How would this affect 1) an English pensioner living in Scotland who doesn't claim Scottish nationality 2) A Scottish pensioner living in Scotland who claims dual nationality 3) A Scottish pensioner living in England who doesn't claim dual nationality 4) A Scottish pensioner living in England who does claim dual nationality 5) A "Scottish" pensioner in England or Scotland who rejects Scottish nationality?
It wont. There is no nationality test for pension payments.
So who pays in each of these cases - the UK Govt or the Scottish Govt? The UK Govt doesn't currently restrict pension payments to those living in the UK does it?
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold; Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world, The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere The ceremony of innocence is drowned; The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity.
Yeats was undoubtedly one of the greatest poets of the 20th century.
The reason oldies play such a dominant role in our political culture is that they vote. If you get an 80% turnout then their USP is at least diminished.
There is no question that the oldies are a key part of BT though. I think this is because they remember a time when the UK was a lot more United in the pre-devolution days. At the meeting I was at in Dundee last week Archie MacPherson, the old BBC football commentator was the star turn by a distance.
Pensions have also been an underrated issue in the campaign. The technical problems that would cause enormous problems for private sector pensions now in deficit in Scotland (pretty much all of them) have probably passed them by but the risks of having your pension paid by something you are no longer a part of has not.
There was an excellent debate in Dundee yesterday compered by Victoria Derbyshire which my daughter was at. What I found noticeable watching it (and her) on the I-player last night is that as we come to the crunch all of the issues are fading away somewhat and this is becoming a question of whether you want to be British or simply Scottish.
One of the sources of my nervousness about this is that I am not sure that BT have been positive enough about this throughout the campaign. They have spent their time and energy knocking down the latest gibberish from Salmond and demonstrating its idiocy. In the last 2 weeks they really need to make it clear that we are British and damned proud of it. Archie had no doubt about that and neither do I.
Very well said DavidL. #proudtobebritish
How, David, did your daughter think the discussion went? And what was her feel for the way the audience were thinking? You don’t get the same vibes if you’re not there!
Her comment was that Victoria Derbyshire was a lot better at keeping control of the argument than the muppet who was in charge of the Salmond/Darling debate and that she used humour well to reduce the heat on occasions. She felt very few minds were changed and it was a bit of a draw with each side sticking to their positions and not moving.
David , two small points , everybody laughed at the guy who said he was undecided but had already voted YES as he was going on holiday. However one can understand what he meant. On the second point she is not as clever as you think if she thought the Business for Scotland guy was not accurate. He is a very clever , successful businessman and it would have done her far better to listen to him rather than ignore due to her bias.
The reason oldies play such a dominant role in our political culture is that they vote. If you get an 80% turnout then their USP is at least diminished.
There is no question that the oldies are a key part of BT though. I think this is because they remember a time when the UK was a lot more United in the pre-devolution days. At the meeting I was at in Dundee last week Archie MacPherson, the old BBC football commentator was the star turn by a distance.
Pensions have also been an underrated issue in the campaign. The technical problems that would cause enormous problems for private sector pensions now in deficit in Scotland (pretty much all of them) have probably passed them by but the risks of having your pension paid by something you are no longer a part of has not.
There was an excellent debate in Dundee yesterday compered by Victoria Derbyshire which my daughter was at. What I found noticeable watching it (and her) on the I-player last night is that as we come to the crunch all of the issues are fading away somewhat and this is becoming a question of whether you want to be British or simply Scottish.
One of the sources of my nervousness about this is that I am not sure that BT have been positive enough about this throughout the campaign. They have spent their time and energy knocking down the latest gibberish from Salmond and demonstrating its idiocy. In the last 2 weeks they really need to make it clear that we are British and damned proud of it. Archie had no doubt about that and neither do I.
Very well said DavidL. #proudtobebritish
How, David, did your daughter think the discussion went? And what was her feel for the way the audience were thinking? You don’t get the same vibes if you’re not there!
Her comment was that Victoria Derbyshire was a lot better at keeping control of the argument than the muppet who was in charge of the Salmond/Darling debate and that she used humour well to reduce the heat on occasions. She felt very few minds were changed and it was a bit of a draw with each side sticking to their positions and not moving.
BT supporter calls it "a draw".
That means that the Yes Scotland team totally wiped the floor with the Bitterists.
So, Scottish Labour has only 280,000 voters in its GOTV database?? There are 4.2 million entitled voters at this referendum. The legend that was the SLab machine is no more. R.I.P.
- "Talk to non-Labour figures in the Better Together campaign and they say one of the biggest revelations of their time involved in the campaign has been discovering that the famed Labour machine in Scotland doesn’t actually exist any more. Rubbish, Labour sources say, the party’s made 280,000 contacts with its own voter base."
How would this affect 1) an English pensioner living in Scotland who doesn't claim Scottish nationality 2) A Scottish pensioner living in Scotland who claims dual nationality 3) A Scottish pensioner living in England who doesn't claim dual nationality 4) A Scottish pensioner living in England who does claim dual nationality 5) A "Scottish" pensioner in England or Scotland who rejects Scottish nationality?
It wont. There is no nationality test for pension payments.
So who pays in each of these cases - the UK Govt or the Scottish Govt? The UK Govt doesn't currently restrict pension payments to those living in the UK does it?
But independence would blow that wide open wouldn't it? The rUK will clearly NOT be paying Scottish state pensions going fwds. The negotiations around dual nationality and the rights of Scottish people to maintain rUK nationality at the same time will be very fraught.
I have never comprehended English commentators who wish to pull the plug on the EU while being happy to see see Scotland vote for independence. Clearly they must believe many pro EU voters reside in Scotland so without them a vote to leave will more likely be won. Actually I suspect the opposite will happen. Unnecessary chaos and dislocation to our economic system will follow a Yes vote and rUK voters are highly unlikely to vote for further upset a year or two down the line. The UK without Scotland would be a vastly diminished place and will undoubtedly hold on to the EU safety net.
I hold exactly the opposite view. I believe there is an utter logic fail to oppose Scottish Independence whilst wanting to leave the EU. Both ideals are rooted in the same basic desire for self determination and it seems perverse as an Englishman to want independence from the EU whilst denying the same thing to the Scots.
But that is just the philosophical position. From a practical position I also believe you are entirely wrong and a post Independence rUK will be far more Eurosceptic.
How would this affect 1) an English pensioner living in Scotland who doesn't claim Scottish nationality 2) A Scottish pensioner living in Scotland who claims dual nationality 3) A Scottish pensioner living in England who doesn't claim dual nationality 4) A Scottish pensioner living in England who does claim dual nationality 5) A "Scottish" pensioner in England or Scotland who rejects Scottish nationality?
It wont. There is no nationality test for pension payments.
So who pays in each of these cases - the UK Govt or the Scottish Govt? The UK Govt doesn't currently restrict pension payments to those living in the UK does it?
But independence would blow that wide open wouldn't it? The rUK will clearly NOT be paying Scottish state pensions going fwds.
That was what i was asking - will "Scottish" pensioners be able to effectively determine which Govt they receive their pension from depending on how they (self-)determine their nationality - and regardless of where they live (ie. in Scotland, in rUK, or even elsewhere). On the one hand they may see pensions being paid by the UK Govt as more secure (and less vulnerable to teething problems as the Independence is implemented). On the other hand they may prefer Scotland if there is a retirement age differential.
How long did it take the guy from The Times to join up the dots in Rotherham?
Listening to the Chief Constable being grilled by the Select Committee on Yesterday in Parliament was truly cringeworthy. If the man had any self respect he would resign. But then if he did he would have resigned before yesterday.
How would this affect 1) an English pensioner living in Scotland who doesn't claim Scottish nationality 2) A Scottish pensioner living in Scotland who claims dual nationality 3) A Scottish pensioner living in England who doesn't claim dual nationality 4) A Scottish pensioner living in England who does claim dual nationality 5) A "Scottish" pensioner in England or Scotland who rejects Scottish nationality?
It wont. There is no nationality test for pension payments.
So who pays in each of these cases - the UK Govt or the Scottish Govt? The UK Govt doesn't currently restrict pension payments to those living in the UK does it?
But independence would blow that wide open wouldn't it? The rUK will clearly NOT be paying Scottish state pensions going fwds.
That was what i was asking - will "Scottish" pensioners be able to effectively determine which Govt they receive their pension from depending on how they (self-)determine their nationality - and regardless of where they live (ie. in Scotland, in rUK, or even elsewhere). On the one hand they may see pensions being paid by the UK Govt as more secure (and less vulnerable to teething problems as the Independence is implemented). On the other hand they may prefer Scotland if there is a retirement age differential.
Pensions are a massive element of the deficit. I can't see any rUK chancellor allowing people to choose which country they get paid from. If the Scots decide to leave the UK then their pensions become a Scottish responsibility. So there would absolutely need to be negotiated clarity around that. Or no dual nationality.
