politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Will Parliament next Saturday end Cameron’s Premiership?
A couple of days ago the Sunday Times reports (££) Informal soundings have been taken about recalling parliament on Saturday, the first Saturday sitting since the Falklands War, if there is a “yes” victory.
The uncomfortable truth for the Yes campaign is that their bogus claims about an independence heaven lying on the other side of the referendum vote are being dismantled on a daily basis. And of course, there are also the signs of the tactic for which many of us who are veteran Eck-watchers have been waiting – shooting the messenger.
Patrick Cormack didn't need to quote Cromwell or Amery in order to oust Michael Martin as Speaker; merely mentioning the Norway debate (and, in doing so, drawing audible gasps from honourable members) was enough to tip the balance.
But the situation is not comparable. The democratically-expressed wish of the people of Scotland may pose an existential threat to the 307-year-old Union, but it will not be a "crisis". It will merely be the starting point for a period of the negotiation of terms, which can be done calmly over a period of months between the SNP and the Lib-Lab-Con-unionist parties. Unlike the cases of Chamberlain and Martin, it will not be necessary for David Cameron to have his head summarily cut off in order for government to continue.
I have had a thought: perhaps there are some people (young, or non-political, or just dim) who don't actually know what "U.K.I.P." stands for. It is nowadays referred to almost universally as "Yoo-Kip" and hardly ever "U.K.I.P.", let alone "UK Independence Party", so maybe some people think that it is primarily an anti-immigration party, or a depository for general protests or whinges, and who may have forgotten (or not been aware in the first place) that its primary aim is to withdraw from the EU.
(I remember that when the Green Party had its first burst of significant support in the late 1980s and early 1990s, I read an anecdote about someone who had voted Green and had then been shocked when he discovered that it was against nuclear weapons.)
Maybe there are some UKIP voters now who might be shocked if they were to be told that the UKIP wants to withdraw from the EU completely, and not just to "reform" it or change it in some way.
I disagree with TSE's political priority. The only reason that there would be a call for DC's resignation would be for political advantage by Labour and disgruntled LDS.
However Parliament should be recalled as MPs for the Scottish seats should be disbarred from entering Parliament again (or disqualified as MPs) as they could not take part in the debates on the ancillary relief part of the divorce. Their constituents would be represented by their MSPs.
Also to be disbarred should be all members of the HoL with Scottish residency.
Then the debate should start on what the rUK will allow Scotland to have which parts of the UK's assets and liabilities.
Also Parliament should inform the EU and NATO that Scotland is no longer part of the UK and so are not part of its membership.
The problem with this scenario, however likely it might be, is that typically bookmakers will be betting on the next permanent Prime Minister and will not pay out on the caretaker PM who fills in between David Cameron stepping down and the leadership election.
Hague in particular strikes me as more of a caretaker, not least since he has previously said he no longer wants the top job and has already given up the post of Foreign Secretary.
If YES have a wafer thin win, expect legal challenge after legal challenge to it's validity. Certainly not allowing people born in scotland but not currently resident (including serving forces) to vote while allowing EU citizens to vote is an open goal for a judicial review.
However the news of all police leave being cancelled suggests to me that internal polls are indicating NO and they wish to head off a "peaceful and joyous" Zanunat response.
I disagree with TSE's political priority. The only reason that there would be a call for DC's resignation would be for political advantage by Labour and disgruntled LDS.
However Parliament should be recalled as MPs for the Scottish seats should be disbarred from entering Parliament again (or disqualified as MPs) as they could not take part in the debates on the ancillary relief part of the divorce. Their constituents would be represented by their MSPs.
Also to be disbarred should be all members of the HoL with Scottish residency.
Then the debate should start on what the rUK will allow Scotland to have which parts of the UK's assets and liabilities.
Also Parliament should inform the EU and NATO that Scotland is no longer part of the UK and so are not part of its membership.
No legal method to do any of this, until the separation date at best we can hope for voluntary EV4EL, nothing more.
Having Scotland just represented by MSPs would require the UK PM to consult Holyrood on operational defence and foreign affairs.
Westminster "could" pass a bill to disenfranchise Scotland but would the Queen sign it ?
Like it or not, until the final day, there would be Scottish MPs in London.
I disagree with TSE's political priority. The only reason that there would be a call for DC's resignation would be for political advantage by Labour and disgruntled LDS.
However Parliament should be recalled as MPs for the Scottish seats should be disbarred from entering Parliament again (or disqualified as MPs) as they could not take part in the debates on the ancillary relief part of the divorce. Their constituents would be represented by their MSPs.
Also to be disbarred should be all members of the HoL with Scottish residency.
Then the debate should start on what the rUK will allow Scotland to have which parts of the UK's assets and liabilities.
Also Parliament should inform the EU and NATO that Scotland is no longer part of the UK and so are not part of its membership.
Back in the real world, there are no constitutional grounds for barring Scots parliamentarians, even if fairness or logic dictates there ought to be. Future constitutional arrangements (or how to divvy up the kingdoms) will doubtless be left -- after any number of backbenchers have vented their spleens -- to committees of the great and the good.
Remember too the proposal is that Scotland becomes (once more) independent: not that it be towed out into the mid-Atlantic. It will still be there at the top of the map. It plainly is not in rUK's interest to take revenge on what will remain an important trading partner.
However the news of all police leave being cancelled suggests to me that internal polls are indicating NO and they wish to head off a "peaceful and joyous" Zanunat response.
I wouldn't read any more into that than they are expecting a high turnout........
However the news of all police leave being cancelled suggests to me that internal polls are indicating NO and they wish to head off a "peaceful and joyous" Zanunat response.
I wouldn't read any more into that than they are expecting a high turnout........
"One of the ['peaceful and joyous' anti BBC] protest’s leaders told The Independent that in the event of a No vote on Thursday: “We will take to the streets. We will not be robbed of victory by a conspiracy which has the BBC at its centre.”
If I was a disgruntled Tory MP I'd vote against the Labour confidence motion and get rid of him with a no-confidence letter instead. It's a lower bar and doesn't involve siding with the enemy.
However the news of all police leave being cancelled suggests to me that internal polls are indicating NO and they wish to head off a "peaceful and joyous" Zanunat response.
I wouldn't read any more into that than they are expecting a high turnout........
"One of the ['peaceful and joyous' anti BBC] protest’s leaders told The Independent that in the event of a No vote on Thursday: “We will take to the streets. We will not be robbed of victory by a conspiracy which has the BBC at its centre.”
Thread Answer - Decisively No, because it'll be a decisive No on Thursday.
...............................................
Firstly, thanks for all the good wishes. Back at Chez JackW .. a tad tired and weary but still here !!
I'm being allowed to lurk and make the odd comment but no PB overloading or Mrs JackW will do unthinkable things to both me and Mike Smithson. And next week if I'm up for it Mrs JackW and I will be enjoying some quiet down time in warmer climes. So no ARSE for some weeks, probably back come November.
On the big issue.
Forget almost all the polls. Sampling Scotland is a nightmare and certainly 700 from ICM was a waste of breath. "Almost all polls" I noted.
The exception are the South of Scotland three polls. 1000 within a much smaller population is viable. Small variation in the numbers over the three polls and everything within the polls smells authentic. Around 70/30 to No. Adjust for other regions accordingly.
Next step is to dial in two further factors :
1. Differential turnout of No voters as reality stared them in the face. 2. Pre- buyers remorse of soft Yes voters.
So it's 60/40 for No overall or as the last McARSE prediction noted 60.5%/39.5% to No.
And if you haven't made a killing on the turnout markets over the past months .... Why ????
Fortunately we'll not have to wait too long into the night on Thursday.
Cameron has two problems in the event of a Yes: 1. Will the Conservative and Unionist party accept that it's ok for its leader to lose the union? 2. Will the establishment accept its ok for the PM to lose the union?
