which is why a 'Currency Union' is off the table - for them to work the market has to believe they are immortal.......
We'll just go round in circles on this, but a currency union the rUK will agree to will satisfy the markets because an rUK could not agree to a union that did not satisfy them. However, such a union could not possibly be acceptable to anyone in Scotland who wants Edinburgh to control fiscal and monetary policy. My contention is that to avowed nationalists the symbolism of independence - the UN seat, the Saltire flying in Brussels, the Olympic team, the control over foreign policy, no Trident - is much more important than its day to day economic realities. They'll cede control to London in return for hearing Flower of Scotland played at international gatherings of sovereign states. I can't think of another reason why they would otherwise be in favour of a currency union whose implications they must understand.
Tasty. Very, very tasty. I assume that you are filling your pockets over at Shadsy's. He is offering a whopping 4/1 on Yes getting 35-40%. You'd be a fool not to re-mortgage your house.
I've taken the maximum Ladbrokes would allow me on that one.
Yikes. I hope that was just lazy Sunday, piggy bank stuff. Otherwise there will be tears before bedtime.
Re Scotland: It's Game Over, isn't it? Salmond might as well call off the referendum.
Financial Services account for about 12% of Scottish GDP. What more does anyone need to know?
Edit - And Nick P is right about an EU In/Out referendum. It doesn't matter whether the risk of (say) Honda decamping is really high or not: there will be contradictory statements from plausible people on both sides, and voters will conclude that it's a leap into the dark. That's why I've always thought an Out result is unobtainable.
But of course the BOO side have the perfect answer to that which is that - in the case of the EU - the companies have made this threat before and proved to be lying. A number of large companies threatened to leave the UK if we did not join the Euro. And when we did not, they not only didn't leave but they soon increased investment.
This argument also has the benefit of reminding the public that the same people arguing for staying in the EU were those who were so in favour of us joining the disastrous Euro a decade or more ago and that the arguments they are using now are exactly the same as those they used last time.
I would suggest that the BOO side will be positively hoping for some of these people to start making these dire warnings again as it will just help to show how consistently wrong they have been on almost every aspect of our relationship with the EU.
The BOO argument also has - should it choose to take it - the option of saying that "we would remain inside the SEA as part of the EEA/EFTA, and therefore would have the bulk of the advantages of the single market, without many of the financial costs".
I suspect that a great many 'in's would be 'outs' if offered EEA/EFTA. There are a lot of potential 'outs' who are scared by the fact that 'out' does not seem to have a consistent message of what 'out' might look like.
Mr. Observer, a close result would be a bad thing, whoever wins. Suspicions of vote-rigging (it'll be fun to see how many postal votes are doled out) could make things contentious. A clear Yes or No would be best.
I doubt it will be anything other than very tight. We'll all just have to hope the result is accepted and that if it's a Yes the divorce negotiations are not too fraught.
SCOTLAND may not get independence even if the Yes campaign wins the referendum, it was claimed today.
An unnamed senior colleague of Prime Minister David Cameron was quoted saying a Yes vote would not guarantee independence
I hope that the "unnamed senior colleague of Prime Minister David Cameron" cleared that with Darling first.
Obviously, Scotland will not become an independent country until there is an agreement between the negotiating parties.
This just hasn't struck home yet with our natty colleagues. Personally I'd just keep vetoing EU entry until Salmond signs up to what I want. And there are about a dozen other things HMG can do if he decides he doesn't want to play ball. This takes us back to 2011 when the Nats tried to bluff that everyone will be glad to have us despite it being pointed out that the terms of cub membership have changed over the years and membership concessions are no longer being offered.
This is just wrong. Strange to say, there will be a lot of good will from EWNI towards a new independent Scotland and the electorate (and the international community, for what that's worth) won't like seeing Westminster trying to screw Edinburgh.
Tasty. Very, very tasty. I assume that you are filling your pockets over at Shadsy's. He is offering a whopping 4/1 on Yes getting 35-40%. You'd be a fool not to re-mortgage your house.
I've taken the maximum Ladbrokes would allow me on that one.
Yikes. I hope that was just lazy Sunday, piggy bank stuff. Otherwise there will be tears before bedtime.
Why don't you offer to lay some more.?
I have zero spare cash at the moment. I am totally maxxed out on gold-related equities (fantastic start to 2014!) and we are doing a big extension to the house soon, which requires fiscal prudence. I was even obliged to promise the wife to stop betting on politics. Eg. yesterday I withdrew all my Coral winnings. Still got my open bets of course, one of which I'm expecting to pay out quite soon.
They were thinking that the currency issue is very difficult for us as there is no option that will allow us to maintain current public spending levels, let alone increase them, as an independent country; so we'll just pretend that, actually, there isn't an issue. And it may yet work
It would have worked better if they'd chosen an option which was within their power to deliver, and stuck to it. Probably a separate currency pegged to the pound would have been the most plausible. Instead, they've so far worked their way through 13 out of the 14 items in SeanT's brilliant list yesterday.
A separate currency is clearly the best long term option
Which is why a 'Currency Union' is off the table - for them to work the market has to believe they are immortal.......
I can't think of another reason why they would otherwise be in favour of a currency union whose implications they must understand.
We will have to agree to disagree.
You think they are knaves who will do & say anything to get independence.
I think they are fools who believe the other side will simply concede to their demands.
Mr. Observer, a close result would be a bad thing, whoever wins. Suspicions of vote-rigging (it'll be fun to see how many postal votes are doled out) could make things contentious. A clear Yes or No would be best.
I doubt it will be anything other than very tight. We'll all just have to hope the result is accepted and that if it's a Yes the divorce negotiations are not too fraught.
SCOTLAND may not get independence even if the Yes campaign wins the referendum, it was claimed today.
An unnamed senior colleague of Prime Minister David Cameron was quoted saying a Yes vote would not guarantee independence
I hope that the "unnamed senior colleague of Prime Minister David Cameron" cleared that with Darling first.
Obviously, Scotland will not become an independent country until there is an agreement between the negotiating parties.
Indeed? You may be in for a bit of a shock.
It is conceivable that Scotland could unilaterally declare independence, but you're right I would be shocked if that happened given the calamitous consequences of such a move.
Re Scotland: It's Game Over, isn't it? Salmond might as well call off the referendum.
Financial Services account for about 12% of Scottish GDP. What more does anyone need to know?
Edit - And Nick P is right about an EU In/Out referendum. It doesn't matter whether the risk of (say) Honda decamping is really high or not: there will be contradictory statements from plausible people on both sides, and voters will conclude that it's a leap into the dark. That's why I've always thought an Out result is unobtainable.
But of course the BOO side have the perfect answer to that which is that - in the case of the EU - the companies have made this threat before and proved to be lying. A number of large companies threatened to leave the UK if we did not join the Euro. And when we did not, they not only didn't leave but they soon increased investment.
This argument also has the benefit of reminding the public that the same people arguing for staying in the EU were those who were so in favour of us joining the disastrous Euro a decade or more ago and that the arguments they are using now are exactly the same as those they used last time.
I would suggest that the BOO side will be positively hoping for some of these people to start making these dire warnings again as it will just help to show how consistently wrong they have been on almost every aspect of our relationship with the EU.
The BOO argument also has - should it choose to take it - the option of saying that "we would remain inside the SEA as part of the EEA/EFTA, and therefore would have the bulk of the advantages of the single market, without many of the financial costs".
