On (3) Farage said that they had been having "serious" discussions with Carswell since the summer so, at least at national level, they had a lot more notice than anyone else. No one seems to have told anyone on the local party though.
(4) would be a mistake if there is a credible local available. Ideally someone female, worked in the public sector for a long time and with a smidgeon of experience. A Sarah Wolloston (sp?) type candidate would be ideal and the selection of such a candidate will change the odds.
On your general comment are we not again forgetting the tory who joined the SDP, stood in a by election and lost?
It's still the summer - so I'm guessing at best a month or so. It's not a lot of time to plan a by-election for a party that's really pretty thinly resourced and has just stretched itself to fight a national campaign, however successfully, particularly as all their existing work was done with a different candidate
On 4 - public sector? You don't think a local small business(wo)man might be a better bet? ('I pay my taxes and work hard for what I've got, so I'll make damn good and sure nobody nicks more of your money than absolutely necessary' might be quite an effective line against Carswell.)
To your response to my last comment - yes I had forgotten that there was one (Labour) defector to the SDP honourable enough to seek re-election (he lost). Turns out Dick Taverne also fought a by-election in 1973 as an independent - ironically over his support for the EU - which he won.
My memories were soured by all those second-rate nobodies who defected to Labour under Blair and Brown but never had the courage to ask their voters what they thought. (My view is, if you change your mind, that's grown up and sensible - but if you change your mind and keep profiting from your previous position by e.g. holding a seat you won on a different platform like say the egregious Shaun Woodward, that's simple cowardice bordering on fraud. Carswell is, from that point of view, clearly doing the right thing by his constituents.)
@tnewtondunn: UKIP's Roger Lord accuses Carswell of defecting just to save seat: "There's water around his ankles, he's got nowhere else to go". #r4today
This man is definitely adding to the gaiety of the nation. Not that he or Carswell approve of anything like that of course.
Hmm ...... Mr Lord is certainly not intent on giving up without a fight. Presumably if necessary he'll stand as the "Real UKIP" candidate or such like. That could conceivably make the betting market quite interesting.
Good Morning from a slightly damp and grey Edinburgh with some observations 'on the ground'
1. The Yes supporters are much more visible, vocal and aggressive than No supporters. More posters (although a lot of No posters have been defaced or destroyed), activists haranguing shoppers in the queue at the supermarket. That doesn't mean there are more Yes supporters, but No supporters are definitely keeping quiet.
2. The Yes supporters are impervious to logic or reason. I had dinner with an ardent Yes supporter, who fervently believes the following
a. Westminster has pursued a deliberate agenda of persecution against Scotland, instigated by Thatcher, exemplified by the Miners' strike.
b. The currency question will have no bearing on Scotland's economy. She thinks 'spending' on her favourite things could go up indefinitely even if the Scots 'bartered chickens' as currency.
Just wow.
3. While the reporting of the Scottish situation may be poor in England, the reverse may also be true. An employee of RBS told me she thought the Scottish Banks would carry on printing Sterling notes because they recently showcased their new plastic designs. She seemed genuinely surprised when I suggested voters down South would demand of their politicians that their license to do so be revoked.
No wonder so many tried to spin that the press was out of control and needed more regulation.
Forget heads rolling, if that's true former senior police officers and council officers could well face charges of conspiracy to conceal a felony and to pervert the course of justice. I think I am right in saying that anyone convicted of that faces quite a long prison sentence?
@DanHannanMEP: Only now, reading responses from Twitter Lefties, do I see that the Rotherham scandal was Thatcher's fault. Silly of me to have missed it.
Good Morning from a slightly damp and grey Edinburgh with some observations 'on the ground'
1. The Yes supporters are much more visible, vocal and aggressive than No supporters. More posters (although a lot of No posters have been defaced or destroyed), activists haranguing shoppers in the queue at the supermarket. That doesn't mean there are more Yes supporters, but No supporters are definitely keeping quiet.
2. The Yes supporters are impervious to logic or reason. I had dinner with an ardent Yes supporter, who fervently believes the following
a. Westminster has pursued a deliberate agenda of persecution against Scotland, instigated by Thatcher, exemplified by the Miners' strike.
b. The currency question will have no bearing on Scotland's economy. She thinks 'spending' on her favourite things could go up indefinitely even if the Scots 'bartered chickens' as currency.
Just wow.
3. While the reporting of the Scottish situation may be poor in England, the reverse may also be true. An employee of RBS told me she thought the Scottish Banks would carry on printing Sterling notes because they recently showcased their new plastic designs. She seemed genuinely surprised when I suggested voters down South would demand of their politicians that their license to do so be revoked.
Not sure that helps with the betting...
More later with any luck
Of course, merely being officially outside a currency wouldn't necessarily stop a government or indeed a private bank printing notes in that currency. However, it might well stop anyone who was passably sane accepting them. It might also give anyone who was thinking of lending said government money reason to pause in case they were repaid in money that was effectively worthless - and since like the rest of the UK Scotland is currently running a large deficit, that could easily cause problems.
Frankly, if Scotland does go independent I can't see that they have any option other than their own currency at this stage. Anything else would, leaving aside other issues, not be 'independence' in any meaningful form (see here if you don't believe me - be warned, you need to scroll down to the third article). They could call it the pound, and even keep the Scottish banknote designs (which are very beautiful, far more so than their hopelessly unimaginative English counterparts) but while it would certainly be workable it would likely be less stable than sterling and probably have higher interest rates.
For the rest, good old-fashioned Nat agenda. You can find much the same in Wales, although there it's wedded to Labour tribalism rather than Plaid Cymru.
Small base sizes - so no more than "straws in the wind"
No lead (excl DK) Employed Full time: -4 Part time: -2 Unemployed: -26 Students: +36 Retired: +28
So, who will go out and vote? Students, pensioners or the unemployed?
Huh. Apart from the retired, all those categories are pretty much the reverse of what I would've expected.
The only reasonably big base sizes are "employed" (within MOE either way) and "retired" (clearly "no")
That said, both the under 24s and over 55s are the least keen on independence.
Yes , 3 students weighted by unionists, voodoo numbers. Unionists looking for crumbs of comfort.
66 - so you are only out by a factor of 22......which is pretty good for you, admittedly.....
Now, CV, not to say things like that - well out of order.
Dear little Malcolm is always right about everything and the appropriate attitude towards him from the rest of us is... grovelling obedience!
Wow 66 , no MOE there then and as usual you are so thick you try to defend against my very valid point that it was from a miniscule number. As I said it was a bollocks number weighted up and trussed up as a unionist sop. Learn from Innocent and start trying to tell the truth.
@tnewtondunn: UKIP's Roger Lord accuses Carswell of defecting just to save seat: "There's water around his ankles, he's got nowhere else to go". #r4today
I think perhaps UKIP have dodged a wide bullet, by not having him as their candidate.
My instinct is to agree. Personal votes - from recollection usually worth around 500-1,000. Doubt that anyone will be much more than that. Most constituents won't really know him.
Clearly there will be an insurgency angle to UKIP but surely a lot of it has to be down to whether they can get the Tory organisation to shift over with Carswell.
I've got to say that I am very very sceptical about his ability to use the canvassing data. Even if he was legally collecting it separately, which I struggle to understand (firstly did he collect it all himself, vs. representatives of the Conservative Party) arguably he could have been collecting under false pretences [turn up with a blue rosette, say I'm your local Tory MP, give me your data - and btw I own it not the party]. In any event it strikes me as a serious breach of good faith on his part - even if legal - and makes me think a lot less highly of him.
The Tories can win this - if they keep their nerve, select a good local candidate (I like the idea of an open primary - try to appeal to LD/Lab/Independents that way) and flood the seat.
As for value, I don't have a view - not a serious gambler. But an 80% probability instinctively feels high.
Conservative hold looks most likely to me. Tories will throw the kitchen sink at Clacton in order to stave off a wave of defections. UKIP will want to do so too but there is no evidence from previous elections that UKIP even knows where the kitchen is, let alone the sink.
Farage has messed this up, in my view. Carswell (and any other would-be defectors) should have been encouraged to jump next year, so there'd be no byelection, and to create momentum and news in the run-up to the general election. Now, Carswell will most likely lose, so no other Tory MPs will follow, and UKIP is a busted flush.
OT Admin -- needed to exclude PfP's quote, owing to length restrictions: has this been reduced lately?
Good Morning from a slightly damp and grey Edinburgh with some observations 'on the ground'
1. The Yes supporters are much more visible, vocal and aggressive than No supporters. More posters (although a lot of No posters have been defaced or destroyed), activists haranguing shoppers in the queue at the supermarket. That doesn't mean there are more Yes supporters, but No supporters are definitely keeping quiet.