I suspect the answer to both is no, Cameron won't resign, people rarely do in politics, he will be resigned as the likes of Liam Fox was. However, doubt this Saturday is feasible - MPs petition the speaker for a recall and get agreement and MPs all travel all inside 24 hours? Yes the conference gets in the way, but what will they talk about? Planned business
However the news of all police leave being cancelled suggests to me that internal polls are indicating NO and they wish to head off a "peaceful and joyous" Zanunat response.
I wouldn't read any more into that than they are expecting a high turnout........
"One of the ['peaceful and joyous' anti BBC] protest’s leaders told The Independent that in the event of a No vote on Thursday: “We will take to the streets. We will not be robbed of victory by a conspiracy which has the BBC at its centre.”
"However the news of all police leave being cancelled suggests to me that internal polls are indicating NO and they wish to head off a "peaceful and joyous" Zanunat response."
One of the shock results of Thursday night could be Aberdeen, Scotland’s oil capital. Aberdeen and its position as a global oil industry research powerhouse, is held up by the Yes camp as an example of what Scotland’s independent future could look like. But forecasts put support for independence at just 30 per cent, with 70 per cent against."
*** Anecdote Alert ***
Spoke to a friend in Aberdeen the other day. She is the first of my friends to openly claim to be a No. She also said the proportion of Yes/No posters was roughly 50/50. Given the massive imbalance in other parts of the country, it would suggest there is quite a lot of No support up there.
Good to see you back JackW, and it's great that you are standing firmly by your confident prediction of a decisive NO - not the merest flicker of equivocation from you as the day approaches!
Just three days and we'll have the voters' verdict. I trust you will pop by to receive congratulations [or otherwise] on the fidelity of your forecast?
I'm assuming there are no more polls due until tomorrow?
Good to have JackW back, even if the logic there seems pretty faulty and driven by wishful thinking. There's nothing wrong with a 1000 sample size if it's properly weighted, and the 700 should not just be dismissed simply because you don't like what it said. Remember the Golden Rule?
Anyway, I'm beginning to hope you're right JackW, not because I care a less about Scotland, but because I want Cameron to win next year. A good No vote is going to look good for him. If it happens.
Scotland’s most senior civil servant put businesses under pressure to stay silent about independence, The Telegraph can disclose. Sir Peter Housden, the permanent secretary of the Scottish government, contacted organisations that were seen to favour the Union and told them to “keep out” of the debate. One person, who received a telephone call from the civil servant, said Sir Peter warned that it was “inappropriate” to get involved. A second person said Sir Peter had “torn strips” off him after he raised questions about independence.
I don't think Cameron's position will be tenable after a Yes vote.
It was his decision to not allow Devo Max on the ballot paper, and as they have unconvincingly offered it in a panic at the last minute, seems to have been a very bad error. Also he should have engaged with the Scottish voters before it looked like he might lose. The "effing Tory" stuff was always factored in. He should have engaged as UK PM from day one, taking a leaf from Major's book and campaigning hard to Save the Union Again too little, too late, too much panic.
Also let's not forget the Lib Dems here, a perfect opportunity to ditch the coalition? After all proportionately they will be the biggest losers if the Scottish MPs go. And it will be fun watching Danny Alexander's position if the Tory back benchers try and limit the voting rights of Scottish MPs pre 2016.
Thread Answer - Decisively No, because it'll be a decisive No on Thursday.
...............................................
Firstly, thanks for all the good wishes. Back at Chez JackW .. a tad tired and weary but still here !!
I'm being allowed to lurk and make the odd comment but no PB overloading or Mrs JackW will do unthinkable things to both me and Mike Smithson. And next week if I'm up for it Mrs JackW and I will be enjoying some quiet down time in warmer climes. So no ARSE for some weeks, probably back come November.
On the big issue.
Forget almost all the polls. Sampling Scotland is a nightmare and certainly 700 from ICM was a waste of breath. "Almost all polls" I noted.
The exception are the South of Scotland three polls. 1000 within a much smaller population is viable. Small variation in the numbers over the three polls and everything within the polls smells authentic. Around 70/30 to No. Adjust for other regions accordingly.
Next step is to dial in two further factors :
1. Differential turnout of No voters as reality stared them in the face. 2. Pre- buyers remorse of soft Yes voters.
So it's 60/40 for No overall or as the last McARSE prediction noted 60.5%/39.5% to No.
And if you haven't made a killing on the turnout markets over the past months .... Why ????
Fortunately we'll not have to wait too long into the night on Thursday.
Nice to be back, if only very occasional and part-time for now .....
Glad to hear that you plan some gentle recovery time in the sun. Get fighting fit for next year!
I will owe you a drinkie if the final MCARSE is correct. There are still good odds on such a result. Indeed on the % bands the extremes either way are at attractive odds.
Agree with TSE's scenario: Cameron will go. It is inconceivable that a Unionist PM can survive Scottish independence and most Tory backbenchers know it. Isabel Oakshotte backed up the STimes claims in Evening Standard yesterday. Hague is unifying figure, at least for a few months. I have a feeling Borders MP Rory Stewart, who has been one of the few Tories actively fighting for the Union, may well be the Leo Amery figure this time.
I very much doubt Labour will table a motion of no confidence. It will be entering a severe existential crisis of its own. Thursday's Yes will determine the legacies of an entire generation of political leaders across all three major parties. Cameron will be remembered by history as the man who lost the Union, but the reality is that it has been tossed away by an entire generation of politicians who never really left university and know nothing of the real world.
However the news of all police leave being cancelled suggests to me that internal polls are indicating NO and they wish to head off a "peaceful and joyous" Zanunat response.
I wouldn't read any more into that than they are expecting a high turnout........
Paul is a sandwich short of a picnic , so has a fevered imagination, he will be unable to think rationally
If YES have a wafer thin win, expect legal challenge after legal challenge to it's validity. Certainly not allowing people born in scotland but not currently resident (including serving forces) to vote while allowing EU citizens to vote is an open goal for a judicial review.
However the news of all police leave being cancelled suggests to me that internal polls are indicating NO and they wish to head off a "peaceful and joyous" Zanunat response.
What would be the (legal not Daily Mail) basis for JR? Go on, then.
Thread Answer - Decisively No, because it'll be a decisive No on Thursday.
...............................................
Firstly, thanks for all the good wishes. Back at Chez JackW .. a tad tired and weary but still here !!
I'm being allowed to lurk and make the odd comment but no PB overloading or Mrs JackW will do unthinkable things to both me and Mike Smithson. And next week if I'm up for it Mrs JackW and I will be enjoying some quiet down time in warmer climes. So no ARSE for some weeks, probably back come November.
On the big issue.
Forget almost all the polls. Sampling Scotland is a nightmare and certainly 700 from ICM was a waste of breath. "Almost all polls" I noted.
The exception are the South of Scotland three polls. 1000 within a much smaller population is viable. Small variation in the numbers over the three polls and everything within the polls smells authentic. Around 70/30 to No. Adjust for other regions accordingly.
Next step is to dial in two further factors :
1. Differential turnout of No voters as reality stared them in the face. 2. Pre- buyers remorse of soft Yes voters.
So it's 60/40 for No overall or as the last McARSE prediction noted 60.5%/39.5% to No.
And if you haven't made a killing on the turnout markets over the past months .... Why ????
Fortunately we'll not have to wait too long into the night on Thursday.
Thread Answer - Decisively No, because it'll be a decisive No on Thursday.
...............................................
Firstly, thanks for all the good wishes. Back at Chez JackW .. a tad tired and weary but still here !!
I'm being allowed to lurk and make the odd comment but no PB overloading or Mrs JackW will do unthinkable things to both me and Mike Smithson. And next week if I'm up for it Mrs JackW and I will be enjoying some quiet down time in warmer climes. So no ARSE for some weeks, probably back come November.
On the big issue.
Forget almost all the polls. Sampling Scotland is a nightmare and certainly 700 from ICM was a waste of breath. "Almost all polls" I noted.
The exception are the South of Scotland three polls. 1000 within a much smaller population is viable. Small variation in the numbers over the three polls and everything within the polls smells authentic. Around 70/30 to No. Adjust for other regions accordingly.