I suspect that a great many 'in's would be 'outs' if offered EEA/EFTA. There are a lot of potential 'outs' who are scared by the fact that 'out' does not seem to have a consistent message of what 'out' might look like.
Agreed. I know that on the back of discussions I had with Richard North, he has been working behind the scenes talking to senior officials in EFTA to iron out the position on whether we would automatically be part of EFTA or would have to seek to rejoin if we left the EU. It is not as clear as I believed it to be and he is trying to get an official line on this from them.
Certainly being a member of EFTA seems to be the best option after leaving the EU.
Off topic, Tim Montgomerie has a great column in The Times about just how much it can cost to try to become a Tory MP. Over 40 grand is the average spent by prospective candidates, plus you've got to have the time to travel around the country to persue that elusive seat. There's no way the average bloke on the street is ever going to contemplate that. Montgomerie reckons that prospective Labour candidates don't spend as much, largely because they tend to come from more politically supportive employers such as unions.
That, coupled with the nepotism, and the patronage that infects our politics, all seem to be the only ways into national politics. No wonder politicians are out of touch.
Hmm, seems odd. Sure, you've got have the time to travel round seat-hunting - I tried 18 places before I struck lucky. If you don't have the time for that, you definitely don't have time to be a PPC. I can't imagine what they spend £40K on, though, unless the article (which I can't see because of the paywall) is talking about subsidising their post-selection campaigns. Nor, I think, do most Labour candidates come from politically-supportive employers - the typical background IIRC is public service, especially teaching.
The rules for the application are pretty strict in Labour, at least - you're allowed three communications to members. A friendly union might help with some printing costs, but probably won't since there may be two or more applicants from the union (in my case UNITE had four members applying, including me, but decided to nominate a non-member anyway). Canvassing members at home is pretty common, which again takes time but no significant money. You are explicitly forbidden from making any suggestion that you will help pay for the campaign, and there is no suggestion after selection that it might be nice if you did.
The main snag about being a PPC is time. I work 5 days a week and canvass etc. 2 days a week. I'm saving up my leave from work for the final full-time campaign. I don't expect to have any kind of holiday, or indeed a day off apart from Xmas week, before May 2015, though I'll take an evening off now and then. It's not a complaint (I knew what I was doing when I applied), just a fact. You have to be reasonably keen (some would say bonkers) to sign for that - basically you need to enjoy canvassing and see it as a sort of holiday in itself - meet lots of people, get plenty of exercise, improve your tan...
Tasty. Very, very tasty. I assume that you are filling your pockets over at Shadsy's. He is offering a whopping 4/1 on Yes getting 35-40%. You'd be a fool not to re-mortgage your house.
I've taken the maximum Ladbrokes would allow me on that one.
Yikes. I hope that was just lazy Sunday, piggy bank stuff. Otherwise there will be tears before bedtime.
Why don't you offer to lay some more.?
I have zero spare cash at the moment. I am totally maxxed out on gold-related equities (fantastic start to 2014!) and we are doing a big extension to the house soon, which requires fiscal prudence. I was even obliged to promise the wife to stop betting on politics. Eg. yesterday I withdrew all my Coral winnings. Still got my open bets of course, one of which I'm expecting to pay out quite soon.
Well done to you
Watch out though or the union divvie might try and insinuate you are all mouth and no trousers, as he just did with RichardN
Mr. Observer, a close result would be a bad thing, whoever wins. Suspicions of vote-rigging (it'll be fun to see how many postal votes are doled out) could make things contentious. A clear Yes or No would be best.
And worst of all, a close result on very low turnout.
The consequences of the big turnout differential still hasn't sunk in for better together or indeed the PB tories. Sooner or later it will.
There is a reason for that. The PB Tories haven't got the foggiest idea of ground conditions in Scotland. They are totally, blissfully unaware of the non-existence of BT activists on the ground in vaste swathes of the country. Whereas there isn't even a village which hasn't been canvassed by the Yes team. And before September, they will be re-canvassed and re-canvassed and the gaps will be filled in. Meanwhile, GOTV folks over at BT will be looking at their empty databases and pulling their hair out.
There was quite a funny R4 interview last week with the BT HQ in Glasgow (after one with Yes Scotland for balance). Blair McDougall mentioned that they had several staff working in a unit deconstructing and challenging the White Paper. A whole unit, 4 months after it was published!
The one absolute certainty about this process is that if No wins it'll be in spite of Bettertogether, not because of it.
Agreed. No could still win on 18 September, but if they'd had better personnel the result might have been in the bag already (copyright: George Osborne). Blair McDougall, Anas Sarwar and Ian Davidson are all absolute gifts. And they are just the tip of the BT incompetence iceberg.
The PB Tory & Unionist motto, ' Big mouth over here, money over there, never the twain shall meet.'
I don't know why you think I'm a Unionist - inasmuch as I have a view at all, I'm in favour of Scottish independence, as I've said many times. I think that, after a difficult period of Thatcherite readjustment, an independent Scotland would prosper very well, once it had remembered all those traditional Scottish virtues of thrift, canniness, prudence, and entrepreneurial flair.
However, as a Tory I do of course look for cost-effectiveness in my bets. Unlike that well-known Scot Gordon Brown, I don't think that paying £1 for something I can buy for 25p is a good idea.
Three news stories, that (with my tinfoil hat) create a worrying thought when combined: 1) Crimean building seized by armed men; 2) Yanukovych has asked for protection from Russia; ("compelled to ask the Russian Federation to ensure my personal security from the actions of extremists"); 3) According to BBC News, Russia says that he has been granted protection 'on Russian territory'
Given that Yanukovych is not known to have fled Ukraine, might he be in those buildings seized by gunmen? And if so, is that be a signal that Russia sees Crimea as its own territory? Or should I take my own advice and start getting the Bacofoil out?
Mr. Observer, a close result would be a bad thing, whoever wins. Suspicions of vote-rigging (it'll be fun to see how many postal votes are doled out) could make things contentious. A clear Yes or No would be best.
I doubt it will be anything other than very tight. We'll all just have to hope the result is accepted and that if it's a Yes the divorce negotiations are not too fraught.
SCOTLAND may not get independence even if the Yes campaign wins the referendum, it was claimed today.
An unnamed senior colleague of Prime Minister David Cameron was quoted saying a Yes vote would not guarantee independence
They were thinking that the currency issue is very difficult for us as there is no option that will allow us to maintain current public spending levels, let alone increase them, as an independent country; so we'll just pretend that, actually, there isn't an issue. And it may yet work
It would have worked better if they'd chosen an option which was within their power to deliver, and stuck to it. Probably a separate currency pegged to the pound would have been the most plausible. Instead, they've so far worked their way through 13 out of the 14 items in SeanT's brilliant list yesterday.
A separate currency is clearly the best long term option
Which is why a 'Currency Union' is off the table - for them to work the market has to believe they are immortal.......
I can't think of another reason why they would otherwise be in favour of a currency union whose implications they must understand.
We will have to agree to disagree.
You think they are knaves who will do & say anything to get independence.
I think they are fools who believe the other side will simply concede to their demands.
Of course we could both be right!
I think there are big differences in approach on the Yes side. Some are a lot more progressive than others. Those advocating a separate currency take an honest and honourable position, though it's one I still disagree with.