2. The Yes supporters are impervious to logic or reason. I had dinner with an ardent Yes supporter, who fervently believes the following
a. Westminster has pursued a deliberate agenda of persecution against Scotland, instigated by Thatcher, exemplified by the Miners' strike.
b. The currency question will have no bearing on Scotland's economy. She thinks 'spending' on her favourite things could go up indefinitely even if the Scots 'bartered chickens' as currency.
Just wow.
3. While the reporting of the Scottish situation may be poor in England, the reverse may also be true. An employee of RBS told me she thought the Scottish Banks would carry on printing Sterling notes because they recently showcased their new plastic designs. She seemed genuinely surprised when I suggested voters down South would demand of their politicians that their license to do so be revoked.
Not sure that helps with the betting...
More later with any luck
Scott, Nice to see some reality from you and I do believe what you are seeing is the way things are going. It looks like YES has the momentum , whether they get above 50% still to be seen but for sure it is at worst going to be very very close. Dreamers on here with 60/40 and 2/1 are miles out.
Isn't unionist just a Euphamism for europhiles these days? Stay part of something that's run by something else. Unionism is as dated as Empire.
I'm using it in the context of the Act of Union 1707.
The (here's your money my Lord Campbell) Act of Union 1707. We were united for 100 years before that, it didn't need a dowry and a forced marriage. Screw it, I want the Wuffingas back, Wessex and it's dirty money can sod off.
The ActS of Union, to be more accurate - one for each Parliament. It's the Treaty that is singular.
Small base sizes - so no more than "straws in the wind"
No lead (excl DK) Employed Full time: -4 Part time: -2 Unemployed: -26 Students: +36 Retired: +28
So, who will go out and vote? Students, pensioners or the unemployed?
Huh. Apart from the retired, all those categories are pretty much the reverse of what I would've expected.
The only reasonably big base sizes are "employed" (within MOE either way) and "retired" (clearly "no")
That said, both the under 24s and over 55s are the least keen on independence.
Yes , 3 students weighted by unionists, voodoo numbers. Unionists looking for crumbs of comfort.
66 - so you are only out by a factor of 22......which is pretty good for you, admittedly.....
Now, CV, not to say things like that - well out of order.
Dear little Malcolm is always right about everything and the appropriate attitude towards him from the rest of us is... grovelling obedience!
Innocent , honest clarity and genuine debate is more than enough. As long as you avoid manipulation and lying a la Carlotta I am perfectly happy to have a civil discussion.
The high minded sounding institutions, titles and slogans have no meaning when there is a culture of obstruction, destruction. Child protection, safeguarding children's board, where everyone matters.
There has just been an interesting interview with a care worker who worked at Rotherham from 2003. (Snip)
Many of the taxi drivers were paid from the council's account as they drove the girls to school, and were groomed on those journeys. One taxi driver was banned from council business as a potential paedophile, but none of the Asian drivers were.
Girls would escape at night via the fire escape, or even using knotted sheets out of first-floor windows.
Another point mentioned: many of these girls had been sexually abused before they went into care by their families, and the one thing that the care system could give them was familial love.
If true, it leads to some interesting questions about how we can protect children in care?
I heard the interview too. The way that these girls were groomed into their abuse was not fundamentally different to how pimps have always recruited into prostitution: http://mmp.org/node/13
Care homes are ideal places to find girls and boys leading chaotic lives where normal family life has broken down, drugs and alcohol are a way of life and truly loving relationships rare.
Pimps are generally poorly educated, and often have backgrounds where no respect for women exists. They are often involved with other aspects of petty crime such as drug retailing and use takeaways and minicab businesses as ways to launder cash. The use of these as grooming tools to target children in care is a natural way for an amoral petty criminal to leverage his limited assets and skills, to gain status and money by becoming a pimp.
The techniques are fairly well established, and are used by pimps of other ethnicities, and in other countries both Western and Asian. Most prostitutes are recruited underage. The Rotherham gangs were culturally muslim, but not observant muslims. When you have the combination of unemployable young men and girls in care or runaways, then you see this sort of sexual exploitation.
Similar situations exist in other cities and police and social services are very familiar with the pattern of pimp recruitment. The distinguishing feature of these being culturally muslim gangs is complex, and these gangs also largely controlling the drug and other trades in these towns. A further synergy is that most UK heroin and cannabis is also from Pakistan and Afghan sources.
Organised crime is increasingly like this, with the money being laundered via Dubai in particular (the second largest source of British banknotes after the bank of England according to one senior cop that I know). Once inside prison these guys may well fall under the spell of Jihadis, as we have seen on many occasions.
We need an integrated approach to the issue, and it needs tackling from all sides if Rotherham is to be prevented. Sacking a few social workers and PCC's would just be a smokescreen.
Isn't unionist just a Euphamism for europhiles these days? Stay part of something that's run by something else. Unionism is as dated as Empire.
I'm using it in the context of the Act of Union 1707.
The (here's your money my Lord Campbell) Act of Union 1707. We were united for 100 years before that, it didn't need a dowry and a forced marriage. Screw it, I want the Wuffingas back, Wessex and it's dirty money can sod off.
The ActS of Union, to be more accurate - one for each Parliament. It's the Treaty that is singular.
But I agree, bring back the burhs!
Yes, lest we forget England voting aye in 1706! Screw Wessex, run Alfred's petty kingdom into the sea. No taxation from the Wuffingas nation!
In unrelated news, I may back Bottas (each way) for the pole in Monza, depending on the odds.
MD, An obvious joker , 99 P and selling it because it will not change anything. The only surprising thing is that BT had not bid on it.
Hm, I'm of the opinion that this sort of thing shouldn't be joked about. I hope he doesn't get off scott-free, but haven't heard that the Electoral Commission will actually press charges.
Good Morning from a slightly damp and grey Edinburgh with some observations 'on the ground'
1. The Yes supporters are much more visible, vocal and aggressive than No supporters. More posters (although a lot of No posters have been defaced or destroyed), activists haranguing shoppers in the queue at the supermarket. That doesn't mean there are more Yes supporters, but No supporters are definitely keeping quiet.
2. The Yes supporters are impervious to logic or reason. I had dinner with an ardent Yes supporter, who fervently believes the following
a. Westminster has pursued a deliberate agenda of persecution against Scotland, instigated by Thatcher, exemplified by the Miners' strike.
b. The currency question will have no bearing on Scotland's economy. She thinks 'spending' on her favourite things could go up indefinitely even if the Scots 'bartered chickens' as currency.
Just wow.
3. While the reporting of the Scottish situation may be poor in England, the reverse may also be true. An employee of RBS told me she thought the Scottish Banks would carry on printing Sterling notes because they recently showcased their new plastic designs. She seemed genuinely surprised when I suggested voters down South would demand of their politicians that their license to do so be revoked.
Not sure that helps with the betting...
More later with any luck
Nice to have some thoughtful original comments rather than just links, you should do it more often.
My instinct is to agree. Personal votes - from recollection usually worth around 500-1,000. Doubt that anyone will be much more than that. Most constituents won't really know him.
Clearly there will be an insurgency angle to UKIP but surely a lot of it has to be down to whether they can get the Tory organisation to shift over with Carswell.
I've got to say that I am very very sceptical about his ability to use the canvassing data. Even if he was legally collecting it separately, which I struggle to understand (firstly did he collect it all himself, vs. representatives of the Conservative Party) arguably he could have been collecting under false pretences [turn up with a blue rosette, say I'm your local Tory MP, give me your data - and btw I own it not the party]. In any event it strikes me as a serious breach of good faith on his part - even if legal - and makes me think a lot less highly of him.
The Tories can win this - if they keep their nerve, select a good local candidate (I like the idea of an open primary - try to appeal to LD/Lab/Independents that way) and flood the seat.
As for value, I don't have a view - not a serious gambler. But an 80% probability instinctively feels high.
Conservative hold looks most likely to me. Tories will throw the kitchen sink at Clacton in order to stave off a wave of defections. UKIP will want to do so too but there is no evidence from previous elections that UKIP even knows where the kitchen is, let alone the sink.
Farage has messed this up, in my view. Carswell (and any other would-be defectors) should have been encouraged to jump next year, so there'd be no byelection, and to create momentum and news in the run-up to the general election. Now, Carswell will most likely lose, so no other Tory MPs will follow, and UKIP is a busted flush.
OT Admin -- needed to exclude PfP's quote, owing to length restrictions: has this been reduced lately?
OTOH, Peter Kellner thinks Carswell will win by a country mile.
I have to say I always thought Peter Bone and Nadine Dorries were more likely detectors.
Isn't unionist just a Euphamism for europhiles these days? Stay part of something that's run by something else. Unionism is as dated as Empire.