Next step is to dial in two further factors :
1. Differential turnout of No voters as reality stared them in the face. 2. Pre- buyers remorse of soft Yes voters.
So it's 60/40 for No overall or as the last McARSE prediction noted 60.5%/39.5% to No.
And if you haven't made a killing on the turnout markets over the past months .... Why ????
Fortunately we'll not have to wait too long into the night on Thursday.
Nice to be back, if only very occasional and part-time for now .....
Glad to hear that you plan some gentle recovery time in the sun. Get fighting fit for next year!
I will owe you a drinkie if the final MCARSE is correct. There are still good odds on such a result. Indeed on the % bands the extremes either way are at attractive odds.
His arse is burst, now he is saying listen to the fields , an ARSE indeed , failed mission in Edinburgh , fake fake fake.
I very much doubt Labour will table a motion of no confidence. It will be entering a severe existential crisis of its own. Thursday's Yes will determine the legacies of an entire generation of political leaders across all three major parties. Cameron will be remembered by history as the man who lost the Union, but the reality is that it has been tossed away by an entire generation of politicians who never really left university and know nothing of the real world.
Morning all. Oh dear Mr SO; you should know better. Who's fault is it? The answer, of course, is always, and eternally, Thatcher - irrespective of the question. To be honest, I thought we'd been through this before.
If YES have a wafer thin win, expect legal challenge after legal challenge to it's validity. Certainly not allowing people born in scotland but not currently resident (including serving forces) to vote while allowing EU citizens to vote is an open goal for a judicial review.
However the news of all police leave being cancelled suggests to me that internal polls are indicating NO and they wish to head off a "peaceful and joyous" Zanunat response.
Good to see you back JackW, and it's great that you are standing firmly by your confident prediction of a decisive NO - not the merest flicker of equivocation from you as the day approaches!
Just three days and we'll have the voters' verdict. I trust you will pop by to receive congratulations [or otherwise] on the fidelity of your forecast?
Who's fault is it? The answer, of course, is always, and eternally, Thatcher - irrespective of the question. To be honest, I thought we'd been through this before.
I don't think Cameron's position will be tenable after a Yes vote.
It was his decision to not allow Devo Max on the ballot paper, and as they have unconvincingly offered it in a panic at the last minute, seems to have been a very bad error. Also he should have engaged with the Scottish voters before it looked like he might lose. The "effing Tory" stuff was always factored in. He should have engaged as UK PM from day one, taking a leaf from Major's book and campaigning hard to Save the Union Again too little, too late, too much panic.
Also let's not forget the Lib Dems here, a perfect opportunity to ditch the coalition? After all proportionately they will be the biggest losers if the Scottish MPs go. And it will be fun watching Danny Alexander's position if the Tory back benchers try and limit the voting rights of Scottish MPs pre 2016.
For all these glib assertions about further devolution, what would the question have read. Are you in favour of granting further power to the Scottish assembly, noting that before that happens we'll need to do something about a wider constitutional settlement in ways that will need some thought so everything will change and what this is is in effect a vote about a vote? or something. Trips off the tongue, doesn't it.
On topic, if the usual suspect Tories do this, they are as vain and thick as I've always considered them.
I really can't see the rush and I think a pause for reflection and the Party conferences so the parties can discuss with their members would be worthwhile. It should certainly generate the most animated fringe meetings we have ever seen.
The IOS figures on the previous page are interesting but I think they are Labour voters only and are broadly in line with the polls. As I have said from the start Scottish Labour supporters are the key to all of this with an extremely united Tory party and a fairly united (and now small) Lib Dem party largely balancing the SNP (I think taking the 2011 triumph as their base point is unrealistic and explains why 15-18% of their supporters are voting no).
To win Yes need about 40-45% of the Labour vote depending on how you weight the SNP 2011 figure. I believe they will fall short which is why I think No will win but to quote Wellington on Waterloo: "It has been a damned nice thing — the nearest run thing you ever saw in your life."
It is good to see JackW back and I hope he is well but it was the Yougov call to arms that has hopefully made the difference on this and the complacency of the 60:40 crowd came very, very close to losing it. They still might.
If YES have a wafer thin win, expect legal challenge after legal challenge to it's validity. Certainly not allowing people born in scotland but not currently resident (including serving forces) to vote while allowing EU citizens to vote is an open goal for a judicial review.
However the news of all police leave being cancelled suggests to me that internal polls are indicating NO and they wish to head off a "peaceful and joyous" Zanunat response.
"Military fury over ban on Scottish soldiers based in England voting in next week's historic independence referendum"
Scottish soldiers based in England will not be able to take part in the historic referendum on independence.
Critics condemned the ’shocking’ rules which mean thousands of Scots stationed outside their home nation will not have a say on the future of the Union.
Only those who still have an address in Scotland will be able to take part, affecting troops stationed in England, Cyprus and Germany."
It's weird. "Vote No because we defeated the Germans together!" "Now listen to what Deutsche Bank says!" Now we have 3 known liars signing more false pledges or "VOWS" how low can these unionists stoop in their desperate attempt to cling on to the trough. Why do they need to "VOW" to treat us fairly in the future ......... Doh
A Saturday sitting and a vote of no confidence would be unjustified. What would be the urgency?
A few weeks discussion during conference season would be needed for a real sense of direction to emerge.
Incidentally, for followers of the McARSE, Shadsy has Yes under 40% still at 10/1...
A Saturday sitting would be entirely justified. A process that will break up a 300 year old country will be underway and the day before will have seen carnage on the markets.
Thread Answer - Decisively No, because it'll be a decisive No on Thursday.
...............................................
Firstly, thanks for all the good wishes. Back at Chez JackW .. a tad tired and weary but still here !!
I'm being allowed to lurk and make the odd comment but no PB overloading or Mrs JackW will do unthinkable things to both me and Mike Smithson. And next week if I'm up for it Mrs JackW and I will be enjoying some quiet down time in warmer climes. So no ARSE for some weeks, probably back come November.
On the big issue.
Forget almost all the polls. Sampling Scotland is a nightmare and certainly 700 from ICM was a waste of breath. "Almost all polls" I noted.
The exception are the South of Scotland three polls. 1000 within a much smaller population is viable. Small variation in the numbers over the three polls and everything within the polls smells authentic. Around 70/30 to No. Adjust for other regions accordingly.
Next step is to dial in two further factors :
1. Differential turnout of No voters as reality stared them in the face. 2. Pre- buyers remorse of soft Yes voters.
So it's 60/40 for No overall or as the last McARSE prediction noted 60.5%/39.5% to No.
And if you haven't made a killing on the turnout markets over the past months .... Why ????
Fortunately we'll not have to wait too long into the night on Thursday.
I don't think Cameron's position will be tenable after a Yes vote.
It was his decision to not allow Devo Max on the ballot paper, and as they have unconvincingly offered it in a panic at the last minute, seems to have been a very bad error. Also he should have engaged with the Scottish voters before it looked like he might lose. The "effing Tory" stuff was always factored in. He should have engaged as UK PM from day one, taking a leaf from Major's book and campaigning hard to Save the Union Again too little, too late, too much panic.
Also let's not forget the Lib Dems here, a perfect opportunity to ditch the coalition? After all proportionately they will be the biggest losers if the Scottish MPs go. And it will be fun watching Danny Alexander's position if the Tory back benchers try and limit the voting rights of Scottish MPs pre 2016.
On topic, if the usual suspect Tories do this, they are as vain and thick as I've always considered them.
Yep, some tory turkeys are stupid enough to vote for Christmas.
Though most calls for Camerons resignation come from those who call for his resignation at the drop of a hat anyway!
Scotland’s most senior civil servant put businesses under pressure to stay silent about independence, The Telegraph can disclose. Sir Peter Housden, the permanent secretary of the Scottish government, contacted organisations that were seen to favour the Union and told them to “keep out” of the debate. One person, who received a telephone call from the civil servant, said Sir Peter warned that it was “inappropriate” to get involved. A second person said Sir Peter had “torn strips” off him after he raised questions about independence.
