politicalbetting
Home› General

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Sign In Register

Categories

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » …meanwhile in the race to win GE2015 now less than seven mo

SystemSystem Posts: 12,213
edited September 2014 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » …meanwhile in the race to win GE2015 now less than seven months away….

Sept Ipsos-MORI has CON 1% lead amongst those certain to vote but 3% behind amongst all giving an opinion pic.twitter.com/JlQ59xwTNH

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • LennonLennon Posts: 1,782
    edited September 2014
    First?

    Whilst the MORI poll was interesting, and will no doubt provide a fillip to the Tory side, I do wonder how large a pinch of salt should be taken with any polls at the moment given the Scotland issue is dominating all politics. (Understandably)
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @PickardJE: Comments from SNP former deputy leader Sillars vowing to wreke vengeance on pro-union companies are a big deal - not a lone voice.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    If Scotland goes YES, will the May 2015 election still go ahead? Would a parliament where 10% of the candidates where going to depart in May 2016 be anything other than a lame duck?

    Would such a parliament have any legitimacy?
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    I love Mr Pickard. He's so pithy.
    Scott_P said:

    @PickardJE: Comments from SNP former deputy leader Sillars vowing to wreke vengeance on pro-union companies are a big deal - not a lone voice.

  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    edited September 2014
    Scott_P said:

    @PickardJE: Comments from SNP former deputy leader Sillars vowing to wreke vengeance on pro-union companies are a big deal - not a lone voice.

    The mask has slipped and the true nature of Scottish nationalism is revealed.

    Personally, I wouldn't want this nasty chap anywhere near the levers of power.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @kiranstacey: If an indy Scotland can nationalise BP, the UK shd nationalise Apple and use their cash to pay off 15% of national debt. H/T @jeegarkakkad

    Sillars is officially out of his tree
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    If you're a dog lover telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/11092567/How-to-help-Manchester-Dogs-Home.html
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    Beverley_C said:

    If Scotland goes YES, will the May 2015 election still go ahead? Would a parliament where 10% of the candidates where going to depart in May 2016 be anything other than a lame duck?

    Would such a parliament have any legitimacy?

    The Parliament would have legitimacy, whether any government formed as a result of the GE would have is another matter. For example, imagine a Labour government whose majority is smaller than its number of Scottish MPs.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    I've been meaning to ask this forever, what is your avatar?
    Scott_P said:

    @kiranstacey: If an indy Scotland can nationalise BP, the UK shd nationalise Apple and use their cash to pay off 15% of national debt. H/T @jeegarkakkad

    Sillars is officially out of his tree

  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    I thought Mr Hodges point here was a real humdinger.
    HurstLlama said:

    Beverley_C said:

    If Scotland goes YES, will the May 2015 election still go ahead? Would a parliament where 10% of the candidates where going to depart in May 2016 be anything other than a lame duck?

    Would such a parliament have any legitimacy?

    The Parliament would have legitimacy, whether any government formed as a result of the GE would have is another matter. For example, imagine a Labour government whose majority is smaller than its number of Scottish MPs.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    The way the Scottish referendum has panned out makes me even more sure UKIP will get a good voteshare in next year's election. Far from people going back to the status quo or the "serious" options, if anything it seems that people become even more determined to give the "Westminster elite" a kicking as they start focussing on an election/referendum. Even 15% for them is a possibility imo.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    Jim Sillars - BP rue the day stuff.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-29181989
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    A graph of the yes and no lines in the indyref would be nice
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,668
    I imagine that by next year there will be a distinct Scottish Labour Party that will run on its own platform for the Westminster election. It may sit with Labour until the formal separation but it will be entirely independent.
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    edited September 2014
    Danny565 said:

    The way the Scottish referendum has panned out makes me even more sure UKIP will get a good voteshare in next year's election. Far from people going back to the status quo or the "serious" options, if anything it seems that people become even more determined to give the "Westminster elite" a kicking as they start focussing on an election/referendum. Even 15% for them is a possibility imo.

    I agree Mr. 565. Now take that one step further and let's say the Lib Dems pick-up, say, 9% of the vote and 30 seats and UKIP get 15% and 2 seats. Now throw in a Labour government sustained by MPs from Scottish constituencies. We don't do revolutions but the pressure for change would be enormous. Under the constitution HMG could just ignore it but that might not be the wisest thing.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Given the borders are strong "NO" - Cameron should offer any region that votes "NO" can remain in the rUk should they wish to.

    Only fair right ?
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    edited September 2014
    Swinney is totally off the reservation. If it wasn't so serious, I'd rolling in the aisles of Next and B&Q, and M&S. telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11091801/Big-business-warned-of-day-of-reckoning-if-Scots-vote-Yes.html?fb
    New employment laws will force Standard Life to give two years’ warning on redundancies, he said, meaning it could not follow through its plans to move savings, pensions and investment business to England.

    He suggested Sir Charlie Mayfield, chairman of the John Lewis Group, had taken “instructions from Cameron” when he warned this week that separation would lead to higher prices in Scotland...

    Mr Salmond yesterday accused Standard Life, BP and Shell of colluding with David Cameron by issuing warnings about the impact of independence during the Prime Minister’s visit to Scotland on Wednesday. The two oil giants backed expert warnings oil will all but have run out by 2050...

    Adrian Grace, chief executive of insurance and pensions giant Aegon, told Radio Four’s Today programme it may be “forced” to move staff from its Edinburgh base if the separatists win the referendum. Sir Ian Cheshire, the chief executive of Kingfisher, which includes the B&Q and Screwfix DIY chains, is behind the letter that is expected to be published at the weekend. Along with Mr Bolland, the other signatories are expected to include Mr Clarke and John Timpson, boss of the Timpson shoe repair business.
  • LennonLennon Posts: 1,782
    TGOHF said:

    Given the borders are strong "NO" - Cameron should offer any region that votes "NO" can remain in the rUk should they wish to.

    Only fair right ?

    On the other hand, in the event of a close No vote the Yes camp can say - OK, you can keep the Borders and the rest of us have just voted Yes.
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    TGOHF said:

    Given the borders are strong "NO" - Cameron should offer any region that votes "NO" can remain in the rUk should they wish to.

    Only fair right ?

    Would it not be simpler to just move Hadrian’s Wall 50 miles north. ; )
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    You minx.

    A new colonialism. I can see that - self determination is the watchword afterall!
    TGOHF said:

    Given the borders are strong "NO" - Cameron should offer any region that votes "NO" can remain in the rUk should they wish to.

    Only fair right ?

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Plato said:

    I thought Mr Hodges point here was a real humdinger.

    HurstLlama said:

    Beverley_C said:

    If Scotland goes YES, will the May 2015 election still go ahead? Would a parliament where 10% of the candidates where going to depart in May 2016 be anything other than a lame duck?

    Would such a parliament have any legitimacy?

    The Parliament would have legitimacy, whether any government formed as a result of the GE would have is another matter. For example, imagine a Labour government whose majority is smaller than its number of Scottish MPs.
    They would have an incentive to string out negotiations beyond the May 2016 date Salmond has set.

    I'm sure he would accept it ("in the interests of an orderly transition") in return for material concessions on the substantive matters.

    Hence a Labour government in this position would have a direct conflict of interests and would not be able to negotiate an optimal outcome for rUK.

    This is a very good example of why, immediately following a vote, there should be an Act (ie in 2014):

    - devolving all domestic powers (including financial) to Holyrood
    - fixing a cash lump sum transfer to iScot for the 2015/16 budget for all these domestic matters (ie ending the Barnett formula and meaning that Scottish MPs have no interest in rUK money bills)
    - limiting the voting rights of Scottish MPs to a very limited set of truly UK wide issues (eg defence/foreign affairs)
    - providing that in GE2015 there will be no Scottish MPs elected but that Holyrood will appoint 58 representatives (with the limited powers above) in proportion to the votes cast for parties at the last Holyrood elections (ie 2011)

  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Opinium poll data that is out tomorrow: no matter what it says the market will react - but without any baseline to compare it against how relevant is it.