Agreed. I know that on the back of discussions I had with Richard North, he has been working behind the scenes talking to senior officials in EFTA to iron out the position on whether we would automatically be part of EFTA or would have to seek to rejoin if we left the EU. It is not as clear as I believed it to be and he is trying to get an official line on this from them.
Certainly being a member of EFTA seems to be the best option after leaving the EU.
I think a lot of business opposition would disappear if UKIP had a clear message what the relationship with the EU would be post-exit. I think people are genuinely concerned that 'out' would mean that the gates would go up (I might mention one person on this board who planned differential tariffs with each country in the world based on differences in hourly wage rates). Having EFTA as an official policy would mean that those concerns would be ameliorated, and would mean there would be very few near-term hurdles regarding businesses with substantial European exposure.
Mr. Observer, a close result would be a bad thing, whoever wins. Suspicions of vote-rigging (it'll be fun to see how many postal votes are doled out) could make things contentious. A clear Yes or No would be best.
I doubt it will be anything other than very tight. We'll all just have to hope the result is accepted and that if it's a Yes the divorce negotiations are not too fraught.
SCOTLAND may not get independence even if the Yes campaign wins the referendum, it was claimed today.
An unnamed senior colleague of Prime Minister David Cameron was quoted saying a Yes vote would not guarantee independence
I hope that the "unnamed senior colleague of Prime Minister David Cameron" cleared that with Darling first.
Obviously, Scotland will not become an independent country until there is an agreement between the negotiating parties.
Indeed? You may be in for a bit of a shock.
It is conceivable that Scotland could unilaterally declare independence, but you're right I would be shocked if that happened given the calamitous consequences of such a move.
There are no 'calamitous consequences' in SIndy land - see their frequent comments on the consequence free reneging on their share of the debt......
Three news stories, that (with my tinfoil hat) create a worrying thought when combined: 1) Crimean building seized by armed men; 2) Yanukovych has asked for protection from Russia; ("compelled to ask the Russian Federation to ensure my personal security from the actions of extremists"); 3) According to BBC News, Russia says that he has been granted protection 'on Russian territory'
Given that Yanukovych is not known to have fled Ukraine, might he be in those buildings seized by gunmen? And if so, is that be a signal that Russia sees Crimea as its own territory? Or should I take my own advice and start getting the Bacofoil out?
Re Scotland: It's Game Over, isn't it? Salmond might as well call off the referendum.
Financial Services account for about 12% of Scottish GDP. What more does anyone need to know?
Edit - And Nick P is right about an EU In/Out referendum. It doesn't matter whether the risk of (say) Honda decamping is really high or not: there will be contradictory statements from plausible people on both sides, and voters will conclude that it's a leap into the dark. That's why I've always thought an Out result is unobtainable.
But of course the BOO side have the perfect answer to that which is that - in the case of the EU - the companies have made this threat before and proved to be lying. A number of large companies threatened to leave the UK if we did not join the Euro. And when we did not, they not only didn't leave but they soon increased investment.
This argument also has the benefit of reminding the public that the same people arguing for staying in the EU were those who were so in favour of us joining the disastrous Euro a decade or more ago and that the arguments they are using now are exactly the same as those they used last time.
I would suggest that the BOO side will be positively hoping for some of these people to start making these dire warnings again as it will just help to show how consistently wrong they have been on almost every aspect of our relationship with the EU.
The BOO argument also has - should it choose to take it - the option of saying that "we would remain inside the SEA as part of the EEA/EFTA, and therefore would have the bulk of the advantages of the single market, without many of the financial costs".
I suspect that a great many 'in's would be 'outs' if offered EEA/EFTA. There are a lot of potential 'outs' who are scared by the fact that 'out' does not seem to have a consistent message of what 'out' might look like.
Agreed. I know that on the back of discussions I had with Richard North, he has been working behind the scenes talking to senior officials in EFTA to iron out the position on whether we would automatically be part of EFTA or would have to seek to rejoin if we left the EU. It is not as clear as I believed it to be and he is trying to get an official line on this from them.
Certainly being a member of EFTA seems to be the best option after leaving the EU.
Richard, can I just say that as someone who is pretty much sitting on the fence over EU membership, I find your position on leaving very compelling and intelligent. Unlike some BOOers (and not all, even on here), you seem to have a fairly firm and explainable vision for a UK outside the EU.
I'd be very interested to hear more from you about it.
Three news stories, that (with my tinfoil hat) create a worrying thought when combined: 1) Crimean building seized by armed men; 2) Yanukovych has asked for protection from Russia; ("compelled to ask the Russian Federation to ensure my personal security from the actions of extremists"); 3) According to BBC News, Russia says that he has been granted protection 'on Russian territory'
Given that Yanukovych is not known to have fled Ukraine, might he be in those buildings seized by gunmen? And if so, is that be a signal that Russia sees Crimea as its own territory? Or should I take my own advice and start getting the Bacofoil out?
I believe (but could well be wrong) that the Russian Naval Base in Sevastapol is technically Russian territory - that wouldn't be a daft place for him to be being secured anyway and satisfies your three points.
Three news stories, that (with my tinfoil hat) create a worrying thought when combined: 1) Crimean building seized by armed men; 2) Yanukovych has asked for protection from Russia; ("compelled to ask the Russian Federation to ensure my personal security from the actions of extremists"); 3) According to BBC News, Russia says that he has been granted protection 'on Russian territory'
Given that Yanukovych is not known to have fled Ukraine, might he be in those buildings seized by gunmen? And if so, is that be a signal that Russia sees Crimea as its own territory? Or should I take my own advice and start getting the Bacofoil out?
The PB Tory & Unionist motto, ' Big mouth over here, money over there, never the twain shall meet.'
I don't know why you think I'm a Unionist - inasmuch as I have a view at all, I'm in favour of Scottish independence, as I've said many times. I think that, after a difficult period of Thatcherite readjustment, an independent Scotland would prosper very well, once it had remembered all those traditional Scottish virtues of thrift, canniness, prudence, and entrepreneurial flair.
However, as a Tory I do of course look for cost-effectiveness in my bets. Unlike that well-known Scot Gordon Brown, I don't think that paying £1 for something I can buy for 25p is a good idea.
PB Tory & PB Unionist are descriptions of mindsets rather than specific political or constitutional outlooks. Flashing extraordinary assertions then scampering off to the undergrowth is a characteristic shared by both.
Has anybody - and I'll accept a one-man burger van with deep-fat frying facility - actually said they are waiting for an independent Scotland before making an investment in that country?
PB Tory & PB Unionist are descriptions of mindsets rather than specific political or constitutional outlooks. Flashing extraordinary assertions then scampering off to the undergrowth is a characteristic both share.
The only person who has scampered into the undergrowth today is Stuart, so I guess that makes him a PB Tory and PB Unionist.
Mr. Observer, a close result would be a bad thing, whoever wins. Suspicions of vote-rigging (it'll be fun to see how many postal votes are doled out) could make things contentious. A clear Yes or No would be best.
I doubt it will be anything other than very tight. We'll all just have to hope the result is accepted and that if it's a Yes the divorce negotiations are not too fraught.
SCOTLAND may not get independence even if the Yes campaign wins the referendum, it was claimed today.
An unnamed senior colleague of Prime Minister David Cameron was quoted saying a Yes vote would not guarantee independence
I hope that the "unnamed senior colleague of Prime Minister David Cameron" cleared that with Darling first.
Obviously, Scotland will not become an independent country until there is an agreement between the negotiating parties.