"National Grid is seeking additional electricity supplies for winter after unexpected plant shutdowns have raised fears of potential shortages.
The firm, which runs Britain's supply network, said it was accelerating an emergency plan asking providers how much more electricity they could provide to fill a possible shortfall.
"At this stage we don't know if these reserve services will be needed, but they could provide an additional safeguard," said National Grid's director of UK market operation Cordi O'Hara.
In June, National Grid had said the emergency plan to boost power supplies would not be needed this year.
However, the network operator said fires at E.ON's Ironbridge and SSE's Ferrybridge power plants as well as precautionary checks at EDF Energy's Heysham and Hartlepool nuclear plants had changed the outlook."
The other large group who Salmond has to persuade are residents of Scotland of English origin.From memory they make up 20% of the electorate and you Gov had them i think 80;20 in the no camp.It could be a repeat of the Quebec referendum where natives of Quebec voted for independence but outsiders tipped the balance to give a narrow no vote.
20% ?? err... you'll need a rock-solid source for that please.
The guesstimates I've seen are around the 10% level, and a significant number of them are Yes voters.
18% non Scotland born, 8 from outside UK, 10 within.
Both against - UK born in yesterday's YouGov 31:69
rogerh was claiming that the number of "residents of Scotland of English origin" was 20%, which is clearly total and absolute pants.
The true figure is probably around 8 or 9%, but that will even include many Scots who happened to be born in England.
So writes a Swede who happens to have been born in Scotland. Nauseating post.
Stuart's post seemed a perfectly reasonable argument. No need to call it 'nauseating'.
The people Dickson speaks of are British but his divisive ideology can't accept that denomination.
The Norwegians are Scandinavians. Does that mean that a Norwegian who self-identifies and describes himself as a Norwegian rather than as a Scandinavian is being "divisive"?
You are a European. Why do you persist in describing yourself as British? Do you not realise how divisive you are being?
You can call yourself Swedish or Scandanavian but since you despise ethnic nationalism you can't in good faith call yourself a Scot.
The Scots are a civic nation not an ethnic one.
I'm sure that you do know that, which is why you are trying your luck. In Scandinavia there is a very good word for folk like you: they are sleekit creatures that creep around under rocks and bridges and scare small children. But not, please note, adults.
Ah ha. Scot Nat goes personal, as expected. The equivalent of throwing an egg.
"The mayor of the northern French city of Calais has threatened to block the port unless Britain does more to control the number of illegal migrants.
Natacha Bouchart said that her city was being "taken hostage" by about 1,300 migrants from the Middle East, Asia and Africa who are attempting to cross the English channel from France.
She said that the migrants were costing too much and making life unpleasant."
"The mayor of the northern French city of Calais has threatened to block the port unless Britain does more to control the number of illegal migrants.
Natacha Bouchart said that her city was being "taken hostage" by about 1,300 migrants from the Middle East, Asia and Africa who are attempting to cross the English channel from France.
She said that the migrants were costing too much and making life unpleasant."
How would this affect 1) an English pensioner living in Scotland who doesn't claim Scottish nationality 2) A Scottish pensioner living in Scotland who claims dual nationality 3) A Scottish pensioner living in England who doesn't claim dual nationality 4) A Scottish pensioner living in England who does claim dual nationality 5) A "Scottish" pensioner in England or Scotland who rejects Scottish nationality?
It wont. There is no nationality test for pension payments.
So who pays in each of these cases - the UK Govt or the Scottish Govt? The UK Govt doesn't currently restrict pension payments to those living in the UK does it?
But independence would blow that wide open wouldn't it? The rUK will clearly NOT be paying Scottish state pensions going fwds.
That was what i was asking - will "Scottish" pensioners be able to effectively determine which Govt they receive their pension from depending on how they (self-)determine their nationality - and regardless of where they live (ie. in Scotland, in rUK, or even elsewhere). On the one hand they may see pensions being paid by the UK Govt as more secure (and less vulnerable to teething problems as the Independence is implemented). On the other hand they may prefer Scotland if there is a retirement age differential.
Pensions are a massive element of the deficit. I can't see any rUK chancellor allowing people to choose which country they get paid from. If the Scots decide to leave the UK then their pensions become a Scottish responsibility. So there would absolutely need to be negotiated clarity around that. Or no dual nationality.
I would be doubtful that dual nationality could be prevented. But even if it could, that still leaves people with the option to choose UK nationality over Scottish nationality (how is nationality going to be determined?). Even if they live in Scotland.
I'm struggling to think of policies from central government that would create that sort of active bottom-up culture. Can anyone else think of any?
The main thing government can do is keep out of the way, by scaling back burdensome and counter-productive regulation (ContactPoint, legal liability, legal restrictions on things like selling jam at WI markets, etc).
I find it amazing how intolerant people are of the concept of national leaders "taking a holiday". I suppose the main problem comes from the ability the modern leader has to be "in charge" even when they are supposedly on holiday.
I don't "work" while I'm on holiday - I have a deputy who covers for me while I'm away. Now, some might regard the prospect of Joe Biden and Nick Clegg in charge of the US and UK respectively with a feeling only a notch removed from apoplexy (I think both would do a far better job than the current incumbents for what little that's worth). The fact remains both are designated Deputies and I don't quite see why they shouldn't be able for two weeks to be "in charge".
I'm all for masterly inactivity - after all, that's how we ran the British Empire for two hundred and fifty years. I don't see the disadvantage in the President or Prime Minister being able to take a proper holiday away from the office so to speak and leaving the designated deputy to run things in their absence. I don't think working without any sort of break is particularly productive - I believe it used to be called slavery though the money's better these days for a President or Prime Minister.
I have never comprehended English commentators who wish to pull the plug on the EU while being happy to see see Scotland vote for independence. Clearly they must believe many pro EU voters reside in Scotland so without them a vote to leave will more likely be won. Actually I suspect the opposite will happen. Unnecessary chaos and dislocation to our economic system will follow a Yes vote and rUK voters are highly unlikely to vote for further upset a year or two down the line. The UK without Scotland would be a vastly diminished place and will undoubtedly hold on to the EU safety net.
I hold exactly the opposite view. I believe there is an utter logic fail to oppose Scottish Independence whilst wanting to leave the EU. Both ideals are rooted in the same basic desire for self determination and it seems perverse as an Englishman to want independence from the EU whilst denying the same thing to the Scots.
But that is just the philosophical position. From a practical position I also believe you are entirely wrong and a post Independence rUK will be far more Eurosceptic.
I thought that... Philosophically I can't see how you can argue to leave the EU but ask Scotland to stay in the uk... Seems that's what Farage is doing, which surprised me
Tim Montgomerie @TimMontgomerie 11h I arrive in New York, only to discover @Nigel_Farage is here too! twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/506926614182363136 …
"The mayor of the northern French city of Calais has threatened to block the port unless Britain does more to control the number of illegal migrants.
Natacha Bouchart said that her city was being "taken hostage" by about 1,300 migrants from the Middle East, Asia and Africa who are attempting to cross the English channel from France.
She said that the migrants were costing too much and making life unpleasant."
Illegal immigrants in France - clearly Britain's fault.
To some extent with our generous benefits and refusal to deport. As Australia has shown if you simply deport straight away they get the message and stop coming. There are an estimated million illegals in this country and we make no effort to deal with them and there is a conspiracy of silence by the establishment regarding them.
Looking at some tweets this morning it does seem Carswell might bring a more measured atmosphere to ukip... Hopefully his influence will mean less cranky outrage from party members
How would this affect 1) an English pensioner living in Scotland who doesn't claim Scottish nationality 2) A Scottish pensioner living in Scotland who claims dual nationality 3) A Scottish pensioner living in England who doesn't claim dual nationality 4) A Scottish pensioner living in England who does claim dual nationality 5) A "Scottish" pensioner in England or Scotland who rejects Scottish nationality?
It wont. There is no nationality test for pension payments.
So who pays in each of these cases - the UK Govt or the Scottish Govt? The UK Govt doesn't currently restrict pension payments to those living in the UK does it?
But independence would blow that wide open wouldn't it? The rUK will clearly NOT be paying Scottish state pensions going fwds.
That was what i was asking - will "Scottish" pensioners be able to effectively determine which Govt they receive their pension from depending on how they (self-)determine their nationality - and regardless of where they live (ie. in Scotland, in rUK, or even elsewhere). On the one hand they may see pensions being paid by the UK Govt as more secure (and less vulnerable to teething problems as the Independence is implemented). On the other hand they may prefer Scotland if there is a retirement age differential.
Pensions are a massive element of the deficit. I can't see any rUK chancellor allowing people to choose which country they get paid from. If the Scots decide to leave the UK then their pensions become a Scottish responsibility. So there would absolutely need to be negotiated clarity around that. Or no dual nationality.