    If is showed Yes 55/No 45 would it even matter?
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    @Plato

    "Swinney is totally off the reservation"

    I think you meant Sillars rather than Swinney, but you are right on the substantive point the man is bonkers. However, it would seem that lots of Scots like what he says, will back him and then expect him to deliver. Sad innit.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,534
    TGOHF said:

    Given the borders are strong "NO" - Cameron should offer any region that votes "NO" can remain in the rUk should they wish to.

    Only fair right ?

    Mr. Putin has shown us how to do it.

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,950
    Sillars is soft. Why not outlaw making a Scotsman unemployed?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,336
    SimonStClare said:

    Scott_P said:

    @PickardJE: Comments from SNP former deputy leader Sillars vowing to wreke vengeance on pro-union companies are a big deal - not a lone voice.

    The mask has slipped and the true nature of Scottish nationalism is revealed.

    Personally, I wouldn't want this nasty chap anywhere near the levers of power.
    See previous thread. He's so far from the steering wheel he's at the bus stop.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    I wish I didn't feel this was possible, nevermind likely. Yessers have totally lost the plot when it comes to democracy. Intimidation, threats and now this on polling day.

    I'm appalled. It's Venezuelan politics.
    For very good reasons, Britain's political parties do not campaign on election day. By that point everyone has had their say, the rallies and the shouting must stop. Between the opening and closing of the polling stations, voters can get on with casting their vote in peace, unimpeded by noisy displays of partisan politicking. The parties are limited to being able to offer lifts to supporters and outside the polling station they are allowed a minimal presence. You will also notice that in order to comply with electoral law there is no reporting on the airwaves, or online either, beyond simple statements that voting is happening and it is "brisk".

    ...On Radio 4 this morning, Jim Naughtie delivered a fascinating report from Glasgow Shettleston, one of the poorest constituencies in Glasgow. The Yes activists sound well-organised as they try to convince voters who have never voted before to turn out. Here was old-fashioned on the ground grassroots politics. Fair enough. But towards the end of the report the organiser from Yes explained about a Nationalist march, on the day itself, designed to sweep families along to vote.

    At first I was sure he must have misspoken. Even the Yes campaign – whose brutal tactics of intimidation are coming to the fore now on the streets of Scotland – would surely not stoop to rabble rousing on the day? But no, it is happening elsewhere.
    blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/iainmartin1/100286216/the-nationalist-pied-piper-plan-to-march-voters-to-the-polling-booths-next-week-is-deeply-sinister/
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,336
    SimonStClare said:

    TGOHF said:

    Given the borders are strong "NO" - Cameron should offer any region that votes "NO" can remain in the rUk should they wish to.

    Only fair right ?

    Would it not be simpler to just move Hadrian’s Wall 50 miles north. ; )
    That wouldn't even reach Berwick, would it?

  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    Charles said:

    Plato said:

    I thought Mr Hodges point here was a real humdinger.

    HurstLlama said:

    Beverley_C said:

    If Scotland goes YES, will the May 2015 election still go ahead? Would a parliament where 10% of the candidates where going to depart in May 2016 be anything other than a lame duck?

    Would such a parliament have any legitimacy?

    The Parliament would have legitimacy, whether any government formed as a result of the GE would have is another matter. For example, imagine a Labour government whose majority is smaller than its number of Scottish MPs.
    They would have an incentive to string out negotiations beyond the May 2016 date Salmond has set.

    I'm sure he would accept it ("in the interests of an orderly transition") in return for material concessions on the substantive matters.

    Hence a Labour government in this position would have a direct conflict of interests and would not be able to negotiate an optimal outcome for rUK.

    This is a very good example of why, immediately following a vote, there should be an Act (ie in 2014):

    - devolving all domestic powers (including financial) to Holyrood
    - fixing a cash lump sum transfer to iScot for the 2015/16 budget for all these domestic matters (ie ending the Barnett formula and meaning that Scottish MPs have no interest in rUK money bills)
    - limiting the voting rights of Scottish MPs to a very limited set of truly UK wide issues (eg defence/foreign affairs)
    - providing that in GE2015 there will be no Scottish MPs elected but that Holyrood will appoint 58 representatives (with the limited powers above) in proportion to the votes cast for parties at the last Holyrood elections (ie 2011)

    Good plan, Mr. Charles, and very sensible. Now, tell us, do you think Cameron would ever have the courage in bring in such a bill and fight it through Parliament to get it enacted?
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,708
    The utterances of this Sillars character are shocking in the extreme. Who or what the hell is he? Lunatics like that will turn Scotland into a pariah state. Salmond must distance himself and the SNP from such ravings. He should make a statement that Sillars represents only a lunatic fringe within nationalism and that most fair-minded nationalist folk abhor and condemn his comments.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    These businesses announcing the downsides of Indy must be hurting the YES campaign - this is a clear ploy to dissuade any more coming out.

    Cam and Os have made a real impact with this approach - bravo. In stark contrast to Ed's anti business mantra.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    FPT
    Alanbrooke said:

    » show previous quotes
    nah malc, this guy's a keeper.

    There are enough posters who work in oil and energy on this board ( patrick, RCS1000, Richard T, Mr casino ) so seeing someone telling they don't know what they're talking about is popcorn time.

    I just hope he keeps pushing the boat out on how little he understands manufacturing. ;-)

    I will stick to turnip spotting , which is about 80% of posters on here so keeps me busy.
  • Beverley_CBeverley_C Posts: 6,256
    Well, it is an early night for me. I am off to wine and dine in central Manchester

    Have fun...
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 4,464
    edited September 2014
    Plato said:

    Swinney is totally off the reservation. If it wasn't so serious, I'd rolling in the aisles of Next and B&Q, and M&S. telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11091801/Big-business-warned-of-day-of-reckoning-if-Scots-vote-Yes.html?fb

    New employment laws will force Standard Life to give two years’ warning on redundancies, he said, meaning it could not follow through its plans to move savings, pensions and investment business to England.

    He suggested Sir Charlie Mayfield, chairman of the John Lewis Group, had taken “instructions from Cameron” when he warned this week that separation would lead to higher prices in Scotland...

    Mr Salmond yesterday accused Standard Life, BP and Shell of colluding with David Cameron by issuing warnings about the impact of independence during the Prime Minister’s visit to Scotland on Wednesday. The two oil giants backed expert warnings oil will all but have run out by 2050...

    Adrian Grace, chief executive of insurance and pensions giant Aegon, told Radio Four’s Today programme it may be “forced” to move staff from its Edinburgh base if the separatists win the referendum. Sir Ian Cheshire, the chief executive of Kingfisher, which includes the B&Q and Screwfix DIY chains, is behind the letter that is expected to be published at the weekend. Along with Mr Bolland, the other signatories are expected to include Mr Clarke and John Timpson, boss of the Timpson shoe repair business.
    This is nuts even if he's not official SNP. Until actual independence how have they even got the power to do this? Is this not going to hugely piss off rUK and invite retaliation ( wonder who'd win that one ?). He can't stop me moving my savings from there ( well barring holding billions of rUK savings hostage - and I do not even want speculate where that would end it's too lurid), and move them I will if it's not done for me as the thought of having these delusional Scottish politicians within a million miles of my old age savings makes my blood run cold.

    Std Life if you are reading this get the money south 8.30 on Friday morning if it's a yes. In fact better still do it now and don't bother sending it back.

  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Totally agree with you there.
    Charles said:

    Plato said:

    I thought Mr Hodges point here was a real humdinger.

    HurstLlama said:

    Beverley_C said:

    If Scotland goes YES, will the May 2015 election still go ahead? Would a parliament where 10% of the candidates where going to depart in May 2016 be anything other than a lame duck?