I'm using it in the context of the Act of Union 1707.
The (here's your money my Lord Campbell) Act of Union 1707. We were united for 100 years before that, it didn't need a dowry and a forced marriage. Screw it, I want the Wuffingas back, Wessex and it's dirty money can sod off.
The ActS of Union, to be more accurate - one for each Parliament. It's the Treaty that is singular.
But I agree, bring back the burhs!
Can one actually find any lineal descendants of the Wuffingas?
Isn't unionist just a Euphamism for europhiles these days? Stay part of something that's run by something else. Unionism is as dated as Empire.
I'm using it in the context of the Act of Union 1707.
The (here's your money my Lord Campbell) Act of Union 1707. We were united for 100 years before that, it didn't need a dowry and a forced marriage. Screw it, I want the Wuffingas back, Wessex and it's dirty money can sod off.
The ActS of Union, to be more accurate - one for each Parliament. It's the Treaty that is singular.
But I agree, bring back the burhs!
Can one actually find any lineal descendants of the Wuffingas?
We don't need them, we will select from our own to act as State figurehead and rule in their memory. We won't be messing about with right of birth or any of that hogwash.
I don't imagine the Brummies will be looking for descendants of Penda the cruel ;-)
In unrelated news, I may back Bottas (each way) for the pole in Monza, depending on the odds.
MD, An obvious joker , 99 P and selling it because it will not change anything. The only surprising thing is that BT had not bid on it.
Hm, I'm of the opinion that this sort of thing shouldn't be joked about. I hope he doesn't get off scott-free, but haven't heard that the Electoral Commission will actually press charges.
Very true, but more worrying are the CBI , they are being watched closely and hopefully their expenses are scrutinised on their Tory BT campaign dinner to get round the election rules.
The high minded sounding institutions, titles and slogans have no meaning when there is a culture of obstruction, destruction. Child protection, safeguarding children's board, where everyone matters.
It is a sad reflection of local government today - and this applies to all main parties - that in my experience such institutions, titles and slogans not only do not help but tend to defeat the objective. I think it was Sir Humphrey who said that when you have something you don't want to do, you create an office with a title that suggests you are doing it. Similarly, it would appear that one reason, leaving aside hints of collusion, that this went on was that everything was passed from one office to another, and it was never quite somebody's responsibility to take energetic action or a final decision. If it becomes a joint decision between child protection boards, safeguarding boards, social services and the police to act, it makes action much less likely because they all have to agree on exactly what to do (and they never do).
In one city a while ago - I won't say where - I worked in a failing school. I'm not talking about a school that was coasting along and needed a kick up the bum to get its act together - I'm talking about a school where knife crime was common, where I was physically assaulted twice, and where on my last day lessons had to be suspended because of what appeared to be an attempted murder. Obviously, that's not good enough(!). So what was done? Well, OFSTED graded the school a 4. But they refused to put it into special measures because it was near the end of their financial year and they didn't have the money to spare. The City Council sent in a team. On the first morning, one of the inspectors behaved so aggressively that she made an 11-year-old girl cry (quite an achievement in that school)! The City then demanded the school be put in special measures - that way, it became an Academy and was off their hands. OFSTED still dug their heels in, not wanting to spend the cash. The Head, who was a nice guy and cared deeply about the children but was desperately ineffectual, vacillated - he wanted (needed) the help from Special Measures, but if it had happened he would have been sacked, and also, he genuinely did disapprove of non-LEA schools on principle.
Winners? The officials, who are almost all still in their jobs and busy talking about what to do, keeping them in work when frankly, in my view they should all be (I'll redact that next bit). The losers? The staff, definitely, but more so the children. The really good teachers got the hell out (as did I) some of the bad ones even got promoted to fill the gaps, and only a handful of what had been a pretty good staff stayed on. Anyone who went to that school would get a pretty bad education and be constantly miserable.
Something of the same sort seems to have been either extant or twisted in Rotherham to allow this to go unchecked. That's a very worrying thought. Bad enough it's wrecking education - but when it's actively failing in the if anything more important duty of child protection...
I think that's an aspect of the explosion of administration that hasn't really been researched.
Isn't unionist just a Euphamism for europhiles these days? Stay part of something that's run by something else. Unionism is as dated as Empire.
I'm using it in the context of the Act of Union 1707.
The (here's your money my Lord Campbell) Act of Union 1707. We were united for 100 years before that, it didn't need a dowry and a forced marriage. Screw it, I want the Wuffingas back, Wessex and it's dirty money can sod off.
The ActS of Union, to be more accurate - one for each Parliament. It's the Treaty that is singular.
But I agree, bring back the burhs!
Can one actually find any lineal descendants of the Wuffingas?
We don't need them, we will select from our own to act as State figurehead and rule in their memory. We won't be messing about with right of birth or any of that hogwash.
I don't imagine the Brummies will be looking for descendants of Penda the cruel ;-)
So there’ll be a new Witenagemot? Who is going to be in it?
With less than three weeks to go, the Yes side is still behind and running out of time to turn it around.
This may be just one poll and certainly the only vote that matters is the one on September 18, but the pro-independence body had targeted a poll lead in the weeks leading up to referendum day.
Malcolm G Survation was 53-47 in July, it is 53-47 now, what Yes momentum? After the debates both No and Yes are back where they started
Which shouldn't surprise us as ~two thirds say they have not affected their decision, and those who have been persuaded are typically SNP for Yes and Tory for No. Colour me sceptical....
I heard the interview too. The way that these girls were groomed into their abuse was not fundamentally different to how pimps have always recruited into prostitution: http://mmp.org/node/13
Care homes are ideal places to find girls and boys leading chaotic lives where normal family life has broken down, drugs and alcohol are a way of life and truly loving relationships rare.
Pimps are generally poorly educated, and often have backgrounds where no respect for women exists. They are often involved with other aspects of petty crime such as drug retailing and use takeaways and minicab businesses as ways to launder cash. The use of these as grooming tools to target children in care is a natural way for an amoral petty criminal to leverage his limited assets and skills, to gain status and money by becoming a pimp.
The techniques are fairly well established, and are used by pimps of other ethnicities, and in other countries both Western and Asian. Most prostitutes are recruited underage. The Rotherham gangs were culturally muslim, but not observant muslims. When you have the combination of unemployable young men and girls in care or runaways, then you see this sort of sexual exploitation.
Similar situations exist in other cities and police and social services are very familiar with the pattern of pimp recruitment. The distinguishing feature of these being culturally muslim gangs is complex, and these gangs also largely controlling the drug and other trades in these towns. A further synergy is that most UK heroin and cannabis is also from Pakistan and Afghan sources.
Organised crime is increasingly like this, with the money being laundered via Dubai in particular (the second largest source of British banknotes after the bank of England according to one senior cop that I know). Once inside prison these guys may well fall under the spell of Jihadis, as we have seen on many occasions.
We need an integrated approach to the issue, and it needs tackling from all sides if Rotherham is to be prevented. Sacking a few social workers and PCC's would just be a smokescreen.
Thanks for that, but I must really disagree with the last sentence. Sacking of the people who helped cover up these crimes is a vital first step. If applicable, there should also be criminal prosecutions.
What we are getting from Labour at the moment is just a smokescreen, mainly because they cannot blame it on the Conservatives or LibDems - although Danczuk tried it yesterday, blaming it on 'liberal dogma'.
An employee of RBS told me she thought the Scottish Banks would carry on printing Sterling notes because they recently showcased their new plastic designs. She seemed genuinely surprised when I suggested voters down South would demand of their politicians that their license to do so be revoked.
For all the discussion on currency, a lot of people in Scotland think there is already 'Scottish money' because of what the banknotes have printed on them.
Scottish nationalism for many people is xenophobic against the English, with "Tories" and "Westminster" functioning as euphemisms. It's about having a big chip on the shoulder. The 'logic' goes as follows: London is the capital of Britain, therefore Scotland is 'ruled' not just from England but by England.
Did you tell her that RBS and Lloyds will rush their registration to the rUK (if it's OK with the EU in the case of Lloyds!) in the event of Scottish independence? So hoiking the licence wouldn't be a matter of England telling Scotland what to do.
An iScotland government or banks active in Scotland could of course print some kind of paper backed by the GBPs that are already held in Scotland. But that's a point for the better informed among us. Ditto with the points that monetary union without fiscal union means there'd be no Scottish control over the Scottish economy, and a Scottish currency would be unlikely to work given that Salmond has threatened to renege on debts. From the YES supporters' point of view, those points can only be made by people who've been duped by scaremongerers into 'doing Scotland down'. Our 'belief' isn't strong enough.
Against stupidity, even the gods battle in vain.