Dividing up assets and liabilities is not easy is it?
There is no way an rUK chancellor would accept liability to pay Scottish pensions, and if the law needs changing before independence then so be it.
If iScotland wants pensions paid by the rUK, then rUK should demand all NI from Scotland.
Somehow seeing it from the perspective of a distant observer really brings it home. You have a natural desire to defend your country, but this case is so horrible you know there is utterly no defence that can be attempted.
Jesus H Christ. Seeing it all laid out like that, in a dispassionate foreign publication, really hits you hard. Actually feel slightly nauseous after reading that.
How would this affect 1) an English pensioner living in Scotland who doesn't claim Scottish nationality 2) A Scottish pensioner living in Scotland who claims dual nationality 3) A Scottish pensioner living in England who doesn't claim dual nationality 4) A Scottish pensioner living in England who does claim dual nationality 5) A "Scottish" pensioner in England or Scotland who rejects Scottish nationality?
It wont. There is no nationality test for pension payments.
So who pays in each of these cases - the UK Govt or the Scottish Govt? The UK Govt doesn't currently restrict pension payments to those living in the UK does it?
It's a matter for negotiation. In its white paper the Scottish Government makes a reasonable argument for it taking on the liabilities in respect of pensioners living in Scotland.
How would this affect 1) an English pensioner living in Scotland who doesn't claim Scottish nationality 2) A Scottish pensioner living in Scotland who claims dual nationality 3) A Scottish pensioner living in England who doesn't claim dual nationality 4) A Scottish pensioner living in England who does claim dual nationality 5) A "Scottish" pensioner in England or Scotland who rejects Scottish nationality?
It wont. There is no nationality test for pension payments.
So who pays in each of these cases - the UK Govt or the Scottish Govt? The UK Govt doesn't currently restrict pension payments to those living in the UK does it?
But independence would blow that wide open wouldn't it? The rUK will clearly NOT be paying Scottish state pensions going fwds.
That was what i was asking - will "Scottish" pensioners be able to effectively determine which Govt they receive their pension from depending on how they (self-)determine their nationality - and regardless of where they live (ie. in Scotland, in rUK, or even elsewhere). On the one hand they may see pensions being paid by the UK Govt as more secure (and less vulnerable to teething problems as the Independence is implemented). On the other hand they may prefer Scotland if there is a retirement age differential.
Pensions are a massive element of the deficit. I can't see any rUK chancellor allowing people to choose which country they get paid from. If the Scots decide to leave the UK then their pensions become a Scottish responsibility. So there would absolutely need to be negotiated clarity around that. Or no dual nationality.
Dividing up assets and liabilities is not easy is it?
There is no way an rUK chancellor would accept liability to pay Scottish pensions, and if the law needs changing before independence then so be it.
If iScotland wants pensions paid by the rUK, then rUK should demand all NI from Scotland.
Reneging on any debt won't help the pension cause either.
In my experience, community involvement is a good thing, but to get beyond the small slice of people who positively like volunteering to help organise community things ("I had a really good evening with my sewing circle"), you need a really different culture from the "What are They doing for Us? Nothing!" attitude that is prevalent in Britain.
Shame that you and your friends mocked the Big Society to death then, isn't it.
I don't recall mocking it - in principle it's a good idea. But it appeared to be a top-down concept with little actual follow-up, and muddied by intermingling with substantial local authority cuts, so that it seemed to be partly a suggested substitute for public services. Is your local mental health support centre closing? Why don't you organise a support group of some kind, we'll leave the details to you? (I'm thinking of a specific example here.)
I don't say it's easy to change a culture - it's one of the hardest things in the world. But a sustained effort with financial support is needed rather than some pious references in a few speeches.
Tim Montgomerie @TimMontgomerie 11h I arrive in New York, only to discover @Nigel_Farage is here too! twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/506926614182363136 …
Just watched that... The Americans seem pretty astonished at our softy ways in general but it is Fox News... I quite enjoy watching it but it is shocking at first how openly the speak their mind... Bit like news from a pub or coffee shop in Essex!!
"The mayor of the northern French city of Calais has threatened to block the port unless Britain does more to control the number of illegal migrants.
Natacha Bouchart said that her city was being "taken hostage" by about 1,300 migrants from the Middle East, Asia and Africa who are attempting to cross the English channel from France.
She said that the migrants were costing too much and making life unpleasant."
Illegal immigrants in France - clearly Britain's fault.
The comments by the Mayor of Calais beggar belief – one would have thought the failure to address large numbers of illegal immigrants wandering the breadth of France before ending up at the sea side would be a matter for the French Government. – If she is seeking extra funding, she should look closer to home.
How would this affect 1) an English pensioner living in Scotland who doesn't claim Scottish nationality 2) A Scottish pensioner living in Scotland who claims dual nationality 3) A Scottish pensioner living in England who doesn't claim dual nationality 4) A Scottish pensioner living in England who does claim dual nationality 5) A "Scottish" pensioner in England or Scotland who rejects Scottish nationality?
It wont. There is no nationality test for pension payments.
So who pays in each of these cases - the UK Govt or the Scottish Govt? The UK Govt doesn't currently restrict pension payments to those living in the UK does it?
But independence would blow that wide open wouldn't it? The rUK will clearly NOT be paying Scottish state pensions going fwds.
That was what i was asking - will "Scottish" pensioners be able to effectively determine which Govt they receive their pension from depending on how they (self-)determine their nationality - and regardless of where they live (ie. in Scotland, in rUK, or even elsewhere).
No. There is no nationality test for or link to pension eligibility.
This stuff is out there and has been out there in some cases for a very long time.
Oh ho! So Ukrainian cease fire a figment of Poroshenko's desire to prevent his troops being overwhelmed?
Vice News reporter, Simon Ostrovsky tweets: Putin's spokesman says no ceasefire agreed as Russia not a party to the conflict. But he would say that.
This still may be real #Ukraine BREAKING NEWS Ukrainian presidency website updates wording of its ceasefire announcement saying the two presidents have agreed "on a regime for ceasing fire in Donbass" i.e. the steps needed for reaching a ceasefire deal
10:24: Here's that Russian denial in full: "Putin and Poroshenko really discussed the steps that would contribute to a ceasefire between the militia and the Ukrainian forces. Russia cannot physically agree to a ceasefire because it is not a party to the conflict," Russian news agency RIA quotes President Putin's press secretary, Dmitry Peskov, as saying.
I have never comprehended English commentators who wish to pull the plug on the EU while being happy to see see Scotland vote for independence. Clearly they must believe many pro EU voters reside in Scotland so without them a vote to leave will more likely be won. Actually I suspect the opposite will happen. Unnecessary chaos and dislocation to our economic system will follow a Yes vote and rUK voters are highly unlikely to vote for further upset a year or two down the line. The UK without Scotland would be a vastly diminished place and will undoubtedly hold on to the EU safety net.
I hold exactly the opposite view. I believe there is an utter logic fail to oppose Scottish Independence whilst wanting to leave the EU. Both ideals are rooted in the same basic desire for self determination and it seems perverse as an Englishman to want independence from the EU whilst denying the same thing to the Scots.
But that is just the philosophical position. From a practical position I also believe you are entirely wrong and a post Independence rUK will be far more Eurosceptic.
I thought that... Philosophically I can't see how you can argue to leave the EU but ask Scotland to stay in the uk... Seems that's what Farage is doing, which surprised me
We've all had this debate several times, but I think the key difference is that the British have been a nation for three hundred years, and have a common heritage, language, mindset and culture. The EU has none of those things.
Somehow seeing it from the perspective of a distant observer really brings it home. You have a natural desire to defend your country, but this case is so horrible you know there is utterly no defence that can be attempted.
Jesus H Christ. Seeing it all laid out like that, in a dispassionate foreign publication, really hits you hard. Actually feel slightly nauseous after reading that.
Simply jaw dropping.
'At night, she would come home and hide her soiled clothes at the back of her closet. When she finally found the courage to tell her mother, just shy of her 14th birthday, two police officers came to collect the clothes as evidence, half a dozen bags of them.
But a few days later, they called to say the bags had been lost.
“All of them?” she remembers asking. A check was mailed, 140 pounds, or $232, for loss of property, and the family was discouraged from pressing charges. It was the girl’s word against that of the men. The case was closed.'
Policemen, social workers and council staff should be going to prison if this is true.
In my experience, community involvement is a good thing, but to get beyond the small slice of people who positively like volunteering to help organise community things ("I had a really good evening with my sewing circle"), you need a really different culture from the "What are They doing for Us? Nothing!" attitude that is prevalent in Britain.
Shame that you and your friends mocked the Big Society to death then, isn't it.
I don't recall mocking it - in principle it's a good idea.