'who spoke on conditions of anonymity'
Snigger.
I do worry that an independent Scotland would be burdened by a business class of the most extraordinary timidity and cowardice.
A Saturday sitting and a vote of no confidence would be unjustified. What would be the urgency?
A few weeks discussion during conference season would be needed for a real sense of direction to emerge.
Incidentally, for followers of the McARSE, Shadsy has Yes under 40% still at 10/1...
A Saturday sitting would be entirely justified. A process that will break up a 300 year old country will be underway and the day before will have seen carnage on the markets.
Headless chicken mode is no way to procede.
In 1940 what was the advice?: Keep Calm and Carry On.
Show a bit of British phlegm please. How would a vote of no confidence and immenent election calm the markets?
A Saturday sitting and a vote of no confidence would be unjustified. What would be the urgency?
A few weeks discussion during conference season would be needed for a real sense of direction to emerge.
Incidentally, for followers of the McARSE, Shadsy has Yes under 40% still at 10/1...
A Saturday sitting would be entirely justified. A process that will break up a 300 year old country will be underway and the day before will have seen carnage on the markets.
Show a bit of British phlegm please. How would a vote of no confidence and immenent election calm the markets?
I've been surprised by some of the pro-Union posters who have been prone to panic given the swings of the polls.....their inner drama queens are creeping out......
@Sun_Politics: On Alex Salmond dodging a grilling from Sun Cabbie Grant Davis, The Sun says... twitter.com/Sun_Politics/status/511765931358695425/photo/1
Odd thread. Feels more like a plot of a political drama than reality. Whilst the PM could be fatality wounded by a YES vote, I am not sure anyone gains from a rushed resignation.
@Sun_Politics: On Alex Salmond dodging a grilling from Sun Cabbie Grant Davis, The Sun says... twitter.com/Sun_Politics/status/511765931358695425/photo/1
Eck would only have accused the Sun Cabbie of being Alastair Darling like he did with Allegra Stratton on Newsnight last night, Faisal Islam on SKY......I guess it's easier than answering the question on currency.....
Last night tim montgomerie was getting on my wick....again and not Man U related which is a change.
One minute he's tweeting pictures about attending the london rally for better together, next he's bemoaning that Cameron's 'vow' being made with Clegg and Miliband is poor strategy as it leaves England open to being represented by Farage and UKIP.
Cammo said the country is more important to him than his party, some may doubt that but I don't actually, so it's a logical thing to do.
Talk about having your cake as a pundit..
.Tim Montgomerie@TimMontgomerie·9h Only Nigel Farage left to speak for England after this "vow". Another strategic political error by Cameron pic.twitter.com/5FbX6rvy87
The article presupposes that a vote of no confidence comes from Labour, however, as far as I understand it, the rules of the fixed term of government means that it would not be of interest to them to try. The chances of winning the vote in the proportion required is remote as if won, would lead to a general election. Amusingly, there is virtually no chance of Cameron using the threat of collapsing the government to maintain his position for the same reason.
So what we have is a vote of no confidence in the Conservative party leadership, which could only realistically coming from within the party.
So, is there a betting situation on who will bring the motion to the floor of the house?
A Saturday sitting and a vote of no confidence would be unjustified. What would be the urgency?
A few weeks discussion during conference season would be needed for a real sense of direction to emerge.
Incidentally, for followers of the McARSE, Shadsy has Yes under 40% still at 10/1...
A Saturday sitting would be entirely justified. A process that will break up a 300 year old country will be underway and the day before will have seen carnage on the markets.
I would guess GBP down about 5% pct to start with. Equities more difficult - companies with a lot of Scottish fixed assets will get trashed, but exporters based in the rest of the UK might actually do pretty well e.g. Rolls Royce. Gilts ought to sell off but nobody who understands it takes Salmond's threat to default terribly seriously for many good reasons.
Thread Answer - Decisively No, because it'll be a decisive No on Thursday.
...............................................
Firstly, thanks for all the good wishes. Back at Chez JackW .. a tad tired and weary but still here !!
I'm being allowed to lurk and make the odd comment but no PB overloading or Mrs JackW will do unthinkable things to both me and Mike Smithson. And next week if I'm up for it Mrs JackW and I will be enjoying some quiet down time in warmer climes. So no ARSE for some weeks, probably back come November.
On the big issue.
Forget almost all the polls. Sampling Scotland is a nightmare and certainly 700 from ICM was a waste of breath. "Almost all polls" I noted.
The exception are the South of Scotland three polls. 1000 within a much smaller population is viable. Small variation in the numbers over the three polls and everything within the polls smells authentic. Around 70/30 to No. Adjust for other regions accordingly.
Next step is to dial in two further factors :
1. Differential turnout of No voters as reality stared them in the face. 2. Pre- buyers remorse of soft Yes voters.
So it's 60/40 for No overall or as the last McARSE prediction noted 60.5%/39.5% to No.
And if you haven't made a killing on the turnout markets over the past months .... Why ????
Fortunately we'll not have to wait too long into the night on Thursday.
A Saturday sitting and a vote of no confidence would be unjustified. What would be the urgency?
A few weeks discussion during conference season would be needed for a real sense of direction to emerge.
Incidentally, for followers of the McARSE, Shadsy has Yes under 40% still at 10/1...
A Saturday sitting would be entirely justified. A process that will break up a 300 year old country will be underway and the day before will have seen carnage on the markets.
Headless chicken mode is no way to procede.
In 1940 what was the advice?: Keep Calm and Carry On.
Show a bit of British phlegm please. How would a vote of no confidence and immenent election calm the markets?
It's nothing to do with phlegm, or lack of it. Waiting to do anything until after the conference season means a month or so of total uncertainty. As I said previously, I don't think there will be a vote of confidence, but the government will need to come to the House to respond to the Yes vote and to explain to us - through Parliament - what will happen next.
@chrisshipitv: I've seen letter from Euro Commission that Scotland could NOT keep membership but would genuinely like see how YES campaign think otherwise
If YES have a wafer thin win, expect legal challenge after legal challenge to it's validity. Certainly not allowing people born in scotland but not currently resident (including serving forces) to vote while allowing EU citizens to vote is an open goal for a judicial review.
However the news of all police leave being cancelled suggests to me that internal polls are indicating NO and they wish to head off a "peaceful and joyous" Zanunat response.
Serving forces will have a postal vote, if they have asked for it, back home.
More generally the franchise is in accordance with UK electoral law and the Edinburgh Agreement. It has already been judicially reviewed at least twice (expats and prisoners respectively) IIRC.
Last night tim montgomerie was getting on my wick....again and not Man U related which is a change.
One minute he's tweeting pictures about attending the london rally for better together, next he's bemoaning that Cameron's 'vow' being made with Clegg and Miliband is poor strategy as it leaves England open to being represented by Farage and UKIP.
Cammo said the country is more important to him than his party, some may doubt that but I don't actually, so it's a logical thing to do.
Talk about having your cake as a pundit..
.Tim Montgomerie@TimMontgomerie·9h Only Nigel Farage left to speak for England after this "vow". Another strategic political error by Cameron pic.twitter.com/5FbX6rvy87
Cameron supports a country called Britain which treats the majority of its people, the English, as second class citizens and it seems wishes to make them even further disadvantaged.
Montgomerie it seems would prefer that Britain continues to exist but stops treating the English as second class citizens and is pointing out that Cameron's plan to further disadvantage the English would benefit UKIP at the expense of the Conservative party.
If Cameron had half an ounce of sense he would rebrand the NHS, The English Health Service, Scottish Health Service, the Welsh Health Service and the Northern Ireland Health Service.
Make the dividing line in management responsibility more obvious.
Last night tim montgomerie was getting on my wick....again and not Man U related which is a change.
One minute he's tweeting pictures about attending the london rally for better together, next he's bemoaning that Cameron's 'vow' being made with Clegg and Miliband is poor strategy as it leaves England open to being represented by Farage and UKIP.