Meanwhile, a lot of us have got the sense not to be taken in, but we're keeping relatively quiet, as YES posters festoon the high streets, carnival-style. So maybe old-fashioned Scottish common sense is going to win the day?
Good luck trying to convince SNP (sorry, 'YES') supporters that EU membership requires that there be a financial guarantee scheme to protect the first €100,000 (£85,000) in retail bank accounts, and that an independent Scotland would have great difficulty in setting one up given that 70% of the banking system belongs to two banks (Lloyds and RBS) - and even greater difficulty if Scotland piggybacks onto sterling without getting a monetary union or its own central bank. Who would be the lender of last resort?
But oh no, "it's Scotland's pound too" and so on.
Shouty, naive, smily, prickly xenophobia against cautious common sense. Who will win?
Survation was at 53%-47% before the first debate, suggesting we might be at 57%-43%, but then there is a secondary effect, surely, from the reporting of the second debate and from this poll. NO might get less than 57%.
The NO campaign should push the £85000 question hard. "Let's keep our bank accounts protected".
Winners? The officials, who are almost all still in their jobs and busy talking about what to do, keeping them in work when frankly, in my view they should all be (I'll redact that next bit). The losers? The staff, definitely, but more so the children. The really good teachers got the hell out (as did I) some of the bad ones even got promoted to fill the gaps, and only a handful of what had been a pretty good staff stayed on. Anyone who went to that school would get a pretty bad education and be constantly miserable.
Something of the same sort seems to have been either extant or twisted in Rotherham to allow this to go unchecked. That's a very worrying thought. Bad enough it's wrecking education - but when it's actively failing in the if anything more important duty of child protection...
I think that's an aspect of the explosion of administration that hasn't really been researched.
There will be more Rotherhams. I am sure both Cameron and Miliband believe that. Indeed, any MP who hasn't asked their local Council leader if they've got a potential Rotherham on their hands hasn't been doing their job. And few will have had answers that are both credible and encouraging.
Another irony is that most of us thought it better if our local Muslims weren't too religious; now we discover that perhaps some of them should have been more religious!
The bottom line, I suspect, is that there is something in the male psyche that only feels comfortable when it has its foot on someone else's neck. Indeed, isn't the whole point of politics precisely to neuter that beast?
This is too important to make a party-political issue. Apart from anything else, Labour are likely to form part of the next government so they need to be part of the solution too.
I agree, though, that holding people responsible for their individual actions is a crucial part of moving forward. Whether that is prosecuting the individuals who committed these crimes, or the individuals who chose to do nothing about it, people have to get used to the idea that they have personal responsibility.
The way I see it, trying to label this as a "Labour" or a "Muslim" mess/problem allows the individuals responsible off the hook.
I completely agree that the senior management teams at social services and police in Rotherham (amongst others) should be sacked or prosecuted, but it should not end there. What I meant was that the social problems of barely employable male youths, and disintegrating social cohesion in these towns also need tackling.
Also we need to end the control by these gangs of the drug trade and money laundering, as well as of Islamists in prison. We need to see the big picture.
Thanks for that, but I must really disagree with the last sentence. Sacking of the people who helped cover up these crimes is a vital first step. If applicable, there should also be criminal prosecutions.
I would agree with that, and further (as in my previous post) I think they should be sacked and not replaced. If there are fewer administrators/bodies involved, it's much easier to make decisions and also much easier to spot if anyone is trying to dodge making them
What we are getting from Labour at the moment is just a smokescreen, mainly because they cannot blame it on the Conservatives or LibDems - although Danczuk tried it yesterday, blaming it on 'liberal dogma'.
No, Mr Danczuk. It's Labour's mess. You own it.
But that would break the first rule of local politics - whenever there's a really serious mess-up, pass the buck.
Again, to quote my Sir Humphrey, 'when you have cleaned up a dung-hill, what is left? Nothing! But the person who did it is usually covered in dung.'
The final result will be 60 - 40 +/- 3%. It has been from the start and will be at the finish. If Salmond, really wanted yes to win, he should have given the vote to the English.
Many yes voters have this innocent belief that everything will go on the same. In a way it is touching the naivety. When I was explaining to some of the people at my company that if Scotland became independent then our sales to English customers would be treated as imports and that the English would prefer to buy from their local suppliers. Many of them were completely baffled by this.
The Yes voters are either ardent nationalists or dreamers or at rock bottom and figure that any change cant make things worse. In some ways I admire the first and understand the last but the dreamers just amaze me.
The Yes Vote has become what Salmond did not want a vote for the SNP. Blair Jenkins has disappeared and you are now either with Salmond or against him. I have yet to meet someone recently who has changed their mind on which way they will vote. This is good for the No campaign. The only risk is that the No campaign does not get its voters out. Overall I see this as a fairly low risk given all the media attention but still is the only way I can see Yes winning.
This is too important to make a party-political issue. Apart from anything else, Labour are likely to form part of the next government so they need to be part of the solution too.
I agree, though, that holding people responsible for their individual actions is a crucial part of moving forward. Whether that is prosecuting the individuals who committed these crimes, or the individuals who chose to do nothing about it, people have to get used to the idea that they have personal responsibility.
The way I see it, trying to label this as a "Labour" or a "Muslim" mess/problem allows the individuals responsible off the hook.
I agree that it should not be a party-political issue. The thing is, Danczuk hid behind that a few months ago during an interview on Radio 5. He was repeatedly pressing Nick Clegg and the Lib Dems to state what the party knew about Smith's activities back in the 1970s. When it was pointed out that Smith had been in the Labour Party a couple of years before and perhaps Labour should say what they knew, he replied: "We shouldn't make this a party political issue."
It's ridiculous, and gives the impression that he just does not acre for the truth, or the victims. The same can be said for Watson, who is so low in my estimation that it's best for me not to state my true feelings for fear of getting OGH in trouble.
Labour will probably have this harder: they have more MPs and councils in deprived areas, and those are the areas where this sort of thing will occur most (although far from exclusively).
Academic study: bigger firms could leave iScotland if currency deal fails
MAJOR Scottish companies will quit the country if post-Yes talks even start to suggest a currency union will not materialise, according to an independent survey.
Several "larger PLCs" would move their headquarters south of the Border as soon as they felt the "direction of travel" in separation negotiations would hurt the pound or put up barriers to trading, the Edinburgh University study found.
Winners? The officials, who are almost all still in their jobs and busy talking about what to do, keeping them in work when frankly, in my view they should all be (I'll redact that next bit). The losers? The staff, definitely, but more so the children. The really good teachers got the hell out (as did I) some of the bad ones even got promoted to fill the gaps, and only a handful of what had been a pretty good staff stayed on. Anyone who went to that school would get a pretty bad education and be constantly miserable.
Something of the same sort seems to have been either extant or twisted in Rotherham to allow this to go unchecked. That's a very worrying thought. Bad enough it's wrecking education - but when it's actively failing in the if anything more important duty of child protection...
I think that's an aspect of the explosion of administration that hasn't really been researched.
There will be more Rotherhams. I am sure both Cameron and Miliband believe that. Indeed, any MP who hasn't asked their local Council leader if they've got a potential Rotherham on their hands hasn't been doing their job. And few will have had answers that are both credible and encouraging.
Another irony is that most of us thought it better if our local Muslims weren't too religious; now we discover that perhaps some of them should have been more religious!
The bottom line, I suspect, is that there is something in the male psyche that only feels comfortable when it has its foot on someone else's neck. Indeed, isn't the whole point of politics precisely to neuter that beast?
I would agree with most of what you say. I agree particularly that the role of neutering base instincts is the role of politics (and of religion and loving family life also).
We should not lose sight of the fact that while police, social services and local communities all willfully turned a blind eye, the individuals (and the men they were pimping to) are the primary culprits.
Looking at Clacton Conservative Association annual accounts will dispense the myth that Carswell has built up a substantial organisation . Membership in 2013 was only around 150/160 down 20% on 2012 . It may be that he has been replacing the natural wastage of members over the last few years with new members loyal to him and that they will follow him to UKIP leaving hardly any Conservative Association left in Clacton . Alternatively his personal following amongst a weak local party is not as high as some have said and there are few to follow him to his new party .
- Police 'tried to undermine sex crimes victims' - Brange's tears of joy as they finally say 'I do' - Honour killing victim's sister 'raped by dozens' - Cameron fired up for election battle after MP defects to UKIP - Laws 'needed to stop cover ups' - Rapist who's back on streets - Immigration surges after influx from inside the EU
The first, third, fifth and sixth are all about Rotherham.
I guess we will have an early indication at Clacton of the level of tactical anti-UKIP voting we might see next May.
And there is still time for Boris to throw his hat in this particular ring. That would cut UKIP off at the knees.....