    Would such a parliament have any legitimacy?

    The Parliament would have legitimacy, whether any government formed as a result of the GE would have is another matter. For example, imagine a Labour government whose majority is smaller than its number of Scottish MPs.
    They would have an incentive to string out negotiations beyond the May 2016 date Salmond has set.

    I'm sure he would accept it ("in the interests of an orderly transition") in return for material concessions on the substantive matters.

    Hence a Labour government in this position would have a direct conflict of interests and would not be able to negotiate an optimal outcome for rUK.

    This is a very good example of why, immediately following a vote, there should be an Act (ie in 2014):

    - devolving all domestic powers (including financial) to Holyrood
    - fixing a cash lump sum transfer to iScot for the 2015/16 budget for all these domestic matters (ie ending the Barnett formula and meaning that Scottish MPs have no interest in rUK money bills)
    - limiting the voting rights of Scottish MPs to a very limited set of truly UK wide issues (eg defence/foreign affairs)
    - providing that in GE2015 there will be no Scottish MPs elected but that Holyrood will appoint 58 representatives (with the limited powers above) in proportion to the votes cast for parties at the last Holyrood elections (ie 2011)

  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,336

    Stark_Dawning said:

    The utterances of this Sillars character are shocking in the extreme. Who or what the hell is he? Lunatics like that will turn Scotland into a pariah state. Salmond must distance himself and the SNP from such ravings. He should make a statement that Sillars represents only a lunatic fringe within nationalism and that most fair-minded nationalist folk abhor and condemn his comments.

    See discussion on previous thread which puts the matter in contect.

  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    SimonStClare said:

    TGOHF said:

    Given the borders are strong "NO" - Cameron should offer any region that votes "NO" can remain in the rUk should they wish to.

    Only fair right ?

    Would it not be simpler to just move Hadrian’s Wall 50 miles north. ; )
    It's been done before -

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonine_Wall

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    SimonStClare said:

    Scott_P said:

    @PickardJE: Comments from SNP former deputy leader Sillars vowing to wreke vengeance on pro-union companies are a big deal - not a lone voice.

    The mask has slipped and the true nature of Scottish nationalism is revealed.

    Personally, I wouldn't want this nasty chap anywhere near the levers of power.
    Simon, get a grip , he is nowhere near anything and will not ever be now. He is late 70's and will not be in any position of power ever.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,683
    SimonStClare said:

    TGOHF said:

    Given the borders are strong "NO" - Cameron should offer any region that votes "NO" can remain in the rUk should they wish to.

    Only fair right ?

    Would it not be simpler to just move Hadrian’s Wall 50 miles north. ; )
    I think that actually happened once. My memory may be failing me but I'm pretty sure that for some time (50 years?) the Romans moved the border north, and constructed a new wall round about the Edinburgh-Glasgow line.

    It didn't work out (lots of wars and too expensive for minimal gain ) so they moved back again to Hadrian's wall after a while.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,336
    HurstLlama said:

    Charles said:

    Plato said:

    I thought Mr Hodges point here was a real humdinger.

    HurstLlama said:

    Beverley_C said:

    If Scotland goes YES, will the May 2015 election still go ahead? Would a parliament where 10% of the candidates where going to depart in May 2016 be anything other than a lame duck?

    Would such a parliament have any legitimacy?

    The Parliament would have legitimacy, whether any government formed as a result of the GE would have is another matter. For example, imagine a Labour government whose majority is smaller than its number of Scottish MPs.
    They would have an incentive to string out negotiations beyond the May 2016 date Salmond has set.

    I'm sure he would accept it ("in the interests of an orderly transition") in return for material concessions on the substantive matters.

    Hence a Labour government in this position would have a direct conflict of interests and would not be able to negotiate an optimal outcome for rUK.

    This is a very good example of why, immediately following a vote, there should be an Act (ie in 2014):

    - devolving all domestic powers (including financial) to Holyrood
    - fixing a cash lump sum transfer to iScot for the 2015/16 budget for all these domestic matters (ie ending the Barnett formula and meaning that Scottish MPs have no interest in rUK money bills)
    - limiting the voting rights of Scottish MPs to a very limited set of truly UK wide issues (eg defence/foreign affairs)
    - providing that in GE2015 there will be no Scottish MPs elected but that Holyrood will appoint 58 representatives (with the limited powers above) in proportion to the votes cast for parties at the last Holyrood elections (ie 2011)

    Good plan, Mr. Charles, and very sensible. Now, tell us, do you think Cameron would ever have the courage in bring in such a bill and fight it through Parliament to get it enacted?
    Serious question, why should he not be able to get it through pmt given the reasons Mr Charles adduces?

  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Golly, I'm on a roll today. It was confusing Scotties with Westies, now its Sillars and Swinney.

    Early Onset Altz? I think so!
    HurstLlama said:

    @Plato

    "Swinney is totally off the reservation"

    I think you meant Sillars rather than Swinney, but you are right on the substantive point the man is bonkers. However, it would seem that lots of Scots like what he says, will back him and then expect him to deliver. Sad innit.

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    Scott_P said:

    @kiranstacey: If an indy Scotland can nationalise BP, the UK shd nationalise Apple and use their cash to pay off 15% of national debt. H/T @jeegarkakkad

    Sillars is officially out of his tree

    Nowhere near as bad as you though
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    Beverley_C said:

    Well, it is an early night for me. I am off to wine and dine in central Manchester ...

    Sincere condolences, Mrs C. When dinning in Manchester I found the best rule was to get pissed early, that way much of the pain passed me by. However, I am not sure how applicable that rule is for ladies.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    welshowl said:

    Plato said:

    Swinney is totally off the reservation. If it wasn't so serious, I'd rolling in the aisles of Next and B&Q, and M&S. telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11091801/Big-business-warned-of-day-of-reckoning-if-Scots-vote-Yes.html?fb

    New employment laws will force Standard Life to give two years’ warning on redundancies, he said, meaning it could not follow through its plans to move savings, pensions and investment business to England.

    He suggested Sir Charlie Mayfield, chairman of the John Lewis Group, had taken “instructions from Cameron” when he warned this week that separation would lead to higher prices in Scotland...

    Mr Salmond yesterday accused Standard Life, BP and Shell of colluding with David Cameron by issuing warnings about the impact of independence during the Prime Minister’s visit to Scotland on Wednesday. The two oil giants backed expert warnings oil will all but have run out by 2050...

    Adrian Grace, chief executive of insurance and pensions giant Aegon, told Radio Four’s Today programme it may be “forced” to move staff from its Edinburgh base if the separatists win the referendum. Sir Ian Cheshire, the chief executive of Kingfisher, which includes the B&Q and Screwfix DIY chains, is behind the letter that is expected to be published at the weekend. Along with Mr Bolland, the other signatories are expected to include Mr Clarke and John Timpson, boss of the Timpson shoe repair business.
    This is nuts ( again ). Until actual independence how has he got the power to do this? Is this not going to hugely piss off rUK and invite retaliation ( wonder who'd win that one ?). He can't stop me moving my savings from there ( well barring holding billions of rUK savings hostage - and I do not even want speculate where that would end it's too lurid), and move them I will if it's not done for me as the thought of having these delusional Scottish politicians within a million miles of my old age savings makes my blood run cold.

    Std Life if you are reading this get the money south 8.30 on Friday morning if it's a yes. In fact better still do it now and don't bother sending it back.



    precisely Standard life are faced with the prospect of moving to rUK or watching their customers do it for them.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    HurstLlama said:

    Charles said:

    Plato said:

    I thought Mr Hodges point here was a real humdinger.

    HurstLlama said:

    Beverley_C said:

    If Scotland goes YES, will the May 2015 election still go ahead? Would a parliament where 10% of the candidates where going to depart in May 2016 be anything other than a lame duck?