It's a bit like mocking Dave's green credentials - often people didnt do it because they were anti-green (though obviously some did) but because they knew his commitment to it was paper thin (as subsequently shown).
Somehow seeing it from the perspective of a distant observer really brings it home. You have a natural desire to defend your country, but this case is so horrible you know there is utterly no defence that can be attempted.
Jesus H Christ. Seeing it all laid out like that, in a dispassionate foreign publication, really hits you hard. Actually feel slightly nauseous after reading that.
Simply jaw dropping.
'At night, she would come home and hide her soiled clothes at the back of her closet. When she finally found the courage to tell her mother, just shy of her 14th birthday, two police officers came to collect the clothes as evidence, half a dozen bags of them.
But a few days later, they called to say the bags had been lost.
“All of them?” she remembers asking. A check was mailed, 140 pounds, or $232, for loss of property, and the family was discouraged from pressing charges. It was the girl’s word against that of the men. The case was closed.'
Policemen, social workers and council staff should be going to prison if this is true.
If ever there was a time for someone to call for a judge-lead enquiry....
Somehow seeing it from the perspective of a distant observer really brings it home. You have a natural desire to defend your country, but this case is so horrible you know there is utterly no defence that can be attempted.
Jesus H Christ. Seeing it all laid out like that, in a dispassionate foreign publication, really hits you hard. Actually feel slightly nauseous after reading that.
Simply jaw dropping.
'At night, she would come home and hide her soiled clothes at the back of her closet. When she finally found the courage to tell her mother, just shy of her 14th birthday, two police officers came to collect the clothes as evidence, half a dozen bags of them.
But a few days later, they called to say the bags had been lost.
“All of them?” she remembers asking. A check was mailed, 140 pounds, or $232, for loss of property, and the family was discouraged from pressing charges. It was the girl’s word against that of the men. The case was closed.'
Policemen, social workers and council staff should be going to prison if this is true.
I have never comprehended English commentators who wish to pull the plug on the EU while being happy to see see Scotland vote for independence. Clearly they must believe many pro EU voters reside in Scotland so without them a vote to leave will more likely be won. Actually I suspect the opposite will happen. Unnecessary chaos and dislocation to our economic system will follow a Yes vote and rUK voters are highly unlikely to vote for further upset a year or two down the line. The UK without Scotland would be a vastly diminished place and will undoubtedly hold on to the EU safety net.
I hold exactly the opposite view. I believe there is an utter logic fail to oppose Scottish Independence whilst wanting to leave the EU. Both ideals are rooted in the same basic desire for self determination and it seems perverse as an Englishman to want independence from the EU whilst denying the same thing to the Scots.
But that is just the philosophical position. From a practical position I also believe you are entirely wrong and a post Independence rUK will be far more Eurosceptic.
While I appreciate your philosophical position surely in practical terms breaking up the UK will cause so many short term problems and additional costs to both nations at a time when our economy is still vulnerable that then going ahead and leaving the EU would be impossible to contemplate for at least half a generation. An In/Out vote in 2017 just after the countries formally became independent of each other would be a non starter or if it was held would result in a vote to remain in. Would the diminished Little Britain really feel confident in itself to go it alone?
Pensions have also been an underrated issue in the campaign. The technical problems that would cause enormous problems for private sector pensions now in deficit in Scotland (pretty much all of them) have probably passed them by but the risks of having your pension paid by something you are no longer a part of has not.
...
One of the sources of my nervousness about this is that I am not sure that BT have been positive enough about this throughout the campaign. They have spent their time and energy knocking down the latest gibberish from Salmond and demonstrating its idiocy. In the last 2 weeks they really need to make it clear that we are British and damned proud of it. Archie had no doubt about that and neither do I.
my emphasis added
I agree with almost all of this. As well as pensions, jobs have been an underrated issue in the campaign. Jobs are good. They provide an income for those that have them and support welfare for those that don't. They are aspirational things. A country where most people work is a country at ease with itself.
Jobs are good but there will be far fewer of them after independence. Scotland gets 60% of its wealth from being part of the UK internal market. That UK market business will slip away from Scotland. Some companies, financial companies in particular, will not even attempt to service their customers from a foreign country and will move straight away. Most will soldier on for a while, I think. But no-one will invest any more in Scotland for a UK market business. I run one and can say that categorically. The UK will be another important export market for Scotland, but we will not see the kind wealth that we do now. The difference will show up in cruel numbers of unemployed. The 35-55 age group, who are most enthusiastic voters for independence, will be the most unemployed after it. They are so wrapped up in wishful thinking they have no idea what they are voting for.
Scotland is what it is because we are part of the UK. It makes us a self confident, outward looking, connected and prosperous nation. We can choose a different Scotland, but it will be a diminished Scotland. The nationalists have won the identity argument. We are Scots. We shouldn't be fighting on that territory. The question should be what kind of Scotland do want to be? It is summed up in the title : Better Together Unfortunately the campaign never really convinced itself on that argument. I hope they can turn it around in the next couple of weeks so they at least get a narrow win.
I have never comprehended English commentators who wish to pull the plug on the EU while being happy to see see Scotland vote for independence. Clearly they must believe many pro EU voters reside in Scotland so without them a vote to leave will more likely be won. Actually I suspect the opposite will happen. Unnecessary chaos and dislocation to our economic system will follow a Yes vote and rUK voters are highly unlikely to vote for further upset a year or two down the line. The UK without Scotland would be a vastly diminished place and will undoubtedly hold on to the EU safety net.
I hold exactly the opposite view. I believe there is an utter logic fail to oppose Scottish Independence whilst wanting to leave the EU. Both ideals are rooted in the same basic desire for self determination and it seems perverse as an Englishman to want independence from the EU whilst denying the same thing to the Scots.
But that is just the philosophical position. From a practical position I also believe you are entirely wrong and a post Independence rUK will be far more Eurosceptic.
I thought that... Philosophically I can't see how you can argue to leave the EU but ask Scotland to stay in the uk... Seems that's what Farage is doing, which surprised me
We've all had this debate several times, but I think the key difference is that the British have been a nation for three hundred years, and have a common heritage, language, mindset and culture. The EU has none of those things.
I honestly don't think that matters. It is about the right to self determination and that should apply to Scotland in its relationship with the just as much as it does to the UK within the EU.
Tim Montgomerie @TimMontgomerie 11h I arrive in New York, only to discover @Nigel_Farage is here too! twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/506926614182363136 …
Just watched that... The Americans seem pretty astonished at our softy ways in general but it is Fox News... I quite enjoy watching it but it is shocking at first how openly the speak their mind... Bit like news from a pub or coffee shop in Essex!!
Sean Hannity introduced Nigel Farage as a "future Prime Minister" I believe?
You say yourself that culture is one of the hardest things in the world to change. So can I ask which of the following steps in the argument you disagree with?
(1) Culture is a critical element in the success of a democratic state
(2) British culture is far more democratic and tolerant than that of the poorest countries like, say, Afghanistan
(3) Immigrants usually bring their culture with them when they move countries
(4) Bringing large numbers of people from the poorest countries to the UK will increase the share of our population with less democratic cultural views
(5) Having a larger chunk of our population with less democratic cultural views is a step backwards for the UK
(6) It will take a very long time for such immigrant communities to change their culture, so this isn't easily fixed
(7) The best way to stop this step backwards is to not import as many people from these less democratic cultures
I have never comprehended English commentators who wish to pull the plug on the EU while being happy to see see Scotland vote for independence. Clearly they must believe many pro EU voters reside in Scotland so without them a vote to leave will more likely be won. Actually I suspect the opposite will happen. Unnecessary chaos and dislocation to our economic system will follow a Yes vote and rUK voters are highly unlikely to vote for further upset a year or two down the line. The UK without Scotland would be a vastly diminished place and will undoubtedly hold on to the EU safety net.
I hold exactly the opposite view. I believe there is an utter logic fail to oppose Scottish Independence whilst wanting to leave the EU. Both ideals are rooted in the same basic desire for self determination and it seems perverse as an Englishman to want independence from the EU whilst denying the same thing to the Scots.
But that is just the philosophical position. From a practical position I also believe you are entirely wrong and a post Independence rUK will be far more Eurosceptic.
I thought that... Philosophically I can't see how you can argue to leave the EU but ask Scotland to stay in the uk... Seems that's what Farage is doing, which surprised me
We've all had this debate several times, but I think the key difference is that the British have been a nation for three hundred years, and have a common heritage, language, mindset and culture. The EU has none of those things.
I honestly don't think that matters. It is about the right to self determination and that should apply to Scotland in its relationship with the just as much as it does to the UK within the EU.
Of course, but you can support that right to self-determination while still believing it makes sense for them to stay with the UK. Otherwise, where does it end? Should the principle of self-determination mean the Highlands should be independent from Scotland? Should it mean Inverness should be independent from the Highlands? Etc etc.