Boris already announced he is not standing.
Uxbridge a much safer bet
He could still change his mind, if the Party asked him. "Duty calls..."
Gut instinct is that Boris would go down very well in Essex....
A tough call - the Tories only have one Boris and therefore even if he successfully stood in Clacton, UKIP quite possibly have other by-election contests up their sleeve.
Worse still, were he to stand and lose he'd suddenly look very much like used goods.
I completely agree that the senior management teams at social services and police in Rotherham (amongst others) should be sacked or prosecuted, but it should not end there. What I meant was that the social problems of barely employable male youths, and disintegrating social cohesion in these towns also need tackling.
Also we need to end the control by these gangs of the drug trade and money laundering, as well as of Islamists in prison. We need to see the big picture.
I agree with all of that. I mentioned the other day that people in these communities would have known that it was going on, yet no-one stood up. There was a shocking interview on R5 last year with a man who did not take part, but had been offered girls by friends. Yet he did not go to the police.
We have to ask how we can teach a generation or two in these areas that these actions are not acceptable. And if drugs and other criminality are involved as well, as you imply, then it will be much harder.
I wonder if in Clacton the personal vote for the Labour candidate is being undervalued? Assuming it’s Ivan Henderson again he’s well known, former MP for at least part of the area, and a District and County Councillor. If he can hold his 10,000 and pick up the local Red Liberals he could come through the middle while Tories and UKIP slug it out.
Further the current UKIP PPC was on the local TV last night being distinctly unimpressed about being hi-jacxked by Carswell.
It's not Ivan - his patch of Harwich has been boundary-changed out of the constituency.
I'd be surprised if the personal vote is as low as the 500-1000 that Charles suggests. The usual estimate is 5%, i.e. maybe 3500. I don't know if Carswell has been unusually good or bad as a "constituency MP", though. Sometimes people noted as good Parliamentarians are not too keen on the "constituents with personal problems" stuff, for the reasons we've often discussed here. Canvass data will find its way across, I'd think, but I wonder how much there really is in a seat as safe as that.
The Tories have let it be known that they aren't going to hang about and plan to hold the election in October just after the Tory conference. That suggests either confidence or hubris. The calculation is presumably that a conference bounce (which virtually always happens) will help see them home, and that could well sustain the bounce. Downside is that the army of semi-volunteers (MPs, councillors, agents, activists) who flooded Newark will be at the conference rather than Clacton. My guess is they'll hold it not the day after the conference but a week after.
I guess we will have an early indication at Clacton of the level of tactical anti-UKIP voting we might see next May.
And there is still time for Boris to throw his hat in this particular ring. That would cut UKIP off at the knees.....
Boris already announced he is not standing.
Uxbridge a much safer bet
He could still change his mind, if the Party asked him. "Duty calls..."
Gut instinct is that Boris would go down very well in Essex....
I imagine that the oldies of Clacton would be both starstruck and charmed by Boris and bring in the troops from other areas. It would also win Boris a lot of support in the party and put him in Parliament before rather than after May 2015. If he wins there he would convince Tory associations that he can win elsewhere.
We need raw honesty about the cultural change required in relation to vulnerable victims. We have allowed a series of myths and stereotypes about how “real” victims behave to creep into our institutions and our decision-making. The assumption that real victims would contact the authorities, be prepared to support necessary intervention and never return to the perpetrator are only recently being challenged.
By the way, maybe we should have a PB gathering in Clacton, since so many well-known names from the site plan to canvass there! If we met the Sunday before the poll, we could chat to locals and swap anecdotal data...
Academic study: bigger firms could leave iScotland if currency deal fails
MAJOR Scottish companies will quit the country if post-Yes talks even start to suggest a currency union will not materialise, according to an independent survey.
Several "larger PLCs" would move their headquarters south of the Border as soon as they felt the "direction of travel" in separation negotiations would hurt the pound or put up barriers to trading, the Edinburgh University study found.
Oops! Edinburgh......
Well of course they would.
YES has one massive weakness. It has not demonstrated there is a wall of inward investment, with its pool of jobs, just waiting to head for Scotland once it gets independence. Admittedly, for a very good reason - there is nobody coming forward to say it is what they want.
The flip side is that a sizeable number of jobs - quality jobs, well-paid jobs, high tax-generating jobs - would be at risk of moving south (or east or west). As would those who currently have wealth. Companies and individuals are not going to hang around and suffer higher costs and taxes - or even greater uncertainty over the possibility of these - when there is an easy Plan B....
Winners? The officials, who are almost all still in their jobs and busy talking about what to do, keeping them in work when frankly, in my view they should all be (I'll redact that next bit). The losers? The staff, definitely, but more so the children. The really good teachers got the hell out (as did I) some of the bad ones even got promoted to fill the gaps, and only a handful of what had been a pretty good staff stayed on. Anyone who went to that school would get a pretty bad education and be constantly miserable.
Something of the same sort seems to have been either extant or twisted in Rotherham to allow this to go unchecked. That's a very worrying thought. Bad enough it's wrecking education - but when it's actively failing in the if anything more important duty of child protection...
I think that's an aspect of the explosion of administration that hasn't really been researched.
There will be more Rotherhams. I am sure both Cameron and Miliband believe that. Indeed, any MP who hasn't asked their local Council leader if they've got a potential Rotherham on their hands hasn't been doing their job. And few will have had answers that are both credible and encouraging.
Another irony is that most of us thought it better if our local Muslims weren't too religious; now we discover that perhaps some of them should have been more religious!
The bottom line, I suspect, is that there is something in the male psyche that only feels comfortable when it has its foot on someone else's neck. Indeed, isn't the whole point of politics precisely to neuter that beast?
I would agree with most of what you say. I agree particularly that the role of neutering base instincts is the role of politics (and of religion and loving family life also).
We should not lose sight of the fact that while police, social services and local communities all willfully turned a blind eye, the individuals (and the men they were pimping to) are the primary culprits.
Not. A. Chance.
As with child abuse in other groups, there are simply too many people with their own agenda to take this common sense attitude. The template has already been set in stone, it will simply be applied to the Labour Party (deservedly) and Asian Muslims (less so).
I guess we will have an early indication at Clacton of the level of tactical anti-UKIP voting we might see next May.
And there is still time for Boris to throw his hat in this particular ring. That would cut UKIP off at the knees.....
Boris already announced he is not standing.
Uxbridge a much safer bet
He could still change his mind, if the Party asked him. "Duty calls..."
Gut instinct is that Boris would go down very well in Essex....
I imagine that the oldies of Clacton would be both starstruck and charmed by Boris and bring in the troops from other areas. It would also win Boris a lot of support in the party and put him in Parliament before rather than after May 2015. If he wins there he would convince Tory associations that he can win elsewhere.
Go for it BoJo!
I also suspect BoJo would pull significant votes from the LibDems and to an extent from Labour as well. He is one of the very few stars of modern politics.
If BoJo stood, Carswell might as well go and find another seat - and let Clacton's current gobby UKIP candidate take the drubbing....
This is too important to make a party-political issue. Apart from anything else, Labour are likely to form part of the next government so they need to be part of the solution too.
I agree, though, that holding people responsible for their individual actions is a crucial part of moving forward. Whether that is prosecuting the individuals who committed these crimes, or the individuals who chose to do nothing about it, people have to get used to the idea that they have personal responsibility.
The way I see it, trying to label this as a "Labour" or a "Muslim" mess/problem allows the individuals responsible off the hook.
This is too important an issue for partisanship.Indeed,tribalism could be part of the story of causation and it certainly will not bring any solutions when transformed into the sectarianism which occupies parts of local government of all parties.This leads to a politically incestuous culture that comes with the arrogance of unfettered power.Single party government of any colour usually ends up like this.
An employee of RBS told me she thought the Scottish Banks would carry on printing Sterling notes because they recently showcased their new plastic designs. She seemed genuinely surprised when I suggested voters down South would demand of their politicians that their license to do so be revoked.
For all the discussion on currency, a lot of people in Scotland think there is already 'Scottish money' because of what the banknotes have printed on them.
"HM Treasury issued a statement in April 2013 stating that the present relationship with the Bank of England could be changed after independence, with the result that Scottish banks may lose the ability to issue banknotes backed by Bank of England funds."
And that was well before currency union was ruled out.
I think it would be difficult, if not impossible, to maintain the current backing arrangements with a foreign country using sterlingisation. I don't believe that Panama prints its own dollars.
Academic study: bigger firms could leave iScotland if currency deal fails
MAJOR Scottish companies will quit the country if post-Yes talks even start to suggest a currency union will not materialise, according to an independent survey.