Cammo said the country is more important to him than his party, some may doubt that but I don't actually, so it's a logical thing to do.
Talk about having your cake as a pundit..
.Tim Montgomerie@TimMontgomerie·9h Only Nigel Farage left to speak for England after this "vow". Another strategic political error by Cameron pic.twitter.com/5FbX6rvy87
Cameron supports a country called Britain which treats the majority of its people, the English, as second class citizens and it seems wishes to make them even further disadvantaged.
Montgomerie it seems would prefer that Britain continues to exist but stops treating the English as second class citizens and is pointing out that Cameron's plan to further disadvantage the English would benefit UKIP at the expense of the Conservative party.
OK but his complaint was "strategic error" as it left UKIP to speak for England?
Thread Answer - Decisively No, because it'll be a decisive No on Thursday.
...............................................
Firstly, thanks for all the good wishes. Back at Chez JackW .. a tad tired and weary but still here !!
I'm being allowed to lurk and make the odd comment but no PB overloading or Mrs JackW will do unthinkable things to both me and Mike Smithson. And next week if I'm up for it Mrs JackW and I will be enjoying some quiet down time in warmer climes. So no ARSE for some weeks, probably back come November.
On the big issue.
Forget almost all the polls. Sampling Scotland is a nightmare and certainly 700 from ICM was a waste of breath. "Almost all polls" I noted.
The exception are the South of Scotland three polls. 1000 within a much smaller population is viable. Small variation in the numbers over the three polls and everything within the polls smells authentic. Around 70/30 to No. Adjust for other regions accordingly.
Next step is to dial in two further factors :
1. Differential turnout of No voters as reality stared them in the face. 2. Pre- buyers remorse of soft Yes voters.
So it's 60/40 for No overall or as the last McARSE prediction noted 60.5%/39.5% to No.
And if you haven't made a killing on the turnout markets over the past months .... Why ????
Fortunately we'll not have to wait too long into the night on Thursday.
The ARSE methodology ticks no evidential boxes and requires a good old fashioned British enema-high,hot and a hellavalot, although Sunil'sELBOW methods may be on steroids. The answer is always in the charts,always follow the charts.
I think the Tory party will be so confused about what to do, that nothing will happen. While some backbenchers may not be happy and brief the media that Cameron should resign, I don't think there will be any move to force a leadership contest. I don't think they will vote in favour of a vote of no confidence either.
The Tories are only few points behind Labour in polls and may well take the lead in polls before an election. If English voters see Scotland going independent, therefore losing Scottish MP's sometime in 2016, then they may decide to support the Tories. They may think that the Tories who have virtually no political interest in Scotland, will be much tougher in negotiations with Scotland, than Labour. Because Labour have so much at stake in Scotland, they may be more willing to provide a very good divorce settlement to Scotland.
If YES have a wafer thin win, expect legal challenge after legal challenge to it's validity. Certainly not allowing people born in scotland but not currently resident (including serving forces) to vote while allowing EU citizens to vote is an open goal for a judicial review.
However the news of all police leave being cancelled suggests to me that internal polls are indicating NO and they wish to head off a "peaceful and joyous" Zanunat response.
"Military fury over ban on Scottish soldiers based in England voting in next week's historic independence referendum"
Scottish soldiers based in England will not be able to take part in the historic referendum on independence.
Critics condemned the ’shocking’ rules which mean thousands of Scots stationed outside their home nation will not have a say on the future of the Union.
Only those who still have an address in Scotland will be able to take part, affecting troops stationed in England, Cyprus and Germany."
But they are not resident in Scotland. That's the law set out by the UK and agreed by Mr Cameron. Rough justice, perhaps, but that's the way it is, just as with any other Scot sent furth of the country by employers.
If I was a disgruntled Tory MP I'd vote against the Labour confidence motion and get rid of him with a no-confidence letter instead. It's a lower bar and doesn't involve siding with the enemy.
That's right. The threshold to trigger a leadership ballot is relatively low - 40? - and it's plausible that it would happen that way. I doubt if we'd know before the conference season, though.
Amused to see PBers dealing with cold-turkey poll-free Tuesday on the last thread - chewing over rumours! of canvass returns! and counting posters in Aberdeen! Calm down. Have a nice cup of tea. All will be revealed shortly...
If YES have a wafer thin win, expect legal challenge after legal challenge to it's validity. Certainly not allowing people born in scotland but not currently resident (including serving forces) to vote while allowing EU citizens to vote is an open goal for a judicial review.
However the news of all police leave being cancelled suggests to me that internal polls are indicating NO and they wish to head off a "peaceful and joyous" Zanunat response.
"Military fury over ban on Scottish soldiers based in England voting in next week's historic independence referendum"
Scottish soldiers based in England will not be able to take part in the historic referendum on independence.
Critics condemned the ’shocking’ rules which mean thousands of Scots stationed outside their home nation will not have a say on the future of the Union.
Only those who still have an address in Scotland will be able to take part, affecting troops stationed in England, Cyprus and Germany."
But they are not resident in Scotland. That's the law set out by the UK and agreed by Mr Cameron. Rough justice, perhaps, but that's the way it is, just as with any other Scot sent furth of the country by employers.
I really don't think there will be legal challenges. This is not Florida.
Thread Answer - Decisively No, because it'll be a decisive No on Thursday.
...............................................
Firstly, thanks for all the good wishes. Back at Chez JackW .. a tad tired and weary but still here !!
I'm being allowed to lurk and make the odd comment but no PB overloading or Mrs JackW will do unthinkable things to both me and Mike Smithson. And next week if I'm up for it Mrs JackW and I will be enjoying some quiet down time in warmer climes. So no ARSE for some weeks, probably back come November.
On the big issue.
Forget almost all the polls. Sampling Scotland is a nightmare and certainly 700 from ICM was a waste of breath. "Almost all polls" I noted.
The exception are the South of Scotland three polls. 1000 within a much smaller population is viable. Small variation in the numbers over the three polls and everything within the polls smells authentic. Around 70/30 to No. Adjust for other regions accordingly.
Next step is to dial in two further factors :
1. Differential turnout of No voters as reality stared them in the face. 2. Pre- buyers remorse of soft Yes voters.
So it's 60/40 for No overall or as the last McARSE prediction noted 60.5%/39.5% to No.
And if you haven't made a killing on the turnout markets over the past months .... Why ????
Fortunately we'll not have to wait too long into the night on Thursday.
Assuming TSE's scenario is valid (I think it is BTW) - what's the process for recalling parliament? Bercow has to agree to a request - made by whom? And let's assume a 7am Friday result, Sterling and the markets fall off the cliff - at which point during Friday does a request go in, how quickly does Bercow agree, and how quickly can MPs be organized? Isn't it the opening day of the Labour conference?
A rally designed to encourage Scots to vote against breaking up the United Kingdom was held in London this evening, after organisers decided against holding it in Scotland on account of it being “too far away and f**king freezing.”
Over two thousand people flocked into Trafalgar Square to wave flags and point excitedly at celebrities – including musician Bob Geldof and comedian, Eddie Izzard – in the utterly misguided belief that their actions would have even the faintest impact on Scottish voters as they approach Thursday’s historic vote on independence.
Irish-born Geldof (62) enthralled the audience as he talked at length about the many and varied things he loves about Scotland, from “those little purple flower things” to its “many tasty biscuits.” “I love Scotland!” cheered rally attendee, Lucy Hawkes (27). “It’s one of my favourite places in the whole world, and I’d hate to see it go!”
Agree with TSE's scenario: Cameron will go. It is inconceivable that a Unionist PM can survive Scottish independence and most Tory backbenchers know it. Isabel Oakshotte backed up the STimes claims in Evening Standard yesterday. Hague is unifying figure, at least for a few months. I have a feeling Borders MP Rory Stewart, who has been one of the few Tories actively fighting for the Union, may well be the Leo Amery figure this time.
Rory the Tory (as he is affectionately known up here)? He's certainly been getting his hands dirty with his cairn.