    Would such a parliament have any legitimacy?

    The Parliament would have legitimacy, whether any government formed as a result of the GE would have is another matter. For example, imagine a Labour government whose majority is smaller than its number of Scottish MPs.
    They would have an incentive to string out negotiations beyond the May 2016 date Salmond has set.

    I'm sure he would accept it ("in the interests of an orderly transition") in return for material concessions on the substantive matters.

    Hence a Labour government in this position would have a direct conflict of interests and would not be able to negotiate an optimal outcome for rUK.

    This is a very good example of why, immediately following a vote, there should be an Act (ie in 2014):

    - devolving all domestic powers (including financial) to Holyrood
    - fixing a cash lump sum transfer to iScot for the 2015/16 budget for all these domestic matters (ie ending the Barnett formula and meaning that Scottish MPs have no interest in rUK money bills)
    - limiting the voting rights of Scottish MPs to a very limited set of truly UK wide issues (eg defence/foreign affairs)
    - providing that in GE2015 there will be no Scottish MPs elected but that Holyrood will appoint 58 representatives (with the limited powers above) in proportion to the votes cast for parties at the last Holyrood elections (ie 2011)

    Good plan, Mr. Charles, and very sensible. Now, tell us, do you think Cameron would ever have the courage in bring in such a bill and fight it through Parliament to get it enacted?
    Can I plead the 5th?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,336
    Plato said:

    Golly, I'm on a roll today. It was confusing Scotties with Westies, now its Sillars and Swinney.

    Early Onset Altz? I think so!

    HurstLlama said:

    @Plato

    "Swinney is totally off the reservation"

    I think you meant Sillars rather than Swinney, but you are right on the substantive point the man is bonkers. However, it would seem that lots of Scots like what he says, will back him and then expect him to deliver. Sad innit.

    Confusing those pols is a bit like confusing a Manx cat and an Irish Setter ... but I have had my own lapses too!

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    TGOHF said:

    Given the borders are strong "NO" - Cameron should offer any region that votes "NO" can remain in the rUk should they wish to.

    Only fair right ?

    Cuckoo, Cuckoo
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    Applying the L&N model to IPSOS we have:-

    (Central forecast)

    Con vote lead 8.8%
    Con seat lead 82 seats

    (10000 Monte Carlo simulations)

    Chance of Tory vote lead: 100.0%
    Chance of a Tory seat lead: 99.7%

    Chance of a Hung Parliament: 32.3%
    Chance of a Tory majority: 67.2%
    Chance of a Labour majority: 0.0%
  • hamiltonacehamiltonace Posts: 664
    Looking a bit more into the ICM poll and there seems some results which are interesting. The 20% Dont Know is very high. Yesterday we had a South Scotland poll that was 67/33 but ICM is almost dead level. About 50% of the people polled did not vote or did not know what they voted at the last Scottish election. In such a situation weightings are very hard to get right.

    My gut feeling is that the vote is still going 55/45 No/Yes and not sure this poll says anything different.





  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    HurstLlama said:

    @Plato

    "Swinney is totally off the reservation"

    I think you meant Sillars rather than Swinney, but you are right on the substantive point the man is bonkers. However, it would seem that lots of Scots like what he says, will back him and then expect him to deliver. Sad innit.

    She is obviously not right in the head
  • AggieDAggieD Posts: 24
    TGOHF said:

    Given the borders are strong "NO" - Cameron should offer any region that votes "NO" can remain in the rUk should they wish to.

    Only fair right ?

    When Yessers keep saying they are governed by a Tory government they didn't vote for it's only fair that any of the Regions who vote No should be allowed to stay with the Union.
  • manofkent2014manofkent2014 Posts: 1,543
    edited September 2014
    Charles said:

    Plato said:

    I thought Mr Hodges point here was a real humdinger.

    HurstLlama said:

    Beverley_C said:

    If Scotland goes YES, will the May 2015 election still go ahead? Would a parliament where 10% of the candidates where going to depart in May 2016 be anything other than a lame duck?

    Would such a parliament have any legitimacy?

    The Parliament would have legitimacy, whether any government formed as a result of the GE would have is another matter. For example, imagine a Labour government whose majority is smaller than its number of Scottish MPs.
    They would have an incentive to string out negotiations beyond the May 2016 date Salmond has set.

    I'm sure he would accept it ("in the interests of an orderly transition") in return for material concessions on the substantive matters.

    Hence a Labour government in this position would have a direct conflict of interests and would not be able to negotiate an optimal outcome for rUK.

    This is a very good example of why, immediately following a vote, there should be an Act (ie in 2014):

    - devolving all domestic powers (including financial) to Holyrood
    - fixing a cash lump sum transfer to iScot for the 2015/16 budget for all these domestic matters (ie ending the Barnett formula and meaning that Scottish MPs have no interest in rUK money bills)
    - limiting the voting rights of Scottish MPs to a very limited set of truly UK wide issues (eg defence/foreign affairs)
    - providing that in GE2015 there will be no Scottish MPs elected but that Holyrood will appoint 58 representatives (with the limited powers above) in proportion to the votes cast for parties at the last Holyrood elections (ie 2011)

    I'm not sure there is any justification for allowing Scottish MPs to vote on anything after an independence vote. After all would the government continue to use Scottish resources (e.g. the Scottish Divisions of The Army) on UK issues? Surely anything that was bound up with Scotland would be wholly involved in transitioning and therefore subject to the scrutiny of the British Government in direct negotiation with Scottish Government. Scottish MPs would effectively be surplus to requirements other than in addressing any transitional issues for their constituents?
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Stark_Dawning said:

    The utterances of this Sillars character are shocking in the extreme. Who or what the hell is he? Lunatics like that will turn Scotland into a pariah state. Salmond must distance himself and the SNP from such ravings. He should make a statement that Sillars represents only a lunatic fringe within nationalism and that most fair-minded nationalist folk abhor and condemn his comments.

    He's a former deputy leader of the SNP - he had a massive falling out with Alex Salmond and has spent the last couple of decades criticising everything Salmond has done.
  • __Bobajob____Bobajob__ Posts: 144
    isam said:

    A graph of the yes and no lines in the indyref would be nice

    What the breathless blathering from the PB Tories not enough for you ISam?
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    It's like voting - get pissed early and often!
    HurstLlama said:

    Beverley_C said:

    Well, it is an early night for me. I am off to wine and dine in central Manchester ...

    Sincere condolences, Mrs C. When dinning in Manchester I found the best rule was to get pissed early, that way much of the pain passed me by. However, I am not sure how applicable that rule is for ladies.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,950
    So, amidst the Pistorius verdict, Paisley's death and the possible dissolution of the United Kingdom by this time next week, I have some far more significant news to announce.

    Got one of those book deal thingummyjigs for Sir Edric's Temple and the follow-up, Sir Edric's Treasure (with Tickety Boo Press). No ETA, but I think next year's possible and 2016 maybe (hoping it's 2015 though).

    I may mention it once or twice in the meantime...
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    Charles said:

    HurstLlama said:

    Charles said:

    Plato said:

    I thought Mr Hodges point here was a real humdinger.

    HurstLlama said:

    Beverley_C said:

    If Scotland goes YES, will the May 2015 election still go ahead? Would a parliament where 10% of the candidates where going to depart in May 2016 be anything other than a lame duck?

    Would such a parliament have any legitimacy?

    The Parliament would have legitimacy, whether any government formed as a result of the GE would have is another matter. For example, imagine a Labour government whose majority is smaller than its number of Scottish MPs.
    They would have an incentive to string out negotiations beyond the May 2016 date Salmond has set.

    I'm sure he would accept it ("in the interests of an orderly transition") in return for material concessions on the substantive matters.

    Hence a Labour government in this position would have a direct conflict of interests and would not be able to negotiate an optimal outcome for rUK.