Indeed? You may be in for a bit of a shock.
It is conceivable that Scotland could unilaterally declare independence, but you're right I would be shocked if that happened given the calamitous consequences of such a move.
There are no 'calamitous consequences' in SIndy land - see their frequent comments on the consequence free reneging on their share of the debt......
Salmond - 'You will lend us that money'.
Market - 'Maybe. At a prohibitive rate though'.
Salmond - 'No, you'll lend us it at the rate we choose'
Market - 'OK. We won't lend you any money. There are other buyers, who haven't reneged on previous debt arrangements. What are you going to do now?'
The PB Tory & Unionist motto, ' Big mouth over here, money over there, never the twain shall meet.'
I don't know why you think I'm a Unionist - inasmuch as I have a view at all, I'm in favour of Scottish independence, as I've said many times. I think that, after a difficult period of Thatcherite readjustment, an independent Scotland would prosper very well, once it had remembered all those traditional Scottish virtues of thrift, canniness, prudence, and entrepreneurial flair.
However, as a Tory I do of course look for cost-effectiveness in my bets. Unlike that well-known Scot Gordon Brown, I don't think that paying £1 for something I can buy for 25p is a good idea.
PB Tory & PB Unionist are descriptions of mindsets rather than specific political or constitutional outlooks. Flashing extraordinary assertions then scampering off to the undergrowth is a characteristic shared by both.
Mr. Observer, a close result would be a bad thing, whoever wins. Suspicions of vote-rigging (it'll be fun to see how many postal votes are doled out) could make things contentious. A clear Yes or No would be best.
I doubt it will be anything other than very tight. We'll all just have to hope the result is accepted and that if it's a Yes the divorce negotiations are not too fraught.
SCOTLAND may not get independence even if the Yes campaign wins the referendum, it was claimed today.
An unnamed senior colleague of Prime Minister David Cameron was quoted saying a Yes vote would not guarantee independence
Stodge's Ninth Law of Politics states that the world is more symmetrical than it appears and that all things relate to all other things. We have one region of one country deciding whether it wants to leave and another region in another country seemingly determined to leave.
Ukraine - much posturing from all sides. Crimea has only been part of the Ukraine for sixty years and with the forced expulsion of the indigenous Tatar peoples by Stalin, became populated by Russians. It seems absurd to compel them to be part of Ukraine when their territorial integrity is respected by international treaty. Rather like Kaliningrad, they remain a small part of Russia cut off from the rest. Russia will of course want Sebastopol and its naval base but the wider argument about self-determination (all comes back to 1918 doesn't it ?) suggests that the population of Crimea should be allowed a say and shouldn't be compelled by events in Kiev to go in a different direction.
Scotland - not surprising to see business lining up on one side. Business likes continuity, stability and above all a favourable political climate. It may be that some business leaders are uncomfortable with the uncertainty of the economic situation of an independent Scotland. The problem with business leaders is that they are used to command and control whereas politicians need to convince and persuade and this is why business leaders don't function well as politicians. The flattery and attention of political leaders plays well to the ego of some business people but practicality suggests that IF there is a vote for independence, they will argue for Scotland to adopt pro-business anti-regulation low-tax policies.
"The number of long-term migrants coming to the UK rose to 212,000 in the year to September 2013, according to official figures.
The Office for National Statistics said the net flow - the numbers moving here minus the numbers leaving the UK - rose from 154,000 in the previous year.
David Cameron says he wants to cut net migration to below 100,000 by 2015.
The increase appears to have been driven by a rise in the number of EU citizens coming to Britain.
There was an increase in new arrivals from Poland, Spain, Italy and Portugal.
Some 24,000 citizens of Romania and Bulgaria arrived in the year to September 2013, nearly three times the 9,000 who arrived in the previous year, the Office for National Statistics said in a report. Around 70% came to work, while 30% came to study.
Officials figures for how many Romanians and Bulgarians have arrived since working restrictions were lifted on 1 January have yet to be released.
Excellent timing as gullible tory Eurosceptics wait to see If Merkel will favour them with a smile or a wave.
Mr. Observer, a close result would be a bad thing, whoever wins. Suspicions of vote-rigging (it'll be fun to see how many postal votes are doled out) could make things contentious. A clear Yes or No would be best.
I doubt it will be anything other than very tight. We'll all just have to hope the result is accepted and that if it's a Yes the divorce negotiations are not too fraught.
SCOTLAND may not get independence even if the Yes campaign wins the referendum, it was claimed today.
An unnamed senior colleague of Prime Minister David Cameron was quoted saying a Yes vote would not guarantee independence
If Madrid quite literally sends the tanks into Barcelona it would have an electrifying effect on the Scottish referendum.
What next? Gunships deployed up the Forth at dawn?
Madrid will not do that, though obviously it suits some Catalan nationalists to pretend it would. However, not even the Spanish nationalist Franco-apologists of the PP are that stupid. Once they leave office after the next Spanish general election, Catalonia will get the powers the Basque country has and the current issues will go away.
Tasty. Very, very tasty. I assume that you are filling your pockets over at Shadsy's. He is offering a whopping 4/1 on Yes getting 35-40%. You'd be a fool not to re-mortgage your house.
I've taken the maximum Ladbrokes would allow me on that one.
Yikes. I hope that was just lazy Sunday, piggy bank stuff. Otherwise there will be tears before bedtime.
Why don't you offer to lay some more.?
... and we are doing a big extension to the house soon...
Mr. Observer, a close result would be a bad thing, whoever wins. Suspicions of vote-rigging (it'll be fun to see how many postal votes are doled out) could make things contentious. A clear Yes or No would be best.
I doubt it will be anything other than very tight. We'll all just have to hope the result is accepted and that if it's a Yes the divorce negotiations are not too fraught.
SCOTLAND may not get independence even if the Yes campaign wins the referendum, it was claimed today.
An unnamed senior colleague of Prime Minister David Cameron was quoted saying a Yes vote would not guarantee independence
I hope that the "unnamed senior colleague of Prime Minister David Cameron" cleared that with Darling first.
Obviously, Scotland will not become an independent country until there is an agreement between the negotiating parties.
This just hasn't struck home yet with our natty colleagues. Personally I'd just keep vetoing EU entry until Salmond signs up to what I want. And there are about a dozen other things HMG can do if he decides he doesn't want to play ball. This takes us back to 2011 when the Nats tried to bluff that everyone will be glad to have us despite it being pointed out that the terms of cub membership have changed over the years and membership concessions are no longer being offered.
This is just wrong. Strange to say, there will be a lot of good will from EWNI towards a new independent Scotland and the electorate (and the international community, for what that's worth) won't like seeing Westminster trying to screw Edinburgh.
Ya reckon ? This is business not family. If you seriously think there will be an easy ride from EU countries leeting Scotland keep all its UK opt outs you're mad. It will be sign up to the terms of the last guy in. And nor should the Nats complain, since their rationale is they want to do what's best for them, why should they think anybody else should do different ?
What is now apparent is that after the independence referendum there will be lasting bitterness in Scotland whichever way the vote goes.
I said as much several years back to be told by our Nats that Scotland was different. The biggest factor has been the ridiculous length of the campaign. A short sharp campaign would have saved a lot of rancour.
Mr. Observer, a close result would be a bad thing, whoever wins. Suspicions of vote-rigging (it'll be fun to see how many postal votes are doled out) could make things contentious. A clear Yes or No would be best.