If I was a disgruntled Tory MP I'd vote against the Labour confidence motion and get rid of him with a no-confidence letter instead. It's a lower bar and doesn't involve siding with the enemy.
That's right. The threshold to trigger a leadership ballot is relatively low - 40? - and it's plausible that it would happen that way. I doubt if we'd know before the conference season, though.
Amused to see PBers dealing with cold-turkey poll-free Tuesday on the last thread - chewing over rumours! of canvass returns! and counting posters in Aberdeen! Calm down. Have a nice cup of tea. All will be revealed shortly...
46 letters are required to trigger a confidence vote.
If YES have a wafer thin win, expect legal challenge after legal challenge to it's validity. Certainly not allowing people born in scotland but not currently resident (including serving forces) to vote while allowing EU citizens to vote is an open goal for a judicial review.
However the news of all police leave being cancelled suggests to me that internal polls are indicating NO and they wish to head off a "peaceful and joyous" Zanunat response.
"Military fury over ban on Scottish soldiers based in England voting in next week's historic independence referendum"
Scottish soldiers based in England will not be able to take part in the historic referendum on independence.
Critics condemned the ’shocking’ rules which mean thousands of Scots stationed outside their home nation will not have a say on the future of the Union.
Only those who still have an address in Scotland will be able to take part, affecting troops stationed in England, Cyprus and Germany."
But they are not resident in Scotland. That's the law set out by the UK and agreed by Mr Cameron. Rough justice, perhaps, but that's the way it is, just as with any other Scot sent furth of the country by employers.
Carnyx, Paul is far too thick to understand that if you do not have residence in Scotland that you do not get a vote, those pesky electoral regulations sure get in the way of fantasies.
Morning all and on thread I would hope Tory MPs would avoid adopting a pompous posture and realise that frankly there was nothing David Cameron could do to stop Scotland voting YES. If anyone should resign it should be Bland the Younger since it will have been his traditional voters who turned their back on the UK.
OF course speaking personally, on Saturday I will be starting to prepare for a new Scotland if the vote is indeed YES.
Thread Answer - Decisively No, because it'll be a decisive No on Thursday.
...............................................
Firstly, thanks for all the good wishes. Back at Chez JackW .. a tad tired and weary but still here !!
I'm being allowed to lurk and make the odd comment but no PB overloading or Mrs JackW will do unthinkable things to both me and Mike Smithson. And next week if I'm up for it Mrs JackW and I will be enjoying some quiet down time in warmer climes. So no ARSE for some weeks, probably back come November.
On the big issue.
Forget almost all the polls. Sampling Scotland is a nightmare and certainly 700 from ICM was a waste of breath. "Almost all polls" I noted.
The exception are the South of Scotland three polls. 1000 within a much smaller population is viable. Small variation in the numbers over the three polls and everything within the polls smells authentic. Around 70/30 to No. Adjust for other regions accordingly.
Next step is to dial in two further factors :
1. Differential turnout of No voters as reality stared them in the face. 2. Pre- buyers remorse of soft Yes voters.
So it's 60/40 for No overall or as the last McARSE prediction noted 60.5%/39.5% to No.
And if you haven't made a killing on the turnout markets over the past months .... Why ????
Fortunately we'll not have to wait too long into the night on Thursday.
Dumfries and Galloway 36.1% yes. Borders 38.5% Yes
This clearly supports your 60-40 NO based on polls showing 30% Yes in those region.
Now the chickens and nutters start confirming each others guff
Howse the golf swing?
What does that mean in English
Malcolm. You seen t have a lot of Ostrich DNA in you.
Is that chicken talk, give me that in English, I know you are all flapping and in panic but at least try to post so that people can understand your point
The article presupposes that a vote of no confidence comes from Labour, however, as far as I understand it, the rules of the fixed term of government means that it would not be of interest to them to try. The chances of winning the vote in the proportion required is remote as if won, would lead to a general election. Amusingly, there is virtually no chance of Cameron using the threat of collapsing the government to maintain his position for the same reason.
So what we have is a vote of no confidence in the Conservative party leadership, which could only realistically coming from within the party.
So, is there a betting situation on who will bring the motion to the floor of the house?
Don't think this will be needed. More likely scenario is that a number of senior backbenchers make it clear to whips and cabinet members that he has to go. Cameron will almost certainly take soundings from his Cabinet (the status of which he has restored somewhat since the Blair sofa days). There will be a few Ken Clarke-type figures who shake their heads ruefully and say I support you, but...
Scotland’s most senior civil servant put businesses under pressure to stay silent about independence, The Telegraph can disclose. Sir Peter Housden, the permanent secretary of the Scottish government, contacted organisations that were seen to favour the Union and told them to “keep out” of the debate. One person, who received a telephone call from the civil servant, said Sir Peter warned that it was “inappropriate” to get involved. A second person said Sir Peter had “torn strips” off him after he raised questions about independence.
'who spoke on conditions of anonymity'
Snigger.
I do worry that an independent Scotland would be burdened by a business class of the most extraordinary timidity and cowardice.
Last night tim montgomerie was getting on my wick....again and not Man U related which is a change.
One minute he's tweeting pictures about attending the london rally for better together, next he's bemoaning that Cameron's 'vow' being made with Clegg and Miliband is poor strategy as it leaves England open to being represented by Farage and UKIP.
Cammo said the country is more important to him than his party, some may doubt that but I don't actually, so it's a logical thing to do.
Talk about having your cake as a pundit..
.Tim Montgomerie@TimMontgomerie·9h Only Nigel Farage left to speak for England after this "vow". Another strategic political error by Cameron pic.twitter.com/5FbX6rvy87
Cameron supports a country called Britain which treats the majority of its people, the English, as second class citizens and it seems wishes to make them even further disadvantaged.
Montgomerie it seems would prefer that Britain continues to exist but stops treating the English as second class citizens and is pointing out that Cameron's plan to further disadvantage the English would benefit UKIP at the expense of the Conservative party.
OK but his complaint was "strategic error" as it left UKIP to speak for England?
It is a strategic error for the Conservative party.
Cameron has had nine years as leader of the Conservative party to propose ideas to deal with the English democratic deficit.
Cameron has had four years as prime minister to do something about the English democratic deficit.
Yet he has proposed nothing and done nothing.
Its clear that Cameron does not care about the English democratic deficit.
Now compare with his panic stricken pledges for more powers to Scotland.
Its clear that Cameron does care about maintaining the Union.
But this leaves an opening for a party which is willing to address the English democratic deficit and 'put England first'. UKIP will fill this role and consequently pick up votes the Conservative party would otherwise have had.
That is why Cameron has committed a strategic error.
Thread Answer - Decisively No, because it'll be a decisive No on Thursday.
...............................................
Firstly, thanks for all the good wishes. Back at Chez JackW .. a tad tired and weary but still here !!
I'm being allowed to lurk and make the odd comment but no PB overloading or Mrs JackW will do unthinkable things to both me and Mike Smithson. And next week if I'm up for it Mrs JackW and I will be enjoying some quiet down time in warmer climes. So no ARSE for some weeks, probably back come November.
On the big issue.
Forget almost all the polls. Sampling Scotland is a nightmare and certainly 700 from ICM was a waste of breath. "Almost all polls" I noted.
The exception are the South of Scotland three polls. 1000 within a much smaller population is viable. Small variation in the numbers over the three polls and everything within the polls smells authentic. Around 70/30 to No. Adjust for other regions accordingly.
Next step is to dial in two further factors :
1. Differential turnout of No voters as reality stared them in the face. 2. Pre- buyers remorse of soft Yes voters.
So it's 60/40 for No overall or as the last McARSE prediction noted 60.5%/39.5% to No.
And if you haven't made a killing on the turnout markets over the past months .... Why ????
Fortunately we'll not have to wait too long into the night on Thursday.
If YES have a wafer thin win, expect legal challenge after legal challenge to it's validity. Certainly not allowing people born in scotland but not currently resident (including serving forces) to vote while allowing EU citizens to vote is an open goal for a judicial review.