I have never comprehended English commentators who wish to pull the plug on the EU while being happy to see see Scotland vote for independence. Clearly they must believe many pro EU voters reside in Scotland so without them a vote to leave will more likely be won. Actually I suspect the opposite will happen. Unnecessary chaos and dislocation to our economic system will follow a Yes vote and rUK voters are highly unlikely to vote for further upset a year or two down the line. The UK without Scotland would be a vastly diminished place and will undoubtedly hold on to the EU safety net.
I hold exactly the opposite view. I believe there is an utter logic fail to oppose Scottish Independence whilst wanting to leave the EU. Both ideals are rooted in the same basic desire for self determination and it seems perverse as an Englishman to want independence from the EU whilst denying the same thing to the Scots.
But that is just the philosophical position. From a practical position I also believe you are entirely wrong and a post Independence rUK will be far more Eurosceptic.
While I appreciate your philosophical position surely in practical terms breaking up the UK will cause so many short term problems and additional costs to both nations at a time when our economy is still vulnerable that then going ahead and leaving the EU would be impossible to contemplate for at least half a generation. An In/Out vote in 2017 just after the countries formally became independent of each other would be a non starter or if it was held would result in a vote to remain in. Would the diminished Little Britain really feel confident in itself to go it alone?
My view is that whilst being firm in negotiations both Scotland and the rUK would also be sensible and would do everything they could to ensure the transition to two separate countries was as smooth as possible for both their sakes.
That said, as I said yesterday, I think the timeline for a referendum in 2017 is utterly ludicrous and designed to deceive so I think there would be other issues in play at that point.
Surely the answer is for pensions to be paid according to where residence was during adult life, so if someone has spent 40 years working in Glasgow then retires to Devon the pension should be paid by iScotland.
It would take a lot of work to untangle and prove residency for all pensioners affected, but dividing up assets and liabilities is rarely straightforward. As any divorced person will tell you, the only people that come out better off are the lawyers.
Surely the answer is for pensions to be paid according to where residence was during adult life, so if someone has spent 40 years working in Glasgow then retires to Devon the pension should be paid by iScotland.
That would seem to be unnecessarily complicated. The Scottish Government's proposals seem fine.
The perceived YES surge is a spin-off from the second TV debate. Everyone know Darling won TVD1 on the currency. But Salmond won TVD2 on ... on what, exactly? On Scotland being the best place to run Scotland from. On abstraction. On abstract sunshine.
The NO campaign will lose unless it focuses concretely on its enemy's weakest point .
They should be screaming about the £85,000 issue from the rooftops. An iScotland would have no lender of last resort and therefore would not be able to guarantee the first £85000 in your bank account, as the British government does.
Protect our bank accounts - vote NO.
YES have got no answer to this. For goodness sake, Ruth, Johann, Willie, Alistair - put the SNP on the spot and do it now.
Tim Montgomerie @TimMontgomerie 11h I arrive in New York, only to discover @Nigel_Farage is here too! twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/506926614182363136 …
Just watched that... The Americans seem pretty astonished at our softy ways in general but it is Fox News... I quite enjoy watching it but it is shocking at first how openly the speak their mind... Bit like news from a pub or coffee shop in Essex!!
Sean Hannity introduced Nigel Farage as a "future Prime Minister" I believe?
And when I hear there's going to be a big Orange Order march in Edinburgh the day before the referendum, I think 'are NO trying to lose?' What better way to represent the past against the future (and even the present) and to lose the Catholic vote?
An iScotland would have no lender of last resort and therefore would not be able to guarantee the first £85000 in your bank account, as the British government does.
Protect our bank accounts - vote NO.
YES have got no answer to this. For goodness sake, Ruth, Johann, Willie, Alistair - put the SNP on the spot and do it now.
Wow. You think the deposit insurance comes from the Central Bank? How sweet. And you say 'yes' have no answer to an issue you obviously have no understanding of? I cant imagine why people might be voting 'yes' with people like you advocating 'no'.
Surely the answer is for pensions to be paid according to where residence was during adult life, so if someone has spent 40 years working in Glasgow then retires to Devon the pension should be paid by iScotland.
That would seem to be unnecessarily complicated. The Scottish Government's proposals seem fine.
They may be fine from the iScot point of view, but will rUK feel the same?
It seems logical to me that if a pension was accrued while living in Scotland then the payment should be from Scotland, and of course vice versa.
The perceived YES surge is a spin-off from the second TV debate. Everyone know Darling won TVD1 on the currency. But Salmond won TVD2 on ... on what, exactly? On Scotland being the best place to run Scotland from. On abstraction. On abstract sunshine.
The NO campaign will lose unless it focuses concretely on its enemy's weakest point .
They should be screaming about the £85,000 issue from the rooftops. An iScotland would have no lender of last resort and therefore would not be able to guarantee the first £85000 in your bank account, as the British government does.
Protect our bank accounts - vote NO.
YES have got no answer to this. For goodness sake, Ruth, Johann, Willie, Alistair - put the SNP on the spot and do it now.
The debate was on Monday and the Yougov polling was between Thursday & Sunday, so probably outwith a standard 'instant' post debate surge.
You're rapidly running out of debates in which to put 'the SNP' on the spot.
Since Rotherham. I've noticed an annoying outbreak of 'what aboutery' from some quarters. "What about Jimmy Saville - he was white etc." Can we call it what it is? Stupidity.
If I were to assert that in Rotherham, on average, husbands are taller than their wives. some fool would reply that "I know some women there who are taller than their husbands, so what about them?". The reply should be along the lines of "And you are a thicko."
It seems that in Rotherham and possibly in some other towns, men of Pakistani heritage are disproportionately involved.
Now it may be because they have a culture where white girls are seen to be easy, it may not be. It may be because the authorities turned a blind eye because they were PC, it encouraged the perpetrators. It may not be. It may be because the authorities turned a blind eye owing to incompetence, it may not be.
It could be all three.
But if anyone else comes on here and says "What about Jimmy Saville?" can we award them the 'Order of the Thicko' to be displayed on their avatar?
Age and experience tend to bring wisdom. That's why the blue rinse mob vote more for Dave than for Redward. And why they'll vote to keep their pensions in Sterling thanks very much. You have to be without heart not to be a bit lefty when you're young and without a mind not to be a righty when you understand the world later in life.
This difference in age is very striking. It could be that there has been a permanant change in the attitude towards independence amongst the under 60s. In that as the younger folk age, they will bring with them a higher % preference for independence. If this referendum is lost to No, a referendum in 2024 may succeed.
An iScotland would have no lender of last resort and therefore would not be able to guarantee the first £85000 in your bank account, as the British government does.
Protect our bank accounts - vote NO.
YES have got no answer to this. For goodness sake, Ruth, Johann, Willie, Alistair - put the SNP on the spot and do it now.
Wow. You think the deposit insurance comes from the Central Bank? How sweet. And you say 'yes' have no answer to an issue you obviously have no understanding of? I cant imagine why people might be voting 'yes' with people like you advocating 'no'.
Don't be so rude. The Financial Compensation Compensation Scheme is statutory. It's funded by levies authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority (owned by the Bank of England) and the Financial Conduct Authority (also statutory). €100,000 of protection is required for EU membership and the scheme also has to be underwritten by a central bank, yes. The money comes from the non-central banks, which may be the reason for your confusion. I believe the Herfindahl Index (look it up) for Scottish retail banking is above 3000. You may be aware that Lloyds and RBS have indicated they will skedaddle south in the event of a YES win. You may also be aware of what the markets did yesterday.
Oh ho! So Ukrainian cease fire a figment of Poroshenko's desire to prevent his troops being overwhelmed?
Vice News reporter, Simon Ostrovsky tweets: Putin's spokesman says no ceasefire agreed as Russia not a party to the conflict. But he would say that.
This still may be real #Ukraine BREAKING NEWS Ukrainian presidency website updates wording of its ceasefire announcement saying the two presidents have agreed "on a regime for ceasing fire in Donbass" i.e. the steps needed for reaching a ceasefire deal
10:24: Here's that Russian denial in full: "Putin and Poroshenko really discussed the steps that would contribute to a ceasefire between the militia and the Ukrainian forces. Russia cannot physically agree to a ceasefire because it is not a party to the conflict," Russian news agency RIA quotes President Putin's press secretary, Dmitry Peskov, as saying.
Not convinced will come into force quite yet, the rebels have Mariupol, third largest Donbass city, and Slaviansk, birthplace of the revolt, in their sites for liberation. I doubt they have the manpower or momentum to go further after that. Kiev are desperate, they will have the militias on their back if they ceasefire whilst on the other hand there remains the risk of the uprisings against the government in places like Kherson and Odessa if they continue as the economy collapses.