I doubt it will be anything other than very tight. We'll all just have to hope the result is accepted and that if it's a Yes the divorce negotiations are not too fraught.
SCOTLAND may not get independence even if the Yes campaign wins the referendum, it was claimed today.
An unnamed senior colleague of Prime Minister David Cameron was quoted saying a Yes vote would not guarantee independence
I hope that the "unnamed senior colleague of Prime Minister David Cameron" cleared that with Darling first.
Obviously, Scotland will not become an independent country until there is an agreement between the negotiating parties.
This just hasn't struck home yet with our natty colleagues. Personally I'd just keep vetoing EU entry until Salmond signs up to what I want. And there are about a dozen other things HMG can do if he decides he doesn't want to play ball. This takes us back to 2011 when the Nats tried to bluff that everyone will be glad to have us despite it being pointed out that the terms of cub membership have changed over the years and membership concessions are no longer being offered.
This is just wrong. Strange to say, there will be a lot of good will from EWNI towards a new independent Scotland and the electorate (and the international community, for what that's worth) won't like seeing Westminster trying to screw Edinburgh.
Ya reckon ? This is business not family. If you seriously think there will be an easy ride from EU countries leeting Scotland keep all its UK opt outs you're mad. It will be sign up to the terms of the last guy in. And nor should the Nats complain, since their rationale is they want to do what's best for them, why should they think anybody else should do different ?
The other EU countries will of course not give Scotland an easy ride (though if the EU is anything it is expansionist, and it will admit Scotland on some terms at some stage). That is different from the UK specifically blocking EU membership as a negotiating tool - the attitude expressed in your "Personally I'd just keep vetoing EU entry until Salmond signs up to what I want".
This just got tweeted by a well known Nat twitter dude with 1500 followers
The original tweet has no asterisk.
They're losing it. Just completely losing it.
ROFL
Do you think prominent cyberNats calling one of Scotland's most successful companies "c*nts" is helpful to your cause?
1500 followers!
The original tweet has no asterisk.
They're losing it. Just completely losing it.
*tears of laughter etc.*
Well done.
You've made it to 11:14 without addressing the question of Standard Life
Wrong as usual. I backed up my assessment with what they and other businesses said pre-devolution and then subsequently did. You're just dribbling on obsessively about scottish matters of because you were made to look a fool before you slunk back to PB with your tail between your legs.
It is eerily impressive. You are like one of those crazed monkeys in a zoo, that constantly masturbates, 24/7.
You think an infamous sex tourist like yourself who was eccentrically gushing praise over some kids film the other day should be talking about "constantly masturbates, 24/7"?
What is now apparent is that after the independence referendum there will be lasting bitterness in Scotland whichever way the vote goes.
I said as much several years back to be told by our Nats that Scotland was different. The biggest factor has been the ridiculous length of the campaign. A short sharp campaign would have saved a lot of rancour.
Assuming, as seems to be likely to be the case that NO wins will we see a Quebec situation where we have similar exercise in 10 nor so years time?
Net migration was an idiotic metric for a promise.
Agreed. How on Earth was Cameron planning on controlling emigration numbers?
Vee hav vays ov mayking yoo stay.
Stuart, in Sweden you have got the wrong end of the stick. Vast European immigration to England is happening as people vote with their feet. Cameron is struggling to control this positive immigration rather than the welcome emigration of malcontents like you.
What is now apparent is that after the independence referendum there will be lasting bitterness in Scotland whichever way the vote goes.
I said as much several years back to be told by our Nats that Scotland was different. The biggest factor has been the ridiculous length of the campaign. A short sharp campaign would have saved a lot of rancour.
Assuming, as seems to be likely to be the case that NO wins will we see a Quebec situation where we have similar exercise in 10 nor so years time?
After all we had two devolution referenda.
Will we see a violent and seriously disgruntled Nat tendency seeking to achieve their aims through other means? What odds the Scottish Republican Army bombing the Labour Party conference hotel and trying to kill PM Redward in a few years' time? The NO vote is going to cause a tsunami of grief and anger in certain circles.
The GMB have already cut their affiliation fees to Labour by £1 million as a result of Ed Miliband’s party reform proposals. Are Unite about to do likewise? The Guardian reports this morning:
Unite, Labour’s biggest affiliated union, is to meet next week to discuss a possible £1.5m cut in its annual affiliation fees to the party in what would be a serious blow to Labour’s financial security
Unite officials said the issue is likely to be discussed next Wednesday, five days after a Labour special conference is expected to back plans to reframe the link between Labour and the unions, including requiring individual union members to opt into paying an affiliation fee to the party..
What is now apparent is that after the independence referendum there will be lasting bitterness in Scotland whichever way the vote goes.
I said as much several years back to be told by our Nats that Scotland was different. The biggest factor has been the ridiculous length of the campaign. A short sharp campaign would have saved a lot of rancour.
Assuming, as seems to be likely to be the case that NO wins will we see a Quebec situation where we have similar exercise in 10 nor so years time?
After all we had two devolution referenda.
Will we see a violent and seriously disgruntled Nat tendency seeking to achieve their aims through other means? What odds the Scottish Republican Army bombing the Labour Party conference hotel and trying to kill PM Redward in a few years' time? The NO vote is going to cause a tsunami of grief and anger in certain circles.
Well, lets check the track record shall we?
British Nationalism & Unionism - kneecappings, shootings, maimings, hundreds dead.
Mr. Observer, a close result would be a bad thing, whoever wins. Suspicions of vote-rigging (it'll be fun to see how many postal votes are doled out) could make things contentious. A clear Yes or No would be best.
I doubt it will be anything other than very tight. We'll all just have to hope the result is accepted and that if it's a Yes the divorce negotiations are not too fraught.
SCOTLAND may not get independence even if the Yes campaign wins the referendum, it was claimed today.
An unnamed senior colleague of Prime Minister David Cameron was quoted saying a Yes vote would not guarantee independence
I hope that the "unnamed senior colleague of Prime Minister David Cameron" cleared that with Darling first.
Obviously, Scotland will not become an independent country until there is an agreement between the negotiating parties.
This just hasn't struck home yet with our natty colleagues. Personally I'd just keep vetoing EU onal community, for what that's worth) won't like seeing Westminster trying to screw Edinburgh.
Ya reckon ? This is business not family. If you seriously think there will be an easy ride from EU countries leeting Scotland keep all its UK opt outs you're mad. It will be sign up to the terms of the last guy in. And nor should the Nats complain, since their rationale is they want to do what's best for them, why should they think anybody else should do different ?
The other EU countries will of course not give Scotland an easy ride (though if the EU is anything it is expansionist, and it will admit Scotland on some terms at some stage). That is different from the UK specifically blocking EU membership as a negotiating tool - the attitude expressed in your "Personally I'd just keep vetoing EU entry until Salmond signs up to what I want".
I suspect you've misread the thread. I'm not advocating blocking Scotland" just because", I'm pointing out that HMG has a raft of levers it can use without blocking a democratic vote. Salmond's threat that he won't pay debts etc. therefore is more blustery than a day in Novemeber.
However unlike yourself I am more pessimistic when it comes to a so called velevet divorce. Divorces tend to start off with good intentions and end up with bickering in front of lawyers. Sad but true.
I wonder what Farage will be blasting across the airwaves before during and after his big Clegg EU debate publicity bonanza. Good thing there are no Eurosceptics or tories to debate against him. Another Cameroon 'master strategy' looks set to pay off big time.