However the news of all police leave being cancelled suggests to me that internal polls are indicating NO and they wish to head off a "peaceful and joyous" Zanunat response.
"Military fury over ban on Scottish soldiers based in England voting in next week's historic independence referendum"
Scottish soldiers based in England will not be able to take part in the historic referendum on independence.
Critics condemned the ’shocking’ rules which mean thousands of Scots stationed outside their home nation will not have a say on the future of the Union.
Only those who still have an address in Scotland will be able to take part, affecting troops stationed in England, Cyprus and Germany."
But they are not resident in Scotland. That's the law set out by the UK and agreed by Mr Cameron. Rough justice, perhaps, but that's the way it is, just as with any other Scot sent furth of the country by employers.
Carnyx, Paul is far too thick to understand that if you do not have residence in Scotland that you do not get a vote, those pesky electoral regulations sure get in the way of fantasies.
You mean like you when you claimed Alan Cumming would get a vote?
Assuming TSE's scenario is valid (I think it is BTW) - what's the process for recalling parliament? Bercow has to agree to a request - made by whom? And let's assume a 7am Friday result, Sterling and the markets fall off the cliff - at which point during Friday does a request go in, how quickly does Bercow agree, and how quickly can MPs be organized? Isn't it the opening day of the Labour conference?
All this futile speculation about the remote (<10%) possibility of a YES vote. I don't believe the false promises of the 3 vicars of Bray plastered over today's newspapers, but there is a very strong chance that Cameron will be seen to be the saviour of the UK and will get a poll bounce that will see him over the line in May 2015. It is Wee Eck who will be humiliated and the SNP will burst like a pricked balloon. They didn't win many Westminster seats in 1979 post the failed referendum then.
However, there is a real danger of future terrorist violence from aggrieved extreme nationalists, like the IRA insurgencies, which could yet lead to Scottish secession if the British authorities mis-handle the situation.
If Cameron had half an ounce of sense he would rebrand the NHS, The English Health Service, Scottish Health Service, the Welsh Health Service and the Northern Ireland Health Service.
Make the dividing line in management responsibility more obvious.
The Scottish Health Service used to be called the Scottish Health Service, I believe! I'm not sure when it became the NHS in Scotland, but Michael Forsyth, the then Tory Secretary of State for Scotland, wanted it to be renamed back as you suggest, thugh it was not implemented apparently.
A rally designed to encourage Scots to vote against breaking up the United Kingdom was held in London this evening, after organisers decided against holding it in Scotland on account of it being “too far away and f**king freezing.”
Over two thousand people flocked into Trafalgar Square to wave flags and point excitedly at celebrities – including musician Bob Geldof and comedian, Eddie Izzard – in the utterly misguided belief that their actions would have even the faintest impact on Scottish voters as they approach Thursday’s historic vote on independence.
Irish-born Geldof (62) enthralled the audience as he talked at length about the many and varied things he loves about Scotland, from “those little purple flower things” to its “many tasty biscuits.” “I love Scotland!” cheered rally attendee, Lucy Hawkes (27). “It’s one of my favourite places in the whole world, and I’d hate to see it go!”
I know thats a spoof but it did cross my mind that having a big party in London might be pretty meaningless to undecided Scots, and could even make them more likely to vote yes.
Wouldn't it have been better to hold it in Scotland and invite a load of Scots.
It's an interesting fantasy. To push it further: Cameron asks Miliband to join him in a Grand Coalition, and Miliband quotes Attlee: "No, sir. I won't have you, and I believe the country won't have you, either."
But there were no Kippers in them days... and Boris isn't exactly Churchill, either...
Thread Answer - Decisively No, because it'll be a decisive No on Thursday.
...............................................
Firstly, thanks for all the good wishes. Back at Chez JackW .. a tad tired and weary but still here !!
I'm being allowed to lurk and make the odd comment but no PB overloading or Mrs JackW will do unthinkable things to both me and Mike Smithson. And next week if I'm up for it Mrs JackW and I will be enjoying some quiet down time in warmer climes. So no ARSE for some weeks, probably back come November.
On the big issue.
Forget almost all the polls. Sampling Scotland is a nightmare and certainly 700 from ICM was a waste of breath. "Almost all polls" I noted.
The exception are the South of Scotland three polls. 1000 within a much smaller population is viable. Small variation in the numbers over the three polls and everything within the polls smells authentic. Around 70/30 to No. Adjust for other regions accordingly.
Next step is to dial in two further factors :
1. Differential turnout of No voters as reality stared them in the face. 2. Pre- buyers remorse of soft Yes voters.
So it's 60/40 for No overall or as the last McARSE prediction noted 60.5%/39.5% to No.
And if you haven't made a killing on the turnout markets over the past months .... Why ????
Fortunately we'll not have to wait too long into the night on Thursday.
If Cameron had half an ounce of sense he would rebrand the NHS, The English Health Service, Scottish Health Service, the Welsh Health Service and the Northern Ireland Health Service.
Make the dividing line in management responsibility more obvious.
Already the case. I report to National Health England my various targets and statistics.
A rally designed to encourage Scots to vote against breaking up the United Kingdom was held in London this evening, after organisers decided against holding it in Scotland on account of it being “too far away and f**king freezing.”
Over two thousand people flocked into Trafalgar Square to wave flags and point excitedly at celebrities – including musician Bob Geldof and comedian, Eddie Izzard – in the utterly misguided belief that their actions would have even the faintest impact on Scottish voters as they approach Thursday’s historic vote on independence.
Irish-born Geldof (62) enthralled the audience as he talked at length about the many and varied things he loves about Scotland, from “those little purple flower things” to its “many tasty biscuits.” “I love Scotland!” cheered rally attendee, Lucy Hawkes (27). “It’s one of my favourite places in the whole world, and I’d hate to see it go!”
I know thats a spoof but it did cross my mind that having a big party in London might be pretty meaningless to undecided Scots, and could even make them more likely to vote yes.
Wouldn't it have been better to hold it in Scotland and invite a load of Scots.
Exactly and wheeling out erchies like Geldorf, Izzard , et al how desperate can you get other than to sign another "VOW" of lies.
A rally designed to encourage Scots to vote against breaking up the United Kingdom was held in London this evening, after organisers decided against holding it in Scotland on account of it being “too far away and f**king freezing.”
Over two thousand people flocked into Trafalgar Square to wave flags and point excitedly at celebrities – including musician Bob Geldof and comedian, Eddie Izzard – in the utterly misguided belief that their actions would have even the faintest impact on Scottish voters as they approach Thursday’s historic vote on independence.
Irish-born Geldof (62) enthralled the audience as he talked at length about the many and varied things he loves about Scotland, from “those little purple flower things” to its “many tasty biscuits.” “I love Scotland!” cheered rally attendee, Lucy Hawkes (27). “It’s one of my favourite places in the whole world, and I’d hate to see it go!”
I know thats a spoof but it did cross my mind that having a big party in London might be pretty meaningless to undecided Scots, and could even make them more likely to vote yes.
Wouldn't it have been better to hold it in Scotland and invite a load of Scots.
That's pretty much what the FT [edited] reported - views that it was too few and not in Scotland.
Comments
I think a more likely result is a Cameron as caretaker PM until a mid Nov general election. Tories should be able to appoint someone in a few weeks.
Clear case for electing someone with a mandate to handle the separation.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/11098298/Salmonds-list-of-enemies-grows-longer-by-the-day.html
But the situation is not comparable. The democratically-expressed wish of the people of Scotland may pose an existential threat to the 307-year-old Union, but it will not be a "crisis". It will merely be the starting point for a period of the negotiation of terms, which can be done calmly over a period of months between the SNP and the Lib-Lab-Con-unionist parties. Unlike the cases of Chamberlain and Martin, it will not be necessary for David Cameron to have his head summarily cut off in order for government to continue.