    This is a very good example of why, immediately following a vote, there should be an Act (ie in 2014):

    - devolving all domestic powers (including financial) to Holyrood
    - fixing a cash lump sum transfer to iScot for the 2015/16 budget for all these domestic matters (ie ending the Barnett formula and meaning that Scottish MPs have no interest in rUK money bills)
    - limiting the voting rights of Scottish MPs to a very limited set of truly UK wide issues (eg defence/foreign affairs)
    - providing that in GE2015 there will be no Scottish MPs elected but that Holyrood will appoint 58 representatives (with the limited powers above) in proportion to the votes cast for parties at the last Holyrood elections (ie 2011)

    Good plan, Mr. Charles, and very sensible. Now, tell us, do you think Cameron would ever have the courage in bring in such a bill and fight it through Parliament to get it enacted?
    Can I plead the 5th?
    LOL
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    edited September 2014
    Current forecast 2015 Tory leads from various methodologies.

    Byelection swingback: -1.2% (nc)
    Fisher: 2.6% (down)
    2009-2010 repeat: 3.5% (down)
    Prosser: 5.0% (nc)
    L&N: 8.8% (up)
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    edited September 2014
    Carnyx said:

    SimonStClare said:

    TGOHF said:

    Given the borders are strong "NO" - Cameron should offer any region that votes "NO" can remain in the rUk should they wish to.

    Only fair right ?

    Would it not be simpler to just move Hadrian’s Wall 50 miles north. ; )
    That wouldn't even reach Berwick, would it?
    Not entirely sure Mr Carnyx - I remember walking a large chunk of it in my childhood, stunning scenery but rather bleak imr - and always forget how 'south' it actually is.

  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,683
    Sean_F said:

    TGOHF said:

    Given the borders are strong "NO" - Cameron should offer any region that votes "NO" can remain in the rUk should they wish to.

    Only fair right ?

    Mr. Putin has shown us how to do it.

    We still have 100 challenger 2 tanks and a chunk of self-propelled artillery, plus apache gunships and armoured APCs.

    Who in McDad's Army can stand up to that?

    P.S. We'll dress them up in the native dress of the Scottish lowlanders, natch.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    Plato said:

    I wish I didn't feel this was possible, nevermind likely. Yessers have totally lost the plot when it comes to democracy. Intimidation, threats and now this on polling day.

    I'm appalled. It's Venezuelan politics.

    For very good reasons, Britain's political parties do not campaign on election day. By that point everyone has had their say, the rallies and the shouting must stop. Between the opening and closing of the polling stations, voters can get on with casting their vote in peace, unimpeded by noisy displays of partisan politicking. The parties are limited to being able to offer lifts to supporters and outside the polling station they are allowed a minimal presence. You will also notice that in order to comply with electoral law there is no reporting on the airwaves, or online either, beyond simple statements that voting is happening and it is "brisk".

    ...On Radio 4 this morning, Jim Naughtie delivered a fascinating report from Glasgow Shettleston, one of the poorest constituencies in Glasgow. The Yes activists sound well-organised as they try to convince voters who have never voted before to turn out. Here was old-fashioned on the ground grassroots politics. Fair enough. But towards the end of the report the organiser from Yes explained about a Nationalist march, on the day itself, designed to sweep families along to vote.

    At first I was sure he must have misspoken. Even the Yes campaign – whose brutal tactics of intimidation are coming to the fore now on the streets of Scotland – would surely not stoop to rabble rousing on the day? But no, it is happening elsewhere.
    blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/iainmartin1/100286216/the-nationalist-pied-piper-plan-to-march-voters-to-the-polling-booths-next-week-is-deeply-sinister/

    How terrible those nasty YES people are going to give poor people a lift to the polling station , how bad can they be I say.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    AggieD said:

    TGOHF said:

    Given the borders are strong "NO" - Cameron should offer any region that votes "NO" can remain in the rUk should they wish to.

    Only fair right ?

    When Yessers keep saying they are governed by a Tory government they didn't vote for it's only fair that any of the Regions who vote No should be allowed to stay with the Union.
    Should be the first order of business if there is a yes vote.

    As the Antonine wall shows, the boundaries of Scotland have not been in place forever - if the Borders want to join us we should welcome them with open arms.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Carnyx said:

    HurstLlama said:

    Charles said:

    Plato said:

    I thought Mr Hodges point here was a real humdinger.

    HurstLlama said:

    Beverley_C said:

    If Scotland goes YES, will the May 2015 election still go ahead? Would a parliament where 10% of the candidates where going to depart in May 2016 be anything other than a lame duck?

    Would such a parliament have any legitimacy?

    The Parliament would have legitimacy, whether any government formed as a result of the GE would have is another matter. For example, imagine a Labour government whose majority is smaller than its number of Scottish MPs.
    They would have an incentive to string out negotiations beyond the May 2016 date Salmond has set.

    I'm sure he would accept it ("in the interests of an orderly transition") in return for material concessions on the substantive matters.

    Hence a Labour government in this position would have a direct conflict of interests and would not be able to negotiate an optimal outcome for rUK.

    This is a very good example of why, immediately following a vote, there should be an Act (ie in 2014):

    - devolving all domestic powers (including financial) to Holyrood
    - fixing a cash lump sum transfer to iScot for the 2015/16 budget for all these domestic matters (ie ending the Barnett formula and meaning that Scottish MPs have no interest in rUK money bills)
    - limiting the voting rights of Scottish MPs to a very limited set of truly UK wide issues (eg defence/foreign affairs)
    - providing that in GE2015 there will be no Scottish MPs elected but that Holyrood will appoint 58 representatives (with the limited powers above) in proportion to the votes cast for parties at the last Holyrood elections (ie 2011)

    Good plan, Mr. Charles, and very sensible. Now, tell us, do you think Cameron would ever have the courage in bring in such a bill and fight it through Parliament to get it enacted?
    Serious question, why should he not be able to get it through pmt given the reasons Mr Charles adduces?

    Because Labour - being tactially savvy and strategically foolish - would fight it tooth and nail.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    Morris_Dancer said:

    So, amidst the Pistorius verdict, Paisley's death and the possible dissolution of the United Kingdom by this time next week, I have some far more significant news to announce.

    Got one of those book deal thingummyjigs for Sir Edric's Temple and the follow-up, Sir Edric's Treasure (with Tickety Boo Press). No ETA, but I think next year's possible and 2016 maybe (hoping it's 2015 though).

    I may mention it once or twice in the meantime...

    MD , I hope you will not try to give it the higher prices required in Scotland scam.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    What a perfectly matched pair we'd make in that case!

    Come 'ere, big boy.
    malcolmg said:

    HurstLlama said:

    @Plato

    "Swinney is totally off the reservation"

    I think you meant Sillars rather than Swinney, but you are right on the substantive point the man is bonkers. However, it would seem that lots of Scots like what he says, will back him and then expect him to deliver. Sad innit.

    She is obviously not right in the head
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    Skintland and Salmond's outrage - they'll rue the day.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/9202573/Salmond-attacks-magazine-that-called-Scotland-Skintland.html
  • manofkent2014manofkent2014 Posts: 1,543
    edited September 2014
    malcolmg said:

    TGOHF said:

    Given the borders are strong "NO" - Cameron should offer any region that votes "NO" can remain in the rUk should they wish to.

    Only fair right ?

    Cuckoo, Cuckoo
    So its OK for Scots to say they don't want to stay British and secede from the Union but its not alright for Scots to secede from your vision of Scotland if they wanted to remain part of the Union?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,336
    edited September 2014
    SimonStClare said:

    Carnyx said:

    SimonStClare said:

    TGOHF said:

    Given the borders are strong "NO" - Cameron should offer any region that votes "NO" can remain in the rUk should they wish to.

    Only fair right ?