Several "larger PLCs" would move their headquarters south of the Border as soon as they felt the "direction of travel" in separation negotiations would hurt the pound or put up barriers to trading, the Edinburgh University study found.
Oops! Edinburgh......
Well of course they would.
YES has one massive weakness. It has not demonstrated there is a wall of inward investment, with its pool of jobs, just waiting to head for Scotland once it gets independence. Admittedly, for a very good reason - there is nobody coming forward to say it is what they want.
The flip side is that a sizeable number of jobs - quality jobs, well-paid jobs, high tax-generating jobs - would be at risk of moving south (or east or west). As would those who currently have wealth. Companies and individuals are not going to hang around and suffer higher costs and taxes - or even greater uncertainty over the possibility of these - when there is an easy Plan B....
Why worry about a collapsing tax base, they have oil, eternal oil.
I've just had a very small wager with Ladbrokes at 4/1 on the Tories holding Clacton. I just feel they have a better than 20% chance which is what these odds imply.
This is too important to make a party-political issue. Apart from anything else, Labour are likely to form part of the next government so they need to be part of the solution too.
I agree, though, that holding people responsible for their individual actions is a crucial part of moving forward. Whether that is prosecuting the individuals who committed these crimes, or the individuals who chose to do nothing about it, people have to get used to the idea that they have personal responsibility.
The way I see it, trying to label this as a "Labour" or a "Muslim" mess/problem allows the individuals responsible off the hook.
This is too important an issue for partisanship.Indeed,tribalism could be part of the story of causation and it certainly will not bring any solutions when transformed into the sectarianism which occupies parts of local government of all parties.This leads to a politically incestuous culture that comes with the arrogance of unfettered power.Single party government of any colour usually ends up like this.
did it ever strike you, you might be at the tribal stage because for a couple of decades you denigrated the character of anyone pointing out the crimes by labelling them a racist ?
We need raw honesty about the cultural change required in relation to vulnerable victims. We have allowed a series of myths and stereotypes about how “real” victims behave to creep into our institutions and our decision-making. The assumption that real victims would contact the authorities, be prepared to support necessary intervention and never return to the perpetrator are only recently being challenged.
I've just had a very small wager with Ladbrokes at 4/1 on the Tories holding Clacton. I just feel they have a better than 20% chance which is what these odds imply.
Maybe you're right..
I had the feeling ukip would do very well in clacton if it wasn't for the Tory mp being Carswell
Ukip won the euros there by almost 10,000, getting 48% of the vote... Would have thought those who were previously Tories on holiday would be more inclined to vote ukip again now their MP has joined
I've just had a very small wager with Ladbrokes at 4/1 on the Tories holding Clacton. I just feel they have a better than 20% chance which is what these odds imply.
Maybe you're right..
I had the feeling ukip would do very well in clacton if it wasn't for the Tory mp being Carswell
Ukip won the euros there by almost 10,000, getting 48% of the vote... Would have thought those who were previously Tories on holiday would be more inclined to vote ukip again now their MP has joined
I think UKIP are hugely overvalued right now. I'd have to put it as 50-50 between UKIP and the Tories. There are a huge number of voters in every constituency that pay no attention to the name on the ballot.
Academic study: bigger firms could leave iScotland if currency deal fails
MAJOR Scottish companies will quit the country if post-Yes talks even start to suggest a currency union will not materialise, according to an independent survey.
Several "larger PLCs" would move their headquarters south of the Border as soon as they felt the "direction of travel" in separation negotiations would hurt the pound or put up barriers to trading, the Edinburgh University study found.
Oops! Edinburgh......
Well of course they would.
YES has one massive weakness. It has not demonstrated there is a wall of inward investment, with its pool of jobs, just waiting to head for Scotland once it gets independence. Admittedly, for a very good reason - there is nobody coming forward to say it is what they want.
The flip side is that a sizeable number of jobs - quality jobs, well-paid jobs, high tax-generating jobs - would be at risk of moving south (or east or west). As would those who currently have wealth. Companies and individuals are not going to hang around and suffer higher costs and taxes - or even greater uncertainty over the possibility of these - when there is an easy Plan B....
Why worry about a collapsing tax base, they have oil, eternal oil.
What Salmond and the SNP cannot acknowledge is that Big Oil (and even more so, Independent Oil, because of greater difficulty raising development funding) will see iScotland as higher risk than the current UK regime. To compensate for that, these oil companies will be looking to iScotland for a better fiscal package as compensation. So the net effect is that independence will result in a lower tax take from these oil fields.
And I speak as someone who did this haggling with Governments - in 63 countries around the globe - as my job for 25 years....
Another day of deafening silence from spineless Ed Miliband, on the sexual abuse of 1200 in Rotherham.
Do votes matter more than children?
A number of commentators here have suggested that this is too important an issue for a partisan approach. I look forward to your explanation as to why we are wrong and you are right.
Oil will provide about 10% of the income of the Scottish Government. This is significant but you cannot build the country on this alone. Scotland gets about £1k per person more than England per person in public spending which is about £5bn and oil tax income is about £5-6bn. Thus Scotland would start no better or worse than where it was assuming that nothing else changes!! RBS moving its HQ to London which is almost a fait accompli would immediately create a hole in the tax base and that would be just the start. Lower corporate taxes, Salmond trying to buy off all his voters and the cost of setting up an administration from scratch. Where will all the money come from?
An employee of RBS told me she thought the Scottish Banks would carry on printing Sterling notes because they recently showcased their new plastic designs. She seemed genuinely surprised when I suggested voters down South would demand of their politicians that their license to do so be revoked.
For all the discussion on currency, a lot of people in Scotland think there is already 'Scottish money' because of what the banknotes have printed on them.
"HM Treasury issued a statement in April 2013 stating that the present relationship with the Bank of England could be changed after independence, with the result that Scottish banks may lose the ability to issue banknotes backed by Bank of England funds."
And that was well before currency union was ruled out.
I think it would be difficult, if not impossible, to maintain the current backing arrangements with a foreign country using sterlingisation. I don't believe that Panama prints its own dollars.
Panama prints/mints balboas which are fixed at 1:1 with dollars.
Really disgusted with Salmond now. He has taken on board the fact that you can lie to the electorate as much as you like about currency matters because nobody understands them.
Another day of deafening silence from spineless Ed Miliband, on the sexual abuse of 1200 in Rotherham.
Do votes matter more than children?
A number of commentators here have suggested that this is too important an issue for a partisan approach. I look forward to your explanation as to why we are wrong and you are right.
Surely a non-partisan approach would mean a thorough condemnation from all party leaders and a pledge to work together to address all the issues?
Instead Miliband is silent on this. It's disgusting and he should be ashamed of himself.
Isn't unionist just a Euphamism for europhiles these days? Stay part of something that's run by something else. Unionism is as dated as Empire.
I'm using it in the context of the Act of Union 1707.
The (here's your money my Lord Campbell) Act of Union 1707. We were united for 100 years before that, it didn't need a dowry and a forced marriage. Screw it, I want the Wuffingas back, Wessex and it's dirty money can sod off.
The ActS of Union, to be more accurate - one for each Parliament. It's the Treaty that is singular.
But I agree, bring back the burhs!
Can one actually find any lineal descendants of the Wuffingas?
We don't need them, we will select from our own to act as State figurehead and rule in their memory. We won't be messing about with right of birth or any of that hogwash.
I don't imagine the Brummies will be looking for descendants of Penda the cruel ;-)
So there’ll be a new Witenagemot? Who is going to be in it?
I don't believe that Panama prints its own dollars.
They print balboas, pegged to the USD at par, and also use USDs neat. Agreed about unworkability of current backing arrangements if Scotland goes independent. They could print something that might convince some people for some time, though.
Academic study: bigger firms could leave iScotland if currency deal fails
MAJOR Scottish companies will quit the country if post-Yes talks even start to suggest a currency union will not materialise, according to an independent survey.
Several "larger PLCs" would move their headquarters south of the Border as soon as they felt the "direction of travel" in separation negotiations would hurt the pound or put up barriers to trading, the Edinburgh University study found.
Oops! Edinburgh......
Well of course they would.
YES has one massive weakness. It has not demonstrated there is a wall of inward investment, with its pool of jobs, just waiting to head for Scotland once it gets independence. Admittedly, for a very good reason - there is nobody coming forward to say it is what they want.
The flip side is that a sizeable number of jobs - quality jobs, well-paid jobs, high tax-generating jobs - would be at risk of moving south (or east or west). As would those who currently have wealth. Companies and individuals are not going to hang around and suffer higher costs and taxes - or even greater uncertainty over the possibility of these - when there is an easy Plan B....
Why worry about a collapsing tax base, they have oil, eternal oil.