'Tom McPhail, head of pensions research at Hargreaves Lansdown, said: “If you are living in England, you wouldn’t buy a pension from a French company based in France, so why would you invest your savings in Scotland, if it had a different currency, a different set of rules and in a wholly different jurisdiction?”'
And
'Customers are advised to begin contacting their providers and ask what will happen in the event of a Yes vote.'
Today Standard Life, tomorrow the rest, when all their customers start moving investments.
What is now apparent is that after the independence referendum there will be lasting bitterness in Scotland whichever way the vote goes.
I said as much several years back to be told by our Nats that Scotland was different. The biggest factor has been the ridiculous length of the campaign. A short sharp campaign would have saved a lot of rancour.
Assuming, as seems to be likely to be the case that NO wins will we see a Quebec situation where we have similar exercise in 10 nor so years time?
After all we had two devolution referenda.
Will we see a violent and seriously disgruntled Nat tendency seeking to achieve their aims through other means? What odds the Scottish Republican Army bombing the Labour Party conference hotel and trying to kill PM Redward in a few years' time? The NO vote is going to cause a tsunami of grief and anger in certain circles.
I'd say absolutely no chance at all. If the nationalists lose they'll take the defeat and start again. That's democracy.
What is now apparent is that after the independence referendum there will be lasting bitterness in Scotland whichever way the vote goes.
I said as much several years back to be told by our Nats that Scotland was different. The biggest factor has been the ridiculous length of the campaign. A short sharp campaign would have saved a lot of rancour.
Assuming, as seems to be likely to be the case that NO wins will we see a Quebec situation where we have similar exercise in 10 nor so years time?
After all we had two devolution referenda.
Will we see a violent and seriously disgruntled Nat tendency seeking to achieve their aims through other means? What odds the Scottish Republican Army bombing the Labour Party conference hotel and trying to kill PM Redward in a few years' time? The NO vote is going to cause a tsunami of grief and anger in certain circles.
The NO vote is going to cause a tsunami of grief and anger in certain circles.
You're just plain wrong. It's quite evident from what's seen on PB day after day after day after day that the Nats will view the inevitable NO as either:
1) Good news for the YES campaign 2) The plan all along 3) Actually a YES, as only a Westminster posh boy would read the letters 'N' and 'O' as 'NO', which just shows how out of touch with Scottish politics and Scottish opinion they are.
EDIT: Thinking about it, the tortured, pretzel logic which is the staple of PB Nats would allow them to hold all three views simultaneously.
Mr. Observer, a close result would be a bad thing, whoever wins. Suspicions of vote-rigging (it'll be fun to see how many postal votes are doled out) could make things contentious. A clear Yes or No would be best.
I doubt it will be anything other than very tight. We'll all just have to hope the result is accepted and that if it's a Yes the divorce negotiations are not too fraught.
SCOTLAND may not get independence even if the Yes campaign wins the referendum, it was claimed today.
An unnamed senior colleague of Prime Minister David Cameron was quoted saying a Yes vote would not guarantee independence
What is now apparent is that after the independence referendum there will be lasting bitterness in Scotland whichever way the vote goes.
I said as much several years back to be told by our Nats that Scotland was different. The biggest factor has been the ridiculous length of the campaign. A short sharp campaign would have saved a lot of rancour.
Assuming, as seems to be likely to be the case that NO wins will we see a Quebec situation where we have similar exercise in 10 nor so years time?
After all we had two devolution referenda.
Will we see a violent and seriously disgruntled Nat tendency seeking to achieve their aims through other means? What odds the Scottish Republican Army bombing the Labour Party conference hotel and trying to kill PM Redward in a few years' time? The NO vote is going to cause a tsunami of grief and anger in certain circles.
Well, lets check the track record shall we?
British Nationalism & Unionism - kneecappings, shootings, maimings, hundreds dead.
Scottish Nationalism - zilch.
And long may it stay that way!
The Irish violence was driven, ultimately, by a profound 'them and us' mental divide. You can call it Nationalist/Unionist or Catholic/Protestant. Either way the community had no common ground and seemed to delight in winding each other up (Orange Marchers for example) and tit-for-tat atrocities. Much progress has been made - but it's taken forever, is still fragile and still, frankly, has a long way to go. A secular approach to Irish politics is not here yet.
The Scottish Nat issues have remained non-violent as there has not historically been a strong 'them and us'. However, I fear that there is a significant increase in that tendency - with Cybernats in the vanguard. I'm fearful that at some point there will be a real mental divide that leads to violence. If there is we will know who is to blame.
I expect a very close result in September. But the good news is that these issues have been raised. If Scotland still votes Yes, it will have done so with its eyes wide open, though the practical consequences for ordinary Scots could well be quite unpleasant.
I don't expect it to be close. Fear, uncertainty and doubt are extremely powerful motivators in a referendum of this sort, and the SNP have made an absolute hash of allaying them, with their positions falling apart repeatedly on several central issues. The currency one is just extraordinary: completely predictable. What were they thinking?
There has never been a "referendum of this sort", I don't know how anyone south of the border can call this. There are many uniquely Scottish forces at play and there is still a long time for events to play out.
@Jonathan - Andy Cooke informs me that you are one of the signees for the PB.com diplomacy game MK II
Can you please check your email and 'confirm' your participation so we can get it going
Also if you have any idea who 'mollusc' is please let me know.
Mr Pork wrote” Angela Merkel will her speech in German give because she judges not her English good enough.
I suggest "she her English good enough not judges”, surely?
An old acquaintance of mine, now long dead, was an interpreter with the Military Police during the war, and interpreted at the surrender of some pretty senior German officers. He told me once that it was sometimes difficult to know whether they were actually surrendering or not, because of the sentence construction.
Mr Pork wrote” Angela Merkel will her speech in German give because she judges not her English good enough.
I suggest "she her English good enough not judges”, surely?
An old acquaintance of mine, now long dead, was an interpreter with the Military Police during the war, and interpreted at the surrender of some pretty senior German officers. He told me once that it was sometimes difficult to know whether they were actually surrendering or not, because of the sentence construction.
That may be all that gullible Eurosceptics have to cling on to today since I somehow doubt Merkel will be surrendering to Cammie any time soon. Throw him a few tiny scraps perhaps.
What is now apparent is that after the independence referendum there will be lasting bitterness in Scotland whichever way the vote goes.
I said as much several years back to be told by our Nats that Scotland was different. The biggest factor has been the ridiculous length of the campaign. A short sharp campaign would have saved a lot of rancour.
Assuming, as seems to be likely to be the case that NO wins will we see a Quebec situation where we have similar exercise in 10 nor so years time?
After all we had two devolution referenda.
Will we see a violent and seriously disgruntled Nat tendency seeking to achieve their aims through other means? What odds the Scottish Republican Army bombing the Labour Party conference hotel and trying to kill PM Redward in a few years' time? The NO vote is going to cause a tsunami of grief and anger in certain circles.
Well, lets check the track record shall we?
British Nationalism & Unionism - kneecappings, shootings, maimings, hundreds dead.
Scottish Nationalism - zilch.
And long may it stay that way!