Of course they won't be happy in Warsaw, Lviv, Riga and Vilnius. I expect though that what I suggested from the outset will happen Crimea to Russia with compensation, Donbass autonomous and Ukraine non aligned. I actually think Poroshenko would have settled for this from the outset. Still as long as a ceasfire is established in due course then rebuilding can go ahead before winter sets in and before more bad blood is generated.
The perceived YES surge is a spin-off from the second TV debate.
The debate was on Monday and the Yougov polling was between Thursday & Sunday, so probably outwith a standard 'instant' post debate surge.
Who are you quoting when you say "instant"? It was a spinoff from the debate, filtered obviously through the reporting of the debate. The debate was certainly still being talked about a lot on Thursay.
You're rapidly running out of debates in which to put 'the SNP' on the spot.
So how do you think an iScotland would continue to protect bank accounts at the £85000, then? What's your answer? That I'm a weak-minded Tory colonialist?
Surely the answer is for pensions to be paid according to where residence was during adult life, so if someone has spent 40 years working in Glasgow then retires to Devon the pension should be paid by iScotland.
That would seem to be unnecessarily complicated. The Scottish Government's proposals seem fine.
They may be fine from the iScot point of view, but will rUK feel the same?
Highly unlikely. One suspects that rUK will have the stronger hand in any negotiation, as Scottish pensioners might discover shortly.
Since Rotherham. I've noticed an annoying outbreak of 'what aboutery' from some quarters. "What about Jimmy Saville - he was white etc." Can we call it what it is? Stupidity.
If I were to assert that in Rotherham, on average, husbands are taller than their wives. some fool would reply that "I know some women there who are taller than their husbands, so what about them?". The reply should be along the lines of "And you are a thicko."
It seems that in Rotherham and possibly in some other towns, men of Pakistani heritage are disproportionately involved.
Now it may be because they have a culture where white girls are seen to be easy, it may not be. It may be because the authorities turned a blind eye because they were PC, it encouraged the perpetrators. It may not be. It may be because the authorities turned a blind eye owing to incompetence, it may not be.
It could be all three.
But if anyone else comes on here and says "What about Jimmy Saville?" can we award them the 'Order of the Thicko' to be displayed on their avatar?
Yes, like saying we can't and shouldn't even try to do anything about ebola because whataboutHIVandyellowfeverandsmallpox.
The dominant UK services sector grew at the fastest pace in 10 months in August, easing fears over the recovery and strengthening the case for an interest rate rise.
The CIPS/Markit services purchasing managers' index (PMI) published on Wednesday rose to 60.5 from 59.1 in July and better than forecasts. Some economists had expected it to fall to 58.
Funny how the biggest banks in Scotland would run out of the country if it became independent, what with it being one of the "richest countries in the world".
The perceived YES surge is a spin-off from the second TV debate.
The debate was on Monday and the Yougov polling was between Thursday & Sunday, so probably outwith a standard 'instant' post debate surge.
Who are you quoting when you say "instant"? It was a spinoff from the debate, filtered obviously through the reporting of the debate. The debate was certainly still being talked about a lot on Thursay.
You're rapidly running out of debates in which to put 'the SNP' on the spot.
So how do you think an iScotland would continue to protect bank accounts at the £85000, then? What's your answer? That I'm a weak-minded Tory colonialist?
I'd say the the Unionists who tried to suggest the Yougov was taken in the 2-3 days immediately after the debate were trying to spin an instant effect line.
I think you're getting a bit shouty because of the polls.
Surely the answer is for pensions to be paid according to where residence was during adult life, so if someone has spent 40 years working in Glasgow then retires to Devon the pension should be paid by iScotland.
That would seem to be unnecessarily complicated. The Scottish Government's proposals seem fine.
They may be fine from the iScot point of view, but will rUK feel the same?
Highly unlikely. One suspects that rUK will have the stronger hand in any negotiation, as Scottish pensioners might discover shortly.
rUK may have a stronger hand, but if Labour are in power they may well give way on a number of points, to ensure Labour will get seats in an iScot going forward.
An iScotland would have no lender of last resort and therefore would not be able to guarantee the first £85000 in your bank account, as the British government does.
Protect our bank accounts - vote NO.
YES have got no answer to this. For goodness sake, Ruth, Johann, Willie, Alistair - put the SNP on the spot and do it now.
Wow. You think the deposit insurance comes from the Central Bank? How sweet. And you say 'yes' have no answer to an issue you obviously have no understanding of? I cant imagine why people might be voting 'yes' with people like you advocating 'no'.
Don't be so rude. The Financial Compensation Compensation Scheme is statutory. It's funded by levies authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority (owned by the Bank of England) and the Financial Conduct Authority (also statutory). €100,000 of protection is required for EU membership and the scheme also has to be underwritten by a central bank, yes. The money comes from the non-central banks, which may be the reason for your confusion. I believe the Herfindahl Index (look it up) for Scottish retail banking is above 3000. You may be aware that Lloyds and RBS have indicated they will skedaddle south in the event of a YES win. You may also be aware of what the markets did yesterday.
It's also worth adding that the fund isn't a bottomless pit of cash. It has borrowed money from the Bank of England - 2008 for instance, when the Bradford and Bingley failed.
Surely the answer is for pensions to be paid according to where residence was during adult life, so if someone has spent 40 years working in Glasgow then retires to Devon the pension should be paid by iScotland.
That would seem to be unnecessarily complicated. The Scottish Government's proposals seem fine.
They may be fine from the iScot point of view, but will rUK feel the same?
Highly unlikely. One suspects that rUK will have the stronger hand in any negotiation, as Scottish pensioners might discover shortly.
rUK may have a stronger hand, but if Labour are in power they may well give way on a number of points, to ensure Labour will get seats in an iScot going forward.
(cf. EU rebate).
I'm not sure this analogy works. Blair gave away the EU rebated for his own personal ambition to be president of Europe one day. rUK Labour aren't going to give a damn about their iScot counterparts as soon as the decision comes in. The iScot counterparts will probably start being aggressive to show they're not a London lobby anyway.
Looking at some tweets this morning it does seem Carswell might bring a more measured atmosphere to ukip... Hopefully his influence will mean less cranky outrage from party members
I think Farage will rue the day Carswell came across - he will IMO cost Farage his job next year. If Carswell is in the HoC and Farage is not, how can the latter credibly remain leader? They'll find some formula that does the equivalent of kicking Farage upstairs so that he hasn't been too obviously ousted.
Meanwhile Carswell strikes me as UKIP's Cameron. Does he not have some rather unacceptable views on immigration, as in, it's beneficial? If so, this will make your average UKIPper hate him.
There was a DT article yesterday about Farage / Carswell under which one commenter invite the DT's UKIP massive to outline exactly what they would do about Britain's Muslims. The responses were either silence or demands for, basically, a pogrom.
It was deeply unpleasant reading; we can only hope Carswell damages them fatally.
Looking at some tweets this morning it does seem Carswell might bring a more measured atmosphere to ukip... Hopefully his influence will mean less cranky outrage from party members
I think Farage will rue the day Carswell came across - he will IMO cost Farage his job next year. If Carswell is in the HoC and Farage is not, how can the latter credibly remain leader? They'll find some formula that does the equivalent of kicking Farage upstairs so that he hasn't been too obviously ousted.
Meanwhile Carswell strikes me as UKIP's Cameron. Does he not have some rather unacceptable views on immigration, as in, it's beneficial? If so, this will make your average UKIPper hate him.
There was a DT article yesterday about Farage / Carswell under which one commenter invite the DT's UKIP massive to outline exactly what they would do about Britain's Muslims. The responses were either silence or demands for, basically, a pogrom.
It was deeply unpleasant reading; we can only hope Carswell damages them fatally.
You think everything is a disaster for UKIP. You must be the most one-eyed poster on here which is really, really going some.
Looking at some tweets this morning it does seem Carswell might bring a more measured atmosphere to ukip... Hopefully his influence will mean less cranky outrage from party members
I think Farage will rue the day Carswell came across - he will IMO cost Farage his job next year. If Carswell is in the HoC and Farage is not, how can the latter credibly remain leader? They'll find some formula that does the equivalent of kicking Farage upstairs so that he hasn't been too obviously ousted.
Meanwhile Carswell strikes me as UKIP's Cameron. Does he not have some rather unacceptable views on immigration, as in, it's beneficial? If so, this will make your average UKIPper hate him.
There was a DT article yesterday about Farage / Carswell under which one commenter invite the DT's UKIP massive to outline exactly what they would do about Britain's Muslims. The responses were either silence or demands for, basically, a pogrom.
It was deeply unpleasant reading; we can only hope Carswell damages them fatally.
It is part of the massive misunderstanding of ukip that they think all immigration is bad. I was attacked on here for not wanting repatriation, because that apparently is the logical conclusion of closing open door immigration.