    Would it not be simpler to just move Hadrian’s Wall 50 miles north. ; )
    That wouldn't even reach Berwick, would it?
    Not entirely sure Mr Carnyx - I remember walking a large chunk of it in my childhood, stunning scenery but rather bleak imr - and always forget how 'south' it actually is.
    Part of it [not the surviving ruin above ground, though] actually goes along a street just north of Newcastle Central station! The western end is rather closer, though.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    SeanT said:

    welshowl said:

    Plato said:

    Swinney is totally off the reservation. If it wasn't so serious, I'd rolling in the aisles of Next and B&Q, and M&S. telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11091801/Big-business-warned-of-day-of-reckoning-if-Scots-vote-Yes.html?fb

    New employment laws will force Standard Life to give two years’ warning on redundancies, he said, meaning it could not follow through its plans to move savings, pensions and investment business to England.

    Adrian Grace, chief executive of insurance and pensions giant Aegon, told Radio Four’s Today programme it may be “forced” to move staff from its Edinburgh base if the separatists win the referendum. Sir Ian Cheshire, the chief executive of Kingfisher, which includes the B&Q and Screwfix DIY chains, is behind the letter that is expected to be published at the weekend. Along with Mr Bolland, the other signatories are expected to include Mr Clarke and John Timpson, boss of the Timpson shoe repair business.


    Std Life if you are reading this get the money south 8.30 on Friday morning if it's a yes. In fact better still do it now and don't bother sending it back.

    Like I said, during the Czech/Slovak "velvet divorce" they had to literally seal the border, with armed guards, to prevent Slovaks smuggling their cash into the Czech republic. Thereafter the Slovak economy crashed by 4% in a year.

    And that's regarded as a model of dissolution: one that went incredibly smoothly.

    But it was two small economies with different languages, different cultures, and much less shared history to unpick. There was also no massively divisive referendum campaign beforehand, stirring up resentment.

    It's a fair guess that our divorce, should it happen, will be messier, nastier, longer and more dangerous. And we have the huge extra complication of EU membership. The Scots will be OUT until they can negotiate their way IN, the UK will be IN.

    Ghastly mess.

    If I had any money in Scottish banks or pension funds I would move it now, if I could. Why take the risk?

    Surely electronic transfers mean that this wouldn't be an issue - unless you are suggesting a bank run next Friday and deposits are frozen ?
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    Alistair said:

    Stark_Dawning said:

    The utterances of this Sillars character are shocking in the extreme. Who or what the hell is he? Lunatics like that will turn Scotland into a pariah state. Salmond must distance himself and the SNP from such ravings. He should make a statement that Sillars represents only a lunatic fringe within nationalism and that most fair-minded nationalist folk abhor and condemn his comments.

    He's a former deputy leader of the SNP - he had a massive falling out with Alex Salmond and has spent the last couple of decades criticising everything Salmond has done.
    That would be a bit much for Beyond Dawning to take in he prefers to be just ignorant of any knowledge on anything and whinge about things.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    Charles said:

    Carnyx said:

    HurstLlama said:

    Charles said:

    Plato said:

    I thought Mr Hodges point here was a real humdinger.

    HurstLlama said:

    Beverley_C said:

    If Scotland goes YES, will the May 2015 election still go ahead? Would a parliament where 10% of the candidates where going to depart in May 2016 be anything other than a lame duck?

    Would such a parliament have any legitimacy?

    The Parliament would have legitimacy, whether any government formed as a result of the GE would have is another matter. For example, imagine a Labour government whose majority is smaller than its number of Scottish MPs.
    They would have an incentive to string out negotiations beyond the May 2016 date Salmond has set.

    I'm sure he would accept it ("in the interests of an orderly transition") in return for material concessions on the substantive matters.

    Hence a Labour government in this position would have a direct conflict of interests and would not be able to negotiate an optimal outcome for rUK.

    This is a very good example of why, immediately following a vote, there should be an Act (ie in 2014):

    - devolving all domestic powers (including financial) to Holyrood
    - fixing a cash lump sum transfer to iScot for the 2015/16 budget for all these domestic matters (ie ending the Barnett formula and meaning that Scottish MPs have no interest in rUK money bills)
    - limiting the voting rights of Scottish MPs to a very limited set of truly UK wide issues (eg defence/foreign affairs)
    - providing that in GE2015 there will be no Scottish MPs elected but that Holyrood will appoint 58 representatives (with the limited powers above) in proportion to the votes cast for parties at the last Holyrood elections (ie 2011)

    Good plan, Mr. Charles, and very sensible. Now, tell us, do you think Cameron would ever have the courage in bring in such a bill and fight it through Parliament to get it enacted?
    Serious question, why should he not be able to get it through pmt given the reasons Mr Charles adduces?

    Because Labour - being tactially savvy and strategically foolish - would fight it tooth and nail.
    So make them. Even I'd vote Cameron again for that lot.

    Why can't cameron do politics ?
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    And they were snuggled up together only TWO DAYS ago.

    Really, when one sleeps with dogs - you get fleas. And Alex did exactly that.

    It's like campaigning with Red Ken.
    Alistair said:

    Stark_Dawning said:

    The utterances of this Sillars character are shocking in the extreme. Who or what the hell is he? Lunatics like that will turn Scotland into a pariah state. Salmond must distance himself and the SNP from such ravings. He should make a statement that Sillars represents only a lunatic fringe within nationalism and that most fair-minded nationalist folk abhor and condemn his comments.

    He's a former deputy leader of the SNP - he had a massive falling out with Alex Salmond and has spent the last couple of decades criticising everything Salmond has done.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    manofkent2014 said:



    I'm not sure there is any justification for allowing Scottish MPs to vote on anything after an independence vote. After all would the government continue to use Scottish resources (e.g. the Scottish Divisions of The Army) on UK issues? Surely anything that was bound up with Scotland would be wholly involved in transitioning and therefore subject to the scrutiny of the British Government in direct negotiation with Scottish Government. Scottish MPs would effectively be surplus to requirements other than in addressing any transitional issues for their constituents?

    Didn't spell it out, but the Scottish MPs would only be in place from GE15 - iDay. During that time they should get a say
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,336
    Charles said:

    Carnyx said:

    HurstLlama said:

    Charles said:

    Plato said:

    I thought Mr Hodges point here was a real humdinger.

    HurstLlama said:

    Beverley_C said:

    If Scotland goes YES, will the May 2015 election still go ahead? Would a parliament where 10% of the candidates where going to depart in May 2016 be anything other than a lame duck?

    Would such a parliament have any legitimacy?

    The Parliament would have legitimacy, whether any government formed as a result of the GE would have is another matter. For example, imagine a Labour government whose majority is smaller than its number of Scottish MPs.
    They would have an incentive to string out negotiations beyond the May 2016 date Salmond has set.

    I'm sure he would accept it ("in the interests of an orderly transition") in return for material concessions on the substantive matters.

    Hence a Labour government in this position would have a direct conflict of interests and would not be able to negotiate an optimal outcome for rUK.

    This is a very good example of why, immediately following a vote, there should be an Act (ie in 2014):

    - devolving all domestic powers (including financial) to Holyrood
    - fixing a cash lump sum transfer to iScot for the 2015/16 budget for all these domestic matters (ie ending the Barnett formula and meaning that Scottish MPs have no interest in rUK money bills)
    - limiting the voting rights of Scottish MPs to a very limited set of truly UK wide issues (eg defence/foreign affairs)
    - providing that in GE2015 there will be no Scottish MPs elected but that Holyrood will appoint 58 representatives (with the limited powers above) in proportion to the votes cast for parties at the last Holyrood elections (ie 2011)

    Good plan, Mr. Charles, and very sensible. Now, tell us, do you think Cameron would ever have the courage in bring in such a bill and fight it through Parliament to get it enacted?
    Serious question, why should he not be able to get it through pmt given the reasons Mr Charles adduces?