What Salmond and the SNP cannot acknowledge is that Big Oil (and even more so, Independent Oil, because of greater difficulty raising development funding) will see iScotland as higher risk than the current UK regime. To compensate for that, these oil companies will be looking to iScotland for a better fiscal package as compensation. So the net effect is that independence will result in a lower tax take from these oil fields.
And I speak as someone who did this haggling with Governments - in 63 countries around the globe - as my job for 25 years....
too true.
Furthermore with the financial sector being 8% of the Scottish economy and looking like heading South oil just can't generate enough tax to cover the shortfall.
Comments
On 4 - public sector? You don't think a local small business(wo)man might be a better bet? ('I pay my taxes and work hard for what I've got, so I'll make damn good and sure nobody nicks more of your money than absolutely necessary' might be quite an effective line against Carswell.)
To your response to my last comment - yes I had forgotten that there was one (Labour) defector to the SDP honourable enough to seek re-election (he lost). Turns out Dick Taverne also fought a by-election in 1973 as an independent - ironically over his support for the EU - which he won.
My memories were soured by all those second-rate nobodies who defected to Labour under Blair and Brown but never had the courage to ask their voters what they thought. (My view is, if you change your mind, that's grown up and sensible - but if you change your mind and keep profiting from your previous position by e.g. holding a seat you won on a different platform like say the egregious Shaun Woodward, that's simple cowardice bordering on fraud. Carswell is, from that point of view, clearly doing the right thing by his constituents.)
Or is this just ever more Nat "make it up as they go along"?
1. The Yes supporters are much more visible, vocal and aggressive than No supporters. More posters (although a lot of No posters have been defaced or destroyed), activists haranguing shoppers in the queue at the supermarket. That doesn't mean there are more Yes supporters, but No supporters are definitely keeping quiet.
2. The Yes supporters are impervious to logic or reason. I had dinner with an ardent Yes supporter, who fervently believes the following
a. Westminster has pursued a deliberate agenda of persecution against Scotland, instigated by Thatcher, exemplified by the Miners' strike.
b. The currency question will have no bearing on Scotland's economy. She thinks 'spending' on her favourite things could go up indefinitely even if the Scots 'bartered chickens' as currency.
Just wow.
3. While the reporting of the Scottish situation may be poor in England, the reverse may also be true. An employee of RBS told me she thought the Scottish Banks would carry on printing Sterling notes because they recently showcased their new plastic designs. She seemed genuinely surprised when I suggested voters down South would demand of their politicians that their license to do so be revoked.
Not sure that helps with the betting...
More later with any luck
Dear little Malcolm is always right about everything and the appropriate attitude towards him from the rest of us is... grovelling obedience!
Frankly, if Scotland does go independent I can't see that they have any option other than their own currency at this stage. Anything else would, leaving aside other issues, not be 'independence' in any meaningful form (see here if you don't believe me - be warned, you need to scroll down to the third article). They could call it the pound, and even keep the Scottish banknote designs (which are very beautiful, far more so than their hopelessly unimaginative English counterparts) but while it would certainly be workable it would likely be less stable than sterling and probably have higher interest rates.
For the rest, good old-fashioned Nat agenda. You can find much the same in Wales, although there it's wedded to Labour tribalism rather than Plaid Cymru.
Probably should start with his MPs before doing anything advanced like that.
As I said it was a bollocks number weighted up and trussed up as a unionist sop.
Learn from Innocent and start trying to tell the truth.
I think perhaps UKIP have dodged a wide bullet, by not having him as their candidate.
Farage has messed this up, in my view. Carswell (and any other would-be defectors) should have been encouraged to jump next year, so there'd be no byelection, and to create momentum and news in the run-up to the general election. Now, Carswell will most likely lose, so no other Tory MPs will follow, and UKIP is a busted flush.
OT Admin -- needed to exclude PfP's quote, owing to length restrictions: has this been reduced lately?
May have been covered already, but some empty-headed twonks have apparently been selling their votes on eBay:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-28968927
In unrelated news, I may back Bottas (each way) for the pole in Monza, depending on the odds.
But I agree, bring back the burhs!
The high minded sounding institutions, titles and slogans have no meaning when there is a culture of obstruction, destruction. Child protection, safeguarding children's board, where everyone matters.
Care homes are ideal places to find girls and boys leading chaotic lives where normal family life has broken down, drugs and alcohol are a way of life and truly loving relationships rare.
Pimps are generally poorly educated, and often have backgrounds where no respect for women exists. They are often involved with other aspects of petty crime such as drug retailing and use takeaways and minicab businesses as ways to launder cash. The use of these as grooming tools to target children in care is a natural way for an amoral petty criminal to leverage his limited assets and skills, to gain status and money by becoming a pimp.
The techniques are fairly well established, and are used by pimps of other ethnicities, and in other countries both Western and Asian. Most prostitutes are recruited underage. The Rotherham gangs were culturally muslim, but not observant muslims. When you have the combination of unemployable young men and girls in care or runaways, then you see this sort of sexual exploitation.
Similar situations exist in other cities and police and social services are very familiar with the pattern of pimp recruitment. The distinguishing feature of these being culturally muslim gangs is complex, and these gangs also largely controlling the drug and other trades in these towns. A further synergy is that most UK heroin and cannabis is also from Pakistan and Afghan sources.
Organised crime is increasingly like this, with the money being laundered via Dubai in particular (the second largest source of British banknotes after the bank of England according to one senior cop that I know). Once inside prison these guys may well fall under the spell of Jihadis, as we have seen on many occasions.
We need an integrated approach to the issue, and it needs tackling from all sides if Rotherham is to be prevented. Sacking a few social workers and PCC's would just be a smokescreen.
Screw Wessex, run Alfred's petty kingdom into the sea. No taxation from the Wuffingas nation!
I have to say I always thought Peter Bone and Nadine Dorries were more likely detectors.
Note his rhetoric, like Carswell, sounds increasingly like the US Tea Party. Fear they have picked up an infection.
I don't imagine the Brummies will be looking for descendants of Penda the cruel ;-)
It's not my fault you don't like the figures I quote from the polls.
In one city a while ago - I won't say where - I worked in a failing school. I'm not talking about a school that was coasting along and needed a kick up the bum to get its act together - I'm talking about a school where knife crime was common, where I was physically assaulted twice, and where on my last day lessons had to be suspended because of what appeared to be an attempted murder. Obviously, that's not good enough(!). So what was done? Well, OFSTED graded the school a 4. But they refused to put it into special measures because it was near the end of their financial year and they didn't have the money to spare. The City Council sent in a team. On the first morning, one of the inspectors behaved so aggressively that she made an 11-year-old girl cry (quite an achievement in that school)! The City then demanded the school be put in special measures - that way, it became an Academy and was off their hands. OFSTED still dug their heels in, not wanting to spend the cash. The Head, who was a nice guy and cared deeply about the children but was desperately ineffectual, vacillated - he wanted (needed) the help from Special Measures, but if it had happened he would have been sacked, and also, he genuinely did disapprove of non-LEA schools on principle.
(continued)
Winners? The officials, who are almost all still in their jobs and busy talking about what to do, keeping them in work when frankly, in my view they should all be (I'll redact that next bit). The losers? The staff, definitely, but more so the children. The really good teachers got the hell out (as did I) some of the bad ones even got promoted to fill the gaps, and only a handful of what had been a pretty good staff stayed on. Anyone who went to that school would get a pretty bad education and be constantly miserable.
Something of the same sort seems to have been either extant or twisted in Rotherham to allow this to go unchecked. That's a very worrying thought. Bad enough it's wrecking education - but when it's actively failing in the if anything more important duty of child protection...
I think that's an aspect of the explosion of administration that hasn't really been researched.
'Andy Murray: I'd play for Scotland, not GB, if there's a Yes vote
Andy Murray has revealed his intention to play for Scotland rather than Great Britain if there's a Yes vote for independence next month.'
http://tinyurl.com/mlmwfce
This may be just one poll and certainly the only vote that matters is the one on September 18, but the pro-independence body had targeted a poll lead in the weeks leading up to referendum day.
http://www.itv.com/news/2014-08-29/support-for-yes-rises-but-is-it-too-little-too-late/
And there is still time for Boris to throw his hat in this particular ring. That would cut UKIP off at the knees.....
What we are getting from Labour at the moment is just a smokescreen, mainly because they cannot blame it on the Conservatives or LibDems - although Danczuk tried it yesterday, blaming it on 'liberal dogma'.
No, Mr Danczuk. It's Labour's mess. You own it.
Uxbridge a much safer bet
Scottish nationalism for many people is xenophobic against the English, with "Tories" and "Westminster" functioning as euphemisms. It's about having a big chip on the shoulder. The 'logic' goes as follows: London is the capital of Britain, therefore Scotland is 'ruled' not just from England but by England.