Enoch Powell was in favour of foreigners coming to the uk for work when required, he just saw the damage mass immigration would do.
I like Carswell! and your caricature of Farage is probably wide of the mark... Ukip needed someone else. Farage was accused of being a one man band for long enough.
As for British Muslims, there is nothing that can be done, even if there was a desire to do something as they are British citizens like anyone else
BBC reporting William Pooley, the first British person to contract Ebola during the outbreak in West Africa has been discharged from hospital after making a full recovery.
Looking at some tweets this morning it does seem Carswell might bring a more measured atmosphere to ukip... Hopefully his influence will mean less cranky outrage from party members
I think Farage will rue the day Carswell came across - he will IMO cost Farage his job next year. If Carswell is in the HoC and Farage is not, how can the latter credibly remain leader? They'll find some formula that does the equivalent of kicking Farage upstairs so that he hasn't been too obviously ousted.
Meanwhile Carswell strikes me as UKIP's Cameron. Does he not have some rather unacceptable views on immigration, as in, it's beneficial? If so, this will make your average UKIPper hate him.
There was a DT article yesterday about Farage / Carswell under which one commenter invite the DT's UKIP massive to outline exactly what they would do about Britain's Muslims. The responses were either silence or demands for, basically, a pogrom.
It was deeply unpleasant reading; we can only hope Carswell damages them fatally.
You think everything is a disaster for UKIP. You must be the most one-eyed poster on here which is really, really going some.
Surely the answer is for pensions to be paid according to where residence was during adult life, so if someone has spent 40 years working in Glasgow then retires to Devon the pension should be paid by iScotland.
That would seem to be unnecessarily complicated. The Scottish Government's proposals seem fine.
They may be fine from the iScot point of view, but will rUK feel the same?
Highly unlikely. One suspects that rUK will have the stronger hand in any negotiation, as Scottish pensioners might discover shortly.
rUK may have a stronger hand, but if Labour are in power they may well give way on a number of points, to ensure Labour will get seats in an iScot going forward.
(cf. EU rebate).
I'm not sure this analogy works. Blair gave away the EU rebated for his own personal ambition to be president of Europe one day. rUK Labour aren't going to give a damn about their iScot counterparts as soon as the decision comes in. The iScot counterparts will probably start being aggressive to show they're not a London lobby anyway.
iScot Labour probably will be aggressive, but the question is whether rUk Labour will provide give-aways. History suggests they will.
Looking at some tweets this morning it does seem Carswell might bring a more measured atmosphere to ukip... Hopefully his influence will mean less cranky outrage from party members
I think Farage will rue the day Carswell came across - he will IMO cost Farage his job next year. If Carswell is in the HoC and Farage is not, how can the latter credibly remain leader? They'll find some formula that does the equivalent of kicking Farage upstairs so that he hasn't been too obviously ousted.
Meanwhile Carswell strikes me as UKIP's Cameron. Does he not have some rather unacceptable views on immigration, as in, it's beneficial? If so, this will make your average UKIPper hate him.
There was a DT article yesterday about Farage / Carswell under which one commenter invite the DT's UKIP massive to outline exactly what they would do about Britain's Muslims. The responses were either silence or demands for, basically, a pogrom.
It was deeply unpleasant reading; we can only hope Carswell damages them fatally.
You think everything is a disaster for UKIP. You must be the most one-eyed poster on here which is really, really going some.
@CD13 It's an error I make constantly. I foolishly think I am dealing with rational human beings instead of frothing lunatics. I blame the way I was brought up, "give people the benefit of the doubt until they prove you to have been mistaken to do so"
Looking at some tweets this morning it does seem Carswell might bring a more measured atmosphere to ukip... Hopefully his influence will mean less cranky outrage from party members
I think Farage will rue the day Carswell came across - he will IMO cost Farage his job next year. If Carswell is in the HoC and Farage is not, how can the latter credibly remain leader? They'll find some formula that does the equivalent of kicking Farage upstairs so that he hasn't been too obviously ousted.
Meanwhile Carswell strikes me as UKIP's Cameron. Does he not have some rather unacceptable views on immigration, as in, it's beneficial? If so, this will make your average UKIPper hate him.
There was a DT article yesterday about Farage / Carswell under which one commenter invite the DT's UKIP massive to outline exactly what they would do about Britain's Muslims. The responses were either silence or demands for, basically, a pogrom.
It was deeply unpleasant reading; we can only hope Carswell damages them fatally.
You think everything is a disaster for UKIP. You must be the most one-eyed poster on here which is really, really going some.
He thinks UKIP will poll 4-5% in May.
I suppose it's a point of view.
Does he bet?
The nutty ones never do
Neither do the Clegg's going to lose Sheffield Hallam posters.
Age and experience tend to bring wisdom. That's why the blue rinse mob vote more for Dave than for Redward. And why they'll vote to keep their pensions in Sterling thanks very much. You have to be without heart not to be a bit lefty when you're young and without a mind not to be a righty when you understand the world later in life.
This difference in age is very striking. It could be that there has been a permanant change in the attitude towards independence amongst the under 60s. In that as the younger folk age, they will bring with them a higher % preference for independence. If this referendum is lost to No, a referendum in 2024 may succeed.
Or not as the case may be. Quebec voted in 1980 60:40 against independence, in 1995 there was only 1% in it but nearly 20 years further on still no third referendum and the move to independence has faded. Unionists will have to up their game in Scotland but at least there will be time to implement more devolution or something approaching Devo Max by 2024. For Nationalists this might yet be their best chance hence their no holds barred campaign.
On topic stories like this (long predicted by turnips) won't shift the oldies
LONDON (Reuters) - Lloyds Banking Group is considering having its registered office in London rather than Edinburgh should Scots vote for independence, banking industry sources told Reuters.
Lloyds, which owns Bank of Scotland, has finalised contingency planning ahead of the Sept. 18 vote. The chances of secession have increased with support for Scottish independence rising dramatically in August.
Banking industry sources said Lloyds executives are considering having the group's registered office in London, with Bank of Scotland operating from Edinburgh as a foreign division of the business.
Comments
http://tinyurl.com/ohrxcfb
- "Talk to non-Labour figures in the Better Together campaign and they say one of the biggest revelations of their time involved in the campaign has been discovering that the famed Labour machine in Scotland doesn’t actually exist any more. Rubbish, Labour sources say, the party’s made 280,000 contacts with its own voter base."
http://blogs.channel4.com/gary-gibbon-on-politics/independence-referendum-plenty-labour-worry/28997#sthash.EqIp1mjQ.dpuf
But that is just the philosophical position. From a practical position I also believe you are entirely wrong and a post Independence rUK will be far more Eurosceptic.
"National Grid is seeking additional electricity supplies for winter after unexpected plant shutdowns have raised fears of potential shortages.
The firm, which runs Britain's supply network, said it was accelerating an emergency plan asking providers how much more electricity they could provide to fill a possible shortfall.
"At this stage we don't know if these reserve services will be needed, but they could provide an additional safeguard," said National Grid's director of UK market operation Cordi O'Hara.
In June, National Grid had said the emergency plan to boost power supplies would not be needed this year.
However, the network operator said fires at E.ON's Ironbridge and SSE's Ferrybridge power plants as well as precautionary checks at EDF Energy's Heysham and Hartlepool nuclear plants had changed the outlook."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29038804
"The mayor of the northern French city of Calais has threatened to block the port unless Britain does more to control the number of illegal migrants.
Natacha Bouchart said that her city was being "taken hostage" by about 1,300 migrants from the Middle East, Asia and Africa who are attempting to cross the English channel from France.
She said that the migrants were costing too much and making life unpleasant."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-29041621
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/ebola/11071607/World-is-losing-battle-against-Ebola-medics-say.html
Morning all
I find it amazing how intolerant people are of the concept of national leaders "taking a holiday". I suppose the main problem comes from the ability the modern leader has to be "in charge" even when they are supposedly on holiday.
I don't "work" while I'm on holiday - I have a deputy who covers for me while I'm away. Now, some might regard the prospect of Joe Biden and Nick Clegg in charge of the US and UK respectively with a feeling only a notch removed from apoplexy (I think both would do a far better job than the current incumbents for what little that's worth). The fact remains both are designated Deputies and I don't quite see why they shouldn't be able for two weeks to be "in charge".
I'm all for masterly inactivity - after all, that's how we ran the British Empire for two hundred and fifty years. I don't see the disadvantage in the President or Prime Minister being able to take a proper holiday away from the office so to speak and leaving the designated deputy to run things in their absence. I don't think working without any sort of break is particularly productive - I believe it used to be called slavery though the money's better these days for a President or Prime Minister.