The Irish violence was driven, ultimately, by a profound 'them and us' mental divide. You can call it Nationalist/Unionist or Catholic/Protestant. Either way the community had no common ground and seemed to delight in winding each other up (Orange Marchers for example) and tit-for-tat atrocities. Much progress has been made - but it's taken forever, is still fragile and still, frankly, has a long way to go. A secular approach to Irish politics is not here yet.
The Scottish Nat issues have remained non-violent as there has not historically been a strong 'them and us'. However, I fear that there is a significant increase in that tendency - with Cybernats in the vanguard. I'm fearful that at some point there will be a real mental divide that leads to violence. If there is we will know who is to blame.
NI is Scots Nats Versus Irish Nats with everyone blaming the english ( they like that sort of thing ).
The number of long-term migrants coming to the UK rose to 212,000 in the year to September 2013, according to official figures.
The Official for National Statistics said the net flow - the numbers moving here minus the numbers leaving the UK - rose from 154,000 in the previous year.
What's the extra GDP from those extra 200,000 people?
What's the "growth" from the "fixed" economy if you subtract that number from the growth figure?
Mass immigration is causing a deflationary spiral. Adding ever more people is like someone on an accelerating treadmill running faster as the treadmill speeds up.
Fyi, Standard Life's full, Indy-destroying statement.
“27 February 2014 Scottish referendum
On 18 September 2014 a referendum will be held to decide whether Scotland should become an independent country. In recent months some of our customers have been in touch with us to ask what impact this would have on their savings and investments with Standard Life.
Our key priority is to continue serving the needs of our 4 million UK customers, wherever they reside and regardless of any constitutional change. The same applies to our customers in other parts of the world.
As a business we have a long-standing policy of strict political neutrality and at no time will we advise people on how they should vote, but we have a duty and a responsibility to understand the implications of independence for our customers and other stakeholders and to take whatever action may be necessary to protect their interests.
In view of the uncertainty that is likely to remain around this issue, there are steps that we can and will take now based on our own analysis. For example, we have started work to establish additional registered companies to operate outside Scotland, into which we could transfer parts of our operations if it was necessary to do so.
This is a purely precautionary measure, and customers do not need to take any action. We are simply putting in place a mechanism which, in the event of constitutional change, allows us to provide continuity to customers and to continue serving them, wherever they live in the UK.
Customers can find further details in our 2013 Annual Report and Accounts from our Chief Executive David Nish and Chairman Gerry Grimstone.”
In 1997 Russia and Ukraine signed a treaty confirming Ukraine's borders as they are today. The Russian naval base at Sevastopol remains sovereign Ukrainian territory but the Russians hold a lease on the base until 2042.
Comments
http://wingsoverscotland.com/a-developing-theme/
Oh! Look! A wolf! And another one! And there's another one!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!! And another one!!!... ad infinitum...
This is merely the latest sign of that. It's incredible that some of the people commenting on a politics site don't seem to have a clue about campaign logistics and the importance of GOTV. If this is their complacent attitude for all campaigns then god help them in 2015.
The one absolute certainty about this process is that if No wins it'll be in spite of Bettertogether, not because of it.
I suspect that a great many 'in's would be 'outs' if offered EEA/EFTA. There are a lot of potential 'outs' who are scared by the fact that 'out' does not seem to have a consistent message of what 'out' might look like.
You think they are knaves who will do & say anything to get independence.
I think they are fools who believe the other side will simply concede to their demands.
Of course we could both be right!
Certainly being a member of EFTA seems to be the best option after leaving the EU.
Even the scotish tory surgers occasionally manage better than this. The PB Romney is back!
The rules for the application are pretty strict in Labour, at least - you're allowed three communications to members. A friendly union might help with some printing costs, but probably won't since there may be two or more applicants from the union (in my case UNITE had four members applying, including me, but decided to nominate a non-member anyway). Canvassing members at home is pretty common, which again takes time but no significant money. You are explicitly forbidden from making any suggestion that you will help pay for the campaign, and there is no suggestion after selection that it might be nice if you did.
The main snag about being a PPC is time. I work 5 days a week and canvass etc. 2 days a week. I'm saving up my leave from work for the final full-time campaign. I don't expect to have any kind of holiday, or indeed a day off apart from Xmas week, before May 2015, though I'll take an evening off now and then. It's not a complaint (I knew what I was doing when I applied), just a fact. You have to be reasonably keen (some would say bonkers) to sign for that - basically you need to enjoy canvassing and see it as a sort of holiday in itself - meet lots of people, get plenty of exercise, improve your tan...
Watch out though or the union divvie might try and insinuate you are all mouth and no trousers, as he just did with RichardN
He's probably writing that post now
However, as a Tory I do of course look for cost-effectiveness in my bets. Unlike that well-known Scot Gordon Brown, I don't think that paying £1 for something I can buy for 25p is a good idea.
Three news stories, that (with my tinfoil hat) create a worrying thought when combined:
1) Crimean building seized by armed men;
2) Yanukovych has asked for protection from Russia; ("compelled to ask the Russian Federation to ensure my personal security from the actions of extremists");
3) According to BBC News, Russia says that he has been granted protection 'on Russian territory'
Given that Yanukovych is not known to have fled Ukraine, might he be in those buildings seized by gunmen? And if so, is that be a signal that Russia sees Crimea as its own territory? Or should I take my own advice and start getting the Bacofoil out?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26366700
http://blog-imfdirect.imf.org/2014/02/26/treating-inequality-with-redistribution-is-the-cure-worse-than-the-disease/#more-6961
I owe you money. Please send me your bank details.
I'd be very interested to hear more from you about it.
(And no, this is not a wind-up).
Pretty good.
LOL
Has anybody - and I'll accept a one-man burger van with deep-fat frying facility - actually said they are waiting for an independent Scotland before making an investment in that country?
Market - 'Maybe. At a prohibitive rate though'.
Salmond - 'No, you'll lend us it at the rate we choose'
Market - 'OK. We won't lend you any money. There are other buyers, who haven't reneged on previous debt arrangements. What are you going to do now?'
Salmond - 'Err'.
Maybe 'Darien Bonds' are the answer?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-26367391
What next? Gunships deployed up the Forth at dawn?
Stodge's Ninth Law of Politics states that the world is more symmetrical than it appears and that all things relate to all other things. We have one region of one country deciding whether it wants to leave and another region in another country seemingly determined to leave.
Ukraine - much posturing from all sides. Crimea has only been part of the Ukraine for sixty years and with the forced expulsion of the indigenous Tatar peoples by Stalin, became populated by Russians. It seems absurd to compel them to be part of Ukraine when their territorial integrity is respected by international treaty. Rather like Kaliningrad, they remain a small part of Russia cut off from the rest. Russia will of course want Sebastopol and its naval base but the wider argument about self-determination (all comes back to 1918 doesn't it ?) suggests that the population of Crimea should be allowed a say and shouldn't be compelled by events in Kiev to go in a different direction.
Scotland - not surprising to see business lining up on one side. Business likes continuity, stability and above all a favourable political climate. It may be that some business leaders are uncomfortable with the uncertainty of the economic situation of an independent Scotland. The problem with business leaders is that they are used to command and control whereas politicians need to convince and persuade and this is why business leaders don't function well as politicians. The flattery and attention of political leaders plays well to the ego of some business people but practicality suggests that IF there is a vote for independence, they will argue for Scotland to adopt pro-business anti-regulation low-tax policies.
The Office for National Statistics said the net flow - the numbers moving here minus the numbers leaving the UK - rose from 154,000 in the previous year.