Did you tell her that RBS and Lloyds will rush their registration to the rUK (if it's OK with the EU in the case of Lloyds!) in the event of Scottish independence? So hoiking the licence wouldn't be a matter of England telling Scotland what to do.
An iScotland government or banks active in Scotland could of course print some kind of paper backed by the GBPs that are already held in Scotland. But that's a point for the better informed among us. Ditto with the points that monetary union without fiscal union means there'd be no Scottish control over the Scottish economy, and a Scottish currency would be unlikely to work given that Salmond has threatened to renege on debts. From the YES supporters' point of view, those points can only be made by people who've been duped by scaremongerers into 'doing Scotland down'. Our 'belief' isn't strong enough.
Against stupidity, even the gods battle in vain.
Meanwhile, a lot of us have got the sense not to be taken in, but we're keeping relatively quiet, as YES posters festoon the high streets, carnival-style. So maybe old-fashioned Scottish common sense is going to win the day?
Good luck trying to convince SNP (sorry, 'YES') supporters that EU membership requires that there be a financial guarantee scheme to protect the first €100,000 (£85,000) in retail bank accounts, and that an independent Scotland would have great difficulty in setting one up given that 70% of the banking system belongs to two banks (Lloyds and RBS) - and even greater difficulty if Scotland piggybacks onto sterling without getting a monetary union or its own central bank. Who would be the lender of last resort?
But oh no, "it's Scotland's pound too" and so on.
Shouty, naive, smily, prickly xenophobia against cautious common sense. Who will win?
Survation was at 53%-47% before the first debate, suggesting we might be at 57%-43%, but then there is a secondary effect, surely, from the reporting of the second debate and from this poll. NO might get less than 57%.
The NO campaign should push the £85000 question hard. "Let's keep our bank accounts protected".
Another irony is that most of us thought it better if our local Muslims weren't too religious; now we discover that perhaps some of them should have been more religious!
The bottom line, I suspect, is that there is something in the male psyche that only feels comfortable when it has its foot on someone else's neck. Indeed, isn't the whole point of politics precisely to neuter that beast?
I agree, though, that holding people responsible for their individual actions is a crucial part of moving forward. Whether that is prosecuting the individuals who committed these crimes, or the individuals who chose to do nothing about it, people have to get used to the idea that they have personal responsibility.
The way I see it, trying to label this as a "Labour" or a "Muslim" mess/problem allows the individuals responsible off the hook.
I completely agree that the senior management teams at social services and police in Rotherham (amongst others) should be sacked or prosecuted, but it should not end there. What I meant was that the social problems of barely employable male youths, and disintegrating social cohesion in these towns also need tackling.
Also we need to end the control by these gangs of the drug trade and money laundering, as well as of Islamists in prison. We need to see the big picture.
Gut instinct is that Boris would go down very well in Essex....
fhttp://electionsetc.com/2014/08/29/forecast-update-29-august-2014/
Again, to quote my Sir Humphrey, 'when you have cleaned up a dung-hill, what is left? Nothing! But the person who did it is usually covered in dung.'
Their problem is that they forgot to keep the focus on their core business - food and household consummables retailing.
The Yes voters are either ardent nationalists or dreamers or at rock bottom and figure that any change cant make things worse. In some ways I admire the first and understand the last but the dreamers just amaze me.
The Yes Vote has become what Salmond did not want a vote for the SNP. Blair Jenkins has disappeared and you are now either with Salmond or against him. I have yet to meet someone recently who has changed their mind on which way they will vote. This is good for the No campaign. The only risk is that the No campaign does not get its voters out. Overall I see this as a fairly low risk given all the media attention but still is the only way I can see Yes winning.
Con ........... 301 seats (unchanged)
Lab ........... 294 seats ( + 1 seat)
LibDem ....... 26 seats (- 2 seats)
Others ........ 29 seats ( + 1 seat)
Total .........650 seats
It's ridiculous, and gives the impression that he just does not acre for the truth, or the victims. The same can be said for Watson, who is so low in my estimation that it's best for me not to state my true feelings for fear of getting OGH in trouble.
Labour will probably have this harder: they have more MPs and councils in deprived areas, and those are the areas where this sort of thing will occur most (although far from exclusively).
Academic study: bigger firms could leave iScotland if currency deal fails
MAJOR Scottish companies will quit the country if post-Yes talks even start to suggest a currency union will not materialise, according to an independent survey.
Several "larger PLCs" would move their headquarters south of the Border as soon as they felt the "direction of travel" in separation negotiations would hurt the pound or put up barriers to trading, the Edinburgh University study found.
Oops! Edinburgh......
We should not lose sight of the fact that while police, social services and local communities all willfully turned a blind eye, the individuals (and the men they were pimping to) are the primary culprits.
Membership in 2013 was only around 150/160 down 20% on 2012 .
It may be that he has been replacing the natural wastage of members over the last few years with new members loyal to him and that they will follow him to UKIP leaving hardly any Conservative Association left in Clacton . Alternatively his personal following amongst a weak local party is not as high as some have said and there are few to follow him to his new party .
- Police 'tried to undermine sex crimes victims'
- Brange's tears of joy as they finally say 'I do'
- Honour killing victim's sister 'raped by dozens'
- Cameron fired up for election battle after MP defects to UKIP
- Laws 'needed to stop cover ups'
- Rapist who's back on streets
- Immigration surges after influx from inside the EU
The first, third, fifth and sixth are all about Rotherham.
Worse still, were he to stand and lose he'd suddenly look very much like used goods.
We have to ask how we can teach a generation or two in these areas that these actions are not acceptable. And if drugs and other criminality are involved as well, as you imply, then it will be much harder.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aisha
I'd be surprised if the personal vote is as low as the 500-1000 that Charles suggests. The usual estimate is 5%, i.e. maybe 3500. I don't know if Carswell has been unusually good or bad as a "constituency MP", though. Sometimes people noted as good Parliamentarians are not too keen on the "constituents with personal problems" stuff, for the reasons we've often discussed here. Canvass data will find its way across, I'd think, but I wonder how much there really is in a seat as safe as that.
The Tories have let it be known that they aren't going to hang about and plan to hold the election in October just after the Tory conference. That suggests either confidence or hubris. The calculation is presumably that a conference bounce (which virtually always happens) will help see them home, and that could well sustain the bounce. Downside is that the army of semi-volunteers (MPs, councillors, agents, activists) who flooded Newark will be at the conference rather than Clacton. My guess is they'll hold it not the day after the conference but a week after.
After all the things you've said about "Westminster" and defaulting on your debts?
Deluded does not begin to cover it....
Go for it BoJo!
YES has one massive weakness. It has not demonstrated there is a wall of inward investment, with its pool of jobs, just waiting to head for Scotland once it gets independence. Admittedly, for a very good reason - there is nobody coming forward to say it is what they want.
The flip side is that a sizeable number of jobs - quality jobs, well-paid jobs, high tax-generating jobs - would be at risk of moving south (or east or west). As would those who currently have wealth. Companies and individuals are not going to hang around and suffer higher costs and taxes - or even greater uncertainty over the possibility of these - when there is an easy Plan B....
As with child abuse in other groups, there are simply too many people with their own agenda to take this common sense attitude. The template has already been set in stone, it will simply be applied to the Labour Party (deservedly) and Asian Muslims (less so).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3JvawZmQVg
If BoJo stood, Carswell might as well go and find another seat - and let Clacton's current gobby UKIP candidate take the drubbing....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banknotes_of_the_pound_sterling
And that was well before currency union was ruled out.
I think it would be difficult, if not impossible, to maintain the current backing arrangements with a foreign country using sterlingisation. I don't believe that Panama prints its own dollars.
Do votes matter more than children?
Thanks for the link. Notice that he omits the threats and blackmail used by the abusers and also the blocking used at council and police levels.
I had the feeling ukip would do very well in clacton if it wasn't for the Tory mp being Carswell
Ukip won the euros there by almost 10,000, getting 48% of the vote... Would have thought those who were previously Tories on holiday would be more inclined to vote ukip again now their MP has joined
And I speak as someone who did this haggling with Governments - in 63 countries around the globe - as my job for 25 years....
And by next week no doubt Cooper will be on TV telling us all how it's all HMG's fault and nothing to do with Labour.
Really disgusted with Salmond now. He has taken on board the fact that you can lie to the electorate as much as you like about currency matters because nobody understands them.
Instead Miliband is silent on this. It's disgusting and he should be ashamed of himself.
Furthermore with the financial sector being 8% of the Scottish economy and looking like heading South oil just can't generate enough tax to cover the shortfall.