    Because Labour - being tactially savvy and strategically foolish - would fight it tooth and nail.
    Thanks. Still being dim alas. I thought Mr C and Mr C had a coalition majority?

  • Eh_ehm_a_ehEh_ehm_a_eh Posts: 552
    Sillars has about much chance of power making decisions as Galloway. Even less really Galloway was elected.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,950
    Mr. G, I can confirm it will be priced evenly in England and Scotland (and Wales. And Northern Ireland). The price will not be higher if there's a Yes vote ;)
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    @Casino_Royal & @TGOHF – cheers for the link, fascinating stuff.

    @MrG – I shall try in future ; )
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 9,708
    The question is: is Sillars some sort of maverick or is he articulating what all nationalists think but - until they assume control - have avoided saying? I fear there's a dark narcissism at work - an SNP-ruled Scotland will be so damned wonderful that no business would consider leaving, regardless of the punishments and humiliations the SNP inflict upon them. This strikes me as deluded and self-defeating. Global companies will desert such a despotism in droves, while telling them where to stick their cruddy oil.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    he will rue der tag.


    Robin Wigglesworth ‏@RobinWigg 4m
    Very strong (and personal) entreaty from Deutsche Bank's chief economist Folkerts-Landau to Scots: please don't vote for independence.

    Robin Wigglesworth ‏@RobinWigg 2m
    DB: Scottish secession would be as big a mistake as UK moving back to gold standard in 1925 or Fed failing to provide liquidity in 1929.

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    manofkent2014 said:

    malcolmg said:

    TGOHF said:

    Given the borders are strong "NO" - Cameron should offer any region that votes "NO" can remain in the rUk should they wish to.

    Only fair right ?

    Cuckoo, Cuckoo
    So its OK for Scots to say they don't want to stay British and secede from the Union but its not alright for Scots to secede from your vision of Scotland if they wanted to remain part of the Union?
    Don't talk bollocks , they can load their wheelbarrows and F Off if they want
  • Eh_ehm_a_ehEh_ehm_a_eh Posts: 552
    edited September 2014
    Plato said:

    And they were snuggled up together only TWO DAYS ago.

    Really, when one sleeps with dogs - you get fleas. And Alex did exactly that.

    It's like campaigning with Red Ken.

    Alistair said:

    Stark_Dawning said:

    The utterances of this Sillars character are shocking in the extreme. Who or what the hell is he? Lunatics like that will turn Scotland into a pariah state. Salmond must distance himself and the SNP from such ravings. He should make a statement that Sillars represents only a lunatic fringe within nationalism and that most fair-minded nationalist folk abhor and condemn his comments.

    He's a former deputy leader of the SNP - he had a massive falling out with Alex Salmond and has spent the last couple of decades criticising everything Salmond has done.
    Plato said:

    And they were snuggled up together only TWO DAYS ago.

    Really, when one sleeps with dogs - you get fleas. And Alex did exactly that.

    It's like campaigning with Red Ken.

    Alistair said:

    Stark_Dawning said:

    The utterances of this Sillars character are shocking in the extreme. Who or what the hell is he? Lunatics like that will turn Scotland into a pariah state. Salmond must distance himself and the SNP from such ravings. He should make a statement that Sillars represents only a lunatic fringe within nationalism and that most fair-minded nationalist folk abhor and condemn his comments.

    He's a former deputy leader of the SNP - he had a massive falling out with Alex Salmond and has spent the last couple of decades criticising everything Salmond has done.
    Just like Ruth Davidson and Galloway yesterday?
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    edited September 2014
    SouthamObserver said:

    I imagine that by next year there will be a distinct Scottish Labour Party that will run on its own platform for the Westminster election. It may sit with Labour until the formal separation but it will be entirely independent.

    You do realise that the result could still be 'no', right? In fact your calling it for 'yes' is one of the best signs that it will be 'no'!

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    Eh_ehm_a_eh said:

    Sillars has about much chance of power making decisions as Galloway. Even less really Galloway was elected.

    Though Sillars is not as senile as Galloway
  • welshowlwelshowl Posts: 4,464
    Alistair said:

    Stark_Dawning said:

    The utterances of this Sillars character are shocking in the extreme. Who or what the hell is he? Lunatics like that will turn Scotland into a pariah state. Salmond must distance himself and the SNP from such ravings. He should make a statement that Sillars represents only a lunatic fringe within nationalism and that most fair-minded nationalist folk abhor and condemn his comments.

    He's a former deputy leader of the SNP - he had a massive falling out with Alex Salmond and has spent the last couple of decades criticising everything Salmond has done.
    Not the point. It's "brand Scotland" that's going up in flames before your eyes. Centuries of the impression somewhat austere probity are the bedrock of the safety and security that people associate with Scottish financial institutions which is why people put their money there. Now hot on the heels of RBS HBoS etc our screens are being filled with swivel eyed fantasies ( as we see it down here - and the perception we have is all that matters in this context), peddled by either delusional or innumerate political leaders.

    This has already done damage.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    As a Geordie, I love Hadrian's Wall. And the council in Wallsend who have the great humour to have signs in Latin.

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wallsend_Metro_station

    The Byker Wall really isn't playing in the same league.
    Carnyx said:

    SimonStClare said:

    Carnyx said:

    SimonStClare said:

    TGOHF said:

    Given the borders are strong "NO" - Cameron should offer any region that votes "NO" can remain in the rUk should they wish to.

    Only fair right ?

    Would it not be simpler to just move Hadrian’s Wall 50 miles north. ; )
    That wouldn't even reach Berwick, would it?
    Not entirely sure Mr Carnyx - I remember walking a large chunk of it in my childhood, stunning scenery but rather bleak imr - and always forget how 'south' it actually is.
    Part of it actually goes along a street just north of Newcastle Central station! The western end is rather closer, though.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Don't worry! Rod's 1million simulations gives the result as Tory 856, Labour 3 UKIP 55.

    Doesn't matter which poll you talk about.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    RodCrosby said:

    Current forecast 2015 Tory leads from various methodologies.

    Byelection swingback: -1.2% (nc)
    Fisher: 2.6% (down)
    2009-2010 repeat: 3.5% (down)
    Prosser: 5.0% (nc)
    L&N: 8.8% (up)

    L&N seems like a bit of an outlier but I also get the sense that it's your new favourite?

  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821
    Presumably Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon, as well as all the SNP bloggers and cheerleaders, have dissociated themselves from the lunatic menaces of Jim Sillars in the strongest possible terms?
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    TGOHF said:

    SeanT said:

    welshowl said:

    Plato said:

    Swinney is totally off the reservation. If it wasn't so serious, I'd rolling in the aisles of Next and B&Q, and M&S. telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11091801/Big-business-warned-of-day-of-reckoning-if-Scots-vote-Yes.html?fb

    New employment laws will force Standard Life to give two years’ warning on redundancies, he said, meaning it could not follow through its plans to move savings, pensions and investment business to England.

    Adrian Grace, chief executive of insurance and pensions giant Aegon, told Radio Four’s Today programme it may be “forced” to move staff from its Edinburgh base if the separatists win the referendum. Sir Ian Cheshire, the chief executive of Kingfisher, which includes the B&Q and Screwfix DIY chains, is behind the letter that is expected to be published at the weekend. Along with Mr Bolland, the other signatories are expected to include Mr Clarke and John Timpson, boss of the Timpson shoe repair business.


    Std Life if you are reading this get the money south 8.30 on Friday morning if it's a yes. In fact better still do it now and don't bother sending it back.

    Like I said, during the Czech/Slovak "velvet divorce" they had to literally seal the border, with armed guards, to prevent Slovaks smuggling their cash into the Czech republic. Thereafter the Slovak economy crashed by 4% in a year.

    And that's regarded as a model of dissolution: one that went incredibly smoothly.