David Cameron says he wants to cut net migration to below 100,000 by 2015.
The increase appears to have been driven by a rise in the number of EU citizens coming to Britain.
There was an increase in new arrivals from Poland, Spain, Italy and Portugal.
Some 24,000 citizens of Romania and Bulgaria arrived in the year to September 2013, nearly three times the 9,000 who arrived in the previous year, the Office for National Statistics said in a report. Around 70% came to work, while 30% came to study.
Officials figures for how many Romanians and Bulgarians have arrived since working restrictions were lifted on 1 January have yet to be released.
Excellent timing as gullible tory Eurosceptics wait to see If Merkel will favour them with a smile or a wave.
Vee hav vays ov mayking yoo stay.
What next? Gunships deployed up the Forth at dawn?
Madrid will not do that, though obviously it suits some Catalan nationalists to pretend it would. However, not even the Spanish nationalist Franco-apologists of the PP are that stupid. Once they leave office after the next Spanish general election, Catalonia will get the powers the Basque country has and the current issues will go away.
cameronsfollys @cameronsfollys 16m
#NickClegg rejects 'myths' about high cost of going to university [Tell that to the #SqueezedMiddle Nick!] http://is.gd/CD7whG
Can't see how that would backfire.
I've also managed not to comment on the sun rising or the colour of the sky.
Terrible immigration figures: EU newcomers double in last year. Will add spice to @David_Cameron's renegotiation talks with Angela Merkel.
757Live UK @757Liveuk 3m
#Net migration soars over 200000 despite David Cameron's pledge - http://Telegraph.co.uk http://757live.tk/1cU9cxi
The original tweet has no asterisk.
They're losing it. Just completely losing it.
*tears of laughter etc.*
And yet, last night Russia was claiming the CIA had whisked him away to Boise Idaho or some such..!
http://news.sky.com/story/1218041/ukraine-russia-puts-fighter-jets-on-alert
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-26340038
One of the many confounding factors may be sorted. But what about the many we don't even know about in this "settled" science?
Plant pines, they're scenic and cheaper.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/10664563/The-true-costs-of-Scottish-independence-How-it-will-affect-your-money.html
You are right on Catalonia imv.
Your choice posh lad.
After all we had two devolution referenda.
They've learned their lesson by now, surely?
The GMB have already cut their affiliation fees to Labour by £1 million as a result of Ed Miliband’s party reform proposals. Are Unite about to do likewise? The Guardian reports this morning:
Unite, Labour’s biggest affiliated union, is to meet next week to discuss a possible £1.5m cut in its annual affiliation fees to the party in what would be a serious blow to Labour’s financial security
Unite officials said the issue is likely to be discussed next Wednesday, five days after a Labour special conference is expected to back plans to reframe the link between Labour and the unions, including requiring individual union members to opt into paying an affiliation fee to the party..
Well, lets check the track record shall we?
British Nationalism & Unionism - kneecappings, shootings, maimings, hundreds dead.
Scottish Nationalism - zilch.
75% of voters said Coalition wouldn't succeed in controlling immigration. The voters were right http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/article4017829.ece …
I wonder what Farage will be blasting across the airwaves before during and after his big Clegg EU debate publicity bonanza. Good thing there are no Eurosceptics or tories to debate against him. Another Cameroon 'master strategy' looks set to pay off big time.
'Tom McPhail, head of pensions research at Hargreaves Lansdown, said: “If you are living in England, you wouldn’t buy a pension from a French company based in France, so why would you invest your savings in Scotland, if it had a different currency, a different set of rules and in a wholly different jurisdiction?”'
And
'Customers are advised to begin contacting their providers and ask what will happen in the event of a Yes vote.'
Today Standard Life, tomorrow the rest, when all their customers start moving investments.
1) Good news for the YES campaign
2) The plan all along
3) Actually a YES, as only a Westminster posh boy would read the letters 'N' and 'O' as 'NO', which just shows how out of touch with Scottish politics and Scottish opinion they are.
EDIT: Thinking about it, the tortured, pretzel logic which is the staple of PB Nats would allow them to hold all three views simultaneously.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/tsb-to-be-based-in-england-despite-roots-north-of-the-border.23491473
Nothing to do with uncertainty caused by the independence vote - nothing at all.
What next? Gunships deployed up the Forth at dawn?
That's democracy etc.
The Irish violence was driven, ultimately, by a profound 'them and us' mental divide. You can call it Nationalist/Unionist or Catholic/Protestant. Either way the community had no common ground and seemed to delight in winding each other up (Orange Marchers for example) and tit-for-tat atrocities. Much progress has been made - but it's taken forever, is still fragile and still, frankly, has a long way to go. A secular approach to Irish politics is not here yet.
The Scottish Nat issues have remained non-violent as there has not historically been a strong 'them and us'. However, I fear that there is a significant increase in that tendency - with Cybernats in the vanguard. I'm fearful that at some point there will be a real mental divide that leads to violence. If there is we will know who is to blame.
Can you please check your email and 'confirm' your participation so we can get it going
Also if you have any idea who 'mollusc' is please let me know.
Perhaps better sticking to fulminating about the evils of the EUSSR, eh?
Nigel Farage @Nigel_Farage 54m
It is utterly pointless setting immigration figures when you can't control who comes in to this country. They were for spin only. @ukip
Great news for the Cameroons with the May EU elections creeping ever closer.
Angela Merkel will her speech in German give because she judges not her English good enough.
I suggest "she her English good enough not judges”, surely?
An old acquaintance of mine, now long dead, was an interpreter with the Military Police during the war, and interpreted at the surrender of some pretty senior German officers. He told me once that it was sometimes difficult to know whether they were actually surrendering or not, because of the sentence construction.
http://rt.com/news/ukraine-crimea-referendum-future-014/
What's the "growth" from the "fixed" economy if you subtract that number from the growth figure?
Mass immigration is causing a deflationary spiral. Adding ever more people is like someone on an accelerating treadmill running faster as the treadmill speeds up.
“27 February 2014
Scottish referendum
On 18 September 2014 a referendum will be held to decide whether Scotland should become an independent country. In recent months some of our customers have been in touch with us to ask what impact this would have on their savings and investments with Standard Life.
Our key priority is to continue serving the needs of our 4 million UK customers, wherever they reside and regardless of any constitutional change. The same applies to our customers in other parts of the world.
As a business we have a long-standing policy of strict political neutrality and at no time will we advise people on how they should vote, but we have a duty and a responsibility to understand the implications of independence for our customers and other stakeholders and to take whatever action may be necessary to protect their interests.
In view of the uncertainty that is likely to remain around this issue, there are steps that we can and will take now based on our own analysis. For example, we have started work to establish additional registered companies to operate outside Scotland, into which we could transfer parts of our operations if it was necessary to do so.
This is a purely precautionary measure, and customers do not need to take any action. We are simply putting in place a mechanism which, in the event of constitutional change, allows us to provide continuity to customers and to continue serving them, wherever they live in the UK.
Customers can find further details in our 2013 Annual Report and Accounts from our Chief Executive David Nish and Chairman Gerry Grimstone.”
In 1997 Russia and Ukraine signed a treaty confirming Ukraine's borders as they are today. The Russian naval base at Sevastopol remains sovereign Ukrainian territory but the Russians hold a lease on the base until 2042.
So many independence referendums.
I assume the choice will be between Russia and Ukraine.
My guess is they will go with Russia.