Tim Montgomerie @TimMontgomerie 11h
I arrive in New York, only to discover @Nigel_Farage is here too! twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/506926614182363136 …
Nigel Farage @Nigel_Farage
For those in the States I'll be on the @hannityshow with @seanhannity at 10pm EST pic.twitter.com/XYMF69ncif
Lord Ashcroft @LordAshcroft 10h
@TimMontgomerie @Nigel_Farage ...and me and had I known could have given you both a lift #interestingconversation
There is no way an rUK chancellor would accept liability to pay Scottish pensions, and if the law needs changing before independence then so be it.
If iScotland wants pensions paid by the rUK, then rUK should demand all NI from Scotland.
Poor old malcolmg.
I don't say it's easy to change a culture - it's one of the hardest things in the world. But a sustained effort with financial support is needed rather than some pious references in a few speeches.
This stuff is out there and has been out there in some cases for a very long time.
Vice News reporter, Simon Ostrovsky tweets: Putin's spokesman says no ceasefire agreed as Russia not a party to the conflict. But he would say that.
This still may be real #Ukraine
BREAKING NEWS Ukrainian presidency website updates wording of its ceasefire announcement saying the two presidents have agreed "on a regime for ceasing fire in Donbass" i.e. the steps needed for reaching a ceasefire deal
10:24: Here's that Russian denial in full: "Putin and Poroshenko really discussed the steps that would contribute to a ceasefire between the militia and the Ukrainian forces. Russia cannot physically agree to a ceasefire because it is not a party to the conflict," Russian news agency RIA quotes President Putin's press secretary, Dmitry Peskov, as saying.
'At night, she would come home and hide her soiled clothes at the back of her closet. When she finally found the courage to tell her mother, just shy of her 14th birthday, two police officers came to collect the clothes as evidence, half a dozen bags of them.
But a few days later, they called to say the bags had been lost.
“All of them?” she remembers asking. A check was mailed, 140 pounds, or $232, for loss of property, and the family was discouraged from pressing charges. It was the girl’s word against that of the men. The case was closed.'
Policemen, social workers and council staff should be going to prison if this is true.
WATCH: NIGEL FARAGE ON FOX NEWS' HANNITY SHOW... 'CAMERON IS FOLLOWING MY LEAD'
Jobs are good but there will be far fewer of them after independence. Scotland gets 60% of its wealth from being part of the UK internal market. That UK market business will slip away from Scotland. Some companies, financial companies in particular, will not even attempt to service their customers from a foreign country and will move straight away. Most will soldier on for a while, I think. But no-one will invest any more in Scotland for a UK market business. I run one and can say that categorically. The UK will be another important export market for Scotland, but we will not see the kind wealth that we do now. The difference will show up in cruel numbers of unemployed. The 35-55 age group, who are most enthusiastic voters for independence, will be the most unemployed after it. They are so wrapped up in wishful thinking they have no idea what they are voting for.
Scotland is what it is because we are part of the UK. It makes us a self confident, outward looking, connected and prosperous nation. We can choose a different Scotland, but it will be a diminished Scotland. The nationalists have won the identity argument. We are Scots. We shouldn't be fighting on that territory. The question should be what kind of Scotland do want to be? It is summed up in the title : Better Together Unfortunately the campaign never really convinced itself on that argument. I hope they can turn it around in the next couple of weeks so they at least get a narrow win.
You say yourself that culture is one of the hardest things in the world to change. So can I ask which of the following steps in the argument you disagree with?
(1) Culture is a critical element in the success of a democratic state
(2) British culture is far more democratic and tolerant than that of the poorest countries like, say, Afghanistan
(3) Immigrants usually bring their culture with them when they move countries
(4) Bringing large numbers of people from the poorest countries to the UK will increase the share of our population with less democratic cultural views
(5) Having a larger chunk of our population with less democratic cultural views is a step backwards for the UK
(6) It will take a very long time for such immigrant communities to change their culture, so this isn't easily fixed
(7) The best way to stop this step backwards is to not import as many people from these less democratic cultures
That said, as I said yesterday, I think the timeline for a referendum in 2017 is utterly ludicrous and designed to deceive so I think there would be other issues in play at that point.
Surely the answer is for pensions to be paid according to where residence was during adult life, so if someone has spent 40 years working in Glasgow then retires to Devon the pension should be paid by iScotland.
It would take a lot of work to untangle and prove residency for all pensioners affected, but dividing up assets and liabilities is rarely straightforward. As any divorced person will tell you, the only people that come out better off are the lawyers.
The NO campaign will lose unless it focuses concretely on its enemy's weakest point .
They should be screaming about the £85,000 issue from the rooftops. An iScotland would have no lender of last resort and therefore would not be able to guarantee the first £85000 in your bank account, as the British government does.
Protect our bank accounts - vote NO.
YES have got no answer to this. For goodness sake, Ruth, Johann, Willie, Alistair - put the SNP on the spot and do it now.
Big price
@DavidHerdson is on though!!
It seems logical to me that if a pension was accrued while living in Scotland then the payment should be from Scotland, and of course vice versa.
You're rapidly running out of debates in which to put 'the SNP' on the spot.
If I were to assert that in Rotherham, on average, husbands are taller than their wives. some fool would reply that "I know some women there who are taller than their husbands, so what about them?". The reply should be along the lines of "And you are a thicko."
It seems that in Rotherham and possibly in some other towns, men of Pakistani heritage are disproportionately involved.
Now it may be because they have a culture where white girls are seen to be easy, it may not be. It may be because the authorities turned a blind eye because they were PC, it encouraged the perpetrators. It may not be. It may be because the authorities turned a blind eye owing to incompetence, it may not be.
It could be all three.
But if anyone else comes on here and says "What about Jimmy Saville?" can we award them the 'Order of the Thicko' to be displayed on their avatar?
Of course they won't be happy in Warsaw, Lviv, Riga and Vilnius. I expect though that what I suggested from the outset will happen Crimea to Russia with compensation, Donbass autonomous and Ukraine non aligned. I actually think Poroshenko would have settled for this from the outset. Still as long as a ceasfire is established in due course then rebuilding can go ahead before winter sets in and before more bad blood is generated.
You think then that this younger generation won't acquire wisdom as did their predecessors? That's a bit of an insult, isn't it?
The dominant UK services sector grew at the fastest pace in 10 months in August, easing fears over the recovery and strengthening the case for an interest rate rise.
The CIPS/Markit services purchasing managers' index (PMI) published on Wednesday rose to 60.5 from 59.1 in July and better than forecasts. Some economists had expected it to fall to 58.
I think you're getting a bit shouty because of the polls.
rUK may have a stronger hand, but if Labour are in power they may well give way on a number of points, to ensure Labour will get seats in an iScot going forward.
(cf. EU rebate).
Better make a dunce's cap for Theresa May then, she made the same point in the HOC yesterday.
"Better make a dunce's cap for Theresa May then, she made the same point in the HOC yesterday."
Agreed. If the cap fits ...
I hope you would never make such a juvenile error.
Meanwhile Carswell strikes me as UKIP's Cameron. Does he not have some rather unacceptable views on immigration, as in, it's beneficial? If so, this will make your average UKIPper hate him.
There was a DT article yesterday about Farage / Carswell under which one commenter invite the DT's UKIP massive to outline exactly what they would do about Britain's Muslims. The responses were either silence or demands for, basically, a pogrom.
It was deeply unpleasant reading; we can only hope Carswell damages them fatally.
Funny - given a certain Nat's username - that removing the word "runt" from "virulent" gives a better description of their behaviour.
Enoch Powell was in favour of foreigners coming to the uk for work when required, he just saw the damage mass immigration would do.
I like Carswell! and your caricature of Farage is probably wide of the mark... Ukip needed someone else. Farage was accused of being a one man band for long enough.
As for British Muslims, there is nothing that can be done, even if there was a desire to do something as they are British citizens like anyone else
BBC reporting William Pooley, the first British person to contract Ebola during the outbreak in West Africa has been discharged from hospital after making a full recovery.
I suppose it's a point of view.
iScot Labour probably will be aggressive, but the question is whether rUk Labour will provide give-aways. History suggests they will.
The nutty ones never do
It's an error I make constantly. I foolishly think I am dealing with rational human beings instead of frothing lunatics.
I blame the way I was brought up, "give people the benefit of the doubt until they prove you to have been mistaken to do so"
LONDON (Reuters) - Lloyds Banking Group is considering having its registered office in London rather than Edinburgh should Scots vote for independence, banking industry sources told Reuters.
Lloyds, which owns Bank of Scotland, has finalised contingency planning ahead of the Sept. 18 vote. The chances of secession have increased with support for Scottish independence rising dramatically in August.
Banking industry sources said Lloyds executives are considering having the group's registered office in London, with Bank of Scotland operating from Edinburgh as a foreign division of the business.
http://uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/idUKKBN0GX20920140902?irpc=932