    But it was two small economies with different languages, different cultures, and much less shared history to unpick. There was also no massively divisive referendum campaign beforehand, stirring up resentment.

    It's a fair guess that our divorce, should it happen, will be messier, nastier, longer and more dangerous. And we have the huge extra complication of EU membership. The Scots will be OUT until they can negotiate their way IN, the UK will be IN.

    Ghastly mess.

    If I had any money in Scottish banks or pension funds I would move it now, if I could. Why take the risk?
    Surely electronic transfers mean that this wouldn't be an issue - unless you are suggesting a bank run next Friday and deposits are frozen ?

    And look how that has turned out Slovakia booming , GDP soaring , Czech's stagnant and moribund. All the crap will move south and we will get real businesses.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,336
    Stark_Dawning said:

    The question is: is Sillars some sort of maverick or is he articulating what all nationalists think but - until they assume control - have avoided saying? I fear there's a dark narcissism at work - an SNP-ruled Scotland will be so damned wonderful that no business would consider leaving, regardless of the punishments and humiliations the SNP inflict upon them. This strikes me as deluded and self-defeating. Global companies will desert such a despotism in droves, while telling them where to stick their cruddy oil.

    Maverick being encouraged by the DT. I wonder what they've been putting in his beer when he wasn't looking?

    As I said on the last thread, it is a bit like Ted Heath being asked to give a definitive official statement on the future policy of Margaret Thatcher's administration in her second term - and with the difference that Mr Eh reminds us of, that he isn't even an elected member. I can't even remember if he is a SNP member, though rather think he is (the SNP isn;t as dictatorial as some of the folk here like to think - remember the NATO vote - and if he had been ejected, the DT would have been playng Dictator Bingo all over again).

    I am not an SNP member, BTW.

  • RobCRobC Posts: 398
    Non loony Tory MP Rory Stewart made a recent TV series about the border country. One of his points was that the locals have far more in common with each other in terms of shared history whether they fall on the English or Scottish side than with the rest of Scotland to the north or England to the south.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    Stark_Dawning said:

    The question is: is Sillars some sort of maverick or is he articulating what all nationalists think but - until they assume control - have avoided saying? I fear there's a dark narcissism at work - an SNP-ruled Scotland will be so damned wonderful that no business would consider leaving, regardless of the punishments and humiliations the SNP inflict upon them. This strikes me as deluded and self-defeating. Global companies will desert such a despotism in droves, while telling them where to stick their cruddy oil.

    Just think , someone half as stupid as yourself and you will not be far off ,only you do not have the excuse of being almost 80, but make up for it with extra stupidity.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,336
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Presumably Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon, as well as all the SNP bloggers and cheerleaders, have dissociated themselves from the lunatic menaces of Jim Sillars in the strongest possible terms?

    Hmm, ask us that again after the weekend, would you? (Hint: Orange Order and UKIP.)

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,496
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Presumably Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon, as well as all the SNP bloggers and cheerleaders, have dissociated themselves from the lunatic menaces of Jim Sillars in the strongest possible terms?

    Not sure he has spoken to Alex Salmond for at least 20 years except to curse him out.
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322
    Carnyx said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Presumably Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon, as well as all the SNP bloggers and cheerleaders, have dissociated themselves from the lunatic menaces of Jim Sillars in the strongest possible terms?

    Hmm, ask us that again after the weekend, would you? (Hint: Orange Order and UKIP.)

    Oh, eff off that UKIP are the equivalent of Sillars.
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    Make of this what you will...

    Was talking about the referendum with a Slovak acquaintance over the weekend. (no idiot, a Physics PhD and ex-MP in his 50s)

    He told me people in Eastern Europe were "terrified" of a YES vote, the Russians were looking on with glee, and that the SNP must be their agents or dupes...
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    TGOHF said:

    SeanT said:

    welshowl said:

    Plato said:

    Swinney is totally off the reservation. If it wasn't so serious, I'd rolling in the aisles of Next and B&Q, and M&S. telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11091801/Big-business-warned-of-day-of-reckoning-if-Scots-vote-Yes.html?fb

    New employment laws will force Standard Life to give two years’ warning on redundancies, he said, meaning it could not follow through its plans to move savings, pensions and investment business to England.

    Adrian Grace, chief executive of insurance and pensions giant Aegon, told Radio Four’s Today programme it may be “forced” to move staff from its Edinburgh base if the separatists win the referendum. Sir Ian Cheshire, the chief executive of Kingfisher, which includes the B&Q and Screwfix DIY chains, is behind the letter that is expected to be published at the weekend. Along with Mr Bolland, the other signatories are expected to include Mr Clarke and John Timpson, boss of the Timpson shoe repair business.


    Std Life if you are reading this get the money south 8.30 on Friday morning if it's a yes. In fact better still do it now and don't bother sending it back.

    Like I said, during the Czech/Slovak "velvet divorce" they had to literally seal the border, with armed guards, to prevent Slovaks smuggling their cash into the Czech republic. Thereafter the Slovak economy crashed by 4% in a year.

    And that's regarded as a model of dissolution: one that went incredibly smoothly.

    But it was two small economies with different languages, different cultures, and much less shared history to unpick. There was also no massively divisive referendum campaign beforehand, stirring up resentment.

    It's a fair guess that our divorce, should it happen, will be messier, nastier, longer and more dangerous. And we have the huge extra complication of EU membership. The Scots will be OUT until they can negotiate their way IN, the UK will be IN.

    Ghastly mess.

    If I had any money in Scottish banks or pension funds I would move it now, if I could. Why take the risk?
    Surely electronic transfers mean that this wouldn't be an issue - unless you are suggesting a bank run next Friday and deposits are frozen ?

    Bank run on Friday morning is a possibility. I don't know if the results will be announced piecemeal or not. The exit poll should be quite simple.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Carnyx said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Presumably Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon, as well as all the SNP bloggers and cheerleaders, have dissociated themselves from the lunatic menaces of Jim Sillars in the strongest possible terms?

    Hmm, ask us that again after the weekend, would you? (Hint: Orange Order and UKIP.)

    Classic Nat "whataboutery"

    No wonder the Borders want to stay British.

  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,336
    Plato said:

    As a Geordie, I love Hadrian's Wall. And the council in Wallsend who have the great humour to have signs in Latin.

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wallsend_Metro_station

    The Byker Wall really isn't playing in the same league.

    Carnyx said:

    SimonStClare said:

    Carnyx said:

    SimonStClare said:

    TGOHF said:

    Given the borders are strong "NO" - Cameron should offer any region that votes "NO" can remain in the rUk should they wish to.

    Only fair right ?

    Would it not be simpler to just move Hadrian’s Wall 50 miles north. ; )
    That wouldn't even reach Berwick, would it?
    Not entirely sure Mr Carnyx - I remember walking a large chunk of it in my childhood, stunning scenery but rather bleak imr - and always forget how 'south' it actually is.
    Part of it actually goes along a street just north of Newcastle Central station! The western end is rather closer, though.
    Though I've never forgiven General Wade for using much of the eastern part as the foundation for the Newcastle to Carlisle military road (1740s edition, not the Roman one a bit to the south). Lethal if one goes off the road, with the Roman ditches on either side.

  • __Bobajob____Bobajob__ Posts: 144
    malcolmg said:

    manofkent2014 said:

    malcolmg said:

    TGOHF said:

    Given the borders are strong "NO" - Cameron should offer any region that votes "NO" can remain in the rUk should they wish to.

    Only fair right ?

    Cuckoo, Cuckoo
    So its OK for Scots to say they don't want to stay British and secede from the Union but its not alright for Scots to secede from your vision of Scotland if they wanted to remain part of the Union?
    Don't talk bollocks , they can load their wheelbarrows and F Off if they want
    Arf. The high water mark of Malcisms today :)
This discussion has been closed.