I have had a thought: perhaps there are some people (young, or non-political, or just dim) who don't actually know what "U.K.I.P." stands for. It is nowadays referred to almost universally as "Yoo-Kip" and hardly ever "U.K.I.P.", let alone "UK Independence Party", so maybe some people think that it is primarily an anti-immigration party, or a depository for general protests or whinges, and who may have forgotten (or not been aware in the first place) that its primary aim is to withdraw from the EU.
(I remember that when the Green Party had its first burst of significant support in the late 1980s and early 1990s, I read an anecdote about someone who had voted Green and had then been shocked when he discovered that it was against nuclear weapons.)
Maybe there are some UKIP voters now who might be shocked if they were to be told that the UKIP wants to withdraw from the EU completely, and not just to "reform" it or change it in some way.
However Parliament should be recalled as MPs for the Scottish seats should be disbarred from entering Parliament again (or disqualified as MPs) as they could not take part in the debates on the ancillary relief part of the divorce. Their constituents would be represented by their MSPs.
Also to be disbarred should be all members of the HoL with Scottish residency.
Then the debate should start on what the rUK will allow Scotland to have which parts of the UK's assets and liabilities.
Also Parliament should inform the EU and NATO that Scotland is no longer part of the UK and so are not part of its membership.
Hague in particular strikes me as more of a caretaker, not least since he has previously said he no longer wants the top job and has already given up the post of Foreign Secretary.
However the news of all police leave being cancelled suggests to me that internal polls are indicating NO and they wish to head off a "peaceful and joyous" Zanunat response.
Having Scotland just represented by MSPs would require the UK PM to consult Holyrood on operational defence and foreign affairs.
Westminster "could" pass a bill to disenfranchise Scotland but would the Queen sign it ?
Like it or not, until the final day, there would be Scottish MPs in London.
Remember too the proposal is that Scotland becomes (once more) independent: not that it be towed out into the mid-Atlantic. It will still be there at the top of the map. It plainly is not in rUK's interest to take revenge on what will remain an important trading partner.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/scottish-independence/scottish-independence-police-will-be-on-high-alert-on-friday-whatever-the-result-9734233.html
...............................................
Firstly, thanks for all the good wishes. Back at Chez JackW .. a tad tired and weary but still here !!
I'm being allowed to lurk and make the odd comment but no PB overloading or Mrs JackW will do unthinkable things to both me and Mike Smithson. And next week if I'm up for it Mrs JackW and I will be enjoying some quiet down time in warmer climes. So no ARSE for some weeks, probably back come November.
On the big issue.
Forget almost all the polls. Sampling Scotland is a nightmare and certainly 700 from ICM was a waste of breath. "Almost all polls" I noted.
The exception are the South of Scotland three polls. 1000 within a much smaller population is viable. Small variation in the numbers over the three polls and everything within the polls smells authentic. Around 70/30 to No. Adjust for other regions accordingly.
Next step is to dial in two further factors :
1. Differential turnout of No voters as reality stared them in the face.
2. Pre- buyers remorse of soft Yes voters.
So it's 60/40 for No overall or as the last McARSE prediction noted 60.5%/39.5% to No.
And if you haven't made a killing on the turnout markets over the past months .... Why ????
Fortunately we'll not have to wait too long into the night on Thursday.
.......................................................................
Nice to be back, if only very occasional and part-time for now .....
1. Will the Conservative and Unionist party accept that it's ok for its leader to lose the union?
2. Will the establishment accept its ok for the PM to lose the union?
I suspect the answer to both is no, Cameron won't resign, people rarely do in politics, he will be resigned as the likes of Liam Fox was. However, doubt this Saturday is feasible - MPs petition the speaker for a recall and get agreement and MPs all travel all inside 24 hours? Yes the conference gets in the way, but what will they talk about? Planned business
"However the news of all police leave being cancelled suggests to me that internal polls are indicating NO and they wish to head off a "peaceful and joyous" Zanunat response."
Spoke to a friend in Aberdeen the other day. She is the first of my friends to openly claim to be a No. She also said the proportion of Yes/No posters was roughly 50/50. Given the massive imbalance in other parts of the country, it would suggest there is quite a lot of No support up there.
Just three days and we'll have the voters' verdict. I trust you will pop by to receive congratulations [or otherwise] on the fidelity of your forecast?
Good to have JackW back, even if the logic there seems pretty faulty and driven by wishful thinking. There's nothing wrong with a 1000 sample size if it's properly weighted, and the 700 should not just be dismissed simply because you don't like what it said. Remember the Golden Rule?
Anyway, I'm beginning to hope you're right JackW, not because I care a less about Scotland, but because I want Cameron to win next year. A good No vote is going to look good for him. If it happens.
Scotland’s most senior civil servant put businesses under pressure to stay silent about independence, The Telegraph can disclose.
Sir Peter Housden, the permanent secretary of the Scottish government, contacted organisations that were seen to favour the Union and told them to “keep out” of the debate.
One person, who received a telephone call from the civil servant, said Sir Peter warned that it was “inappropriate” to get involved. A second person said Sir Peter had “torn strips” off him after he raised questions about independence.
It was his decision to not allow Devo Max on the ballot paper, and as they have unconvincingly offered it in a panic at the last minute, seems to have been a very bad error.
Also he should have engaged with the Scottish voters before it looked like he might lose. The "effing Tory" stuff was always factored in. He should have engaged as UK PM from day one, taking a leaf from Major's book and campaigning hard to Save the Union
Again too little, too late, too much panic.
Also let's not forget the Lib Dems here, a perfect opportunity to ditch the coalition? After all proportionately they will be the biggest losers if the Scottish MPs go. And it will be fun watching Danny Alexander's position if the Tory back benchers try and limit the voting rights of Scottish MPs pre 2016.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/david-cameron-ed-miliband-nick-4265992
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-29213416
I will owe you a drinkie if the final MCARSE is correct. There are still good odds on such a result. Indeed on the % bands the extremes either way are at attractive odds.
Agree with TSE's scenario: Cameron will go. It is inconceivable that a Unionist PM can survive Scottish independence and most Tory backbenchers know it. Isabel Oakshotte backed up the STimes claims in Evening Standard yesterday. Hague is unifying figure, at least for a few months. I have a feeling Borders MP Rory Stewart, who has been one of the few Tories actively fighting for the Union, may well be the Leo Amery figure this time.
You know what would be really helpful in that scenario?
For the PM to resign...
Not going to happen.
Interestingly http://numbercruncheruk.blogspot.co.uk/ has the following percentages for South Scotland if the overall vote is a 50-50 tie:
Dumfries and Galloway 36.1% yes.
Borders 38.5% Yes
This clearly supports your 60-40 NO based on polls showing 30% Yes in those region.
A few weeks discussion during conference season would be needed for a real sense of direction to emerge.
Incidentally, for followers of the McARSE, Shadsy has Yes under 40% still at 10/1...
On topic, if the usual suspect Tories do this, they are as vain and thick as I've always considered them.
Twitter.com/NicolaSturgeon/status/511549192339460097/photo/1
The IOS figures on the previous page are interesting but I think they are Labour voters only and are broadly in line with the polls. As I have said from the start Scottish Labour supporters are the key to all of this with an extremely united Tory party and a fairly united (and now small) Lib Dem party largely balancing the SNP (I think taking the 2011 triumph as their base point is unrealistic and explains why 15-18% of their supporters are voting no).
To win Yes need about 40-45% of the Labour vote depending on how you weight the SNP 2011 figure. I believe they will fall short which is why I think No will win but to quote Wellington on Waterloo: "It has been a damned nice thing — the nearest run thing you ever saw in your life."
It is good to see JackW back and I hope he is well but it was the Yougov call to arms that has hopefully made the difference on this and the complacency of the 60:40 crowd came very, very close to losing it. They still might.
This is not over. Not even close.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2751801/Scottish-soldiers-based-England-barred-taking-referendum-decide-home-foreign-country.html
"Military fury over ban on Scottish soldiers based in England voting in next week's historic independence referendum"
Scottish soldiers based in England will not be able to take part in the historic referendum on independence.
Critics condemned the ’shocking’ rules which mean thousands of Scots stationed outside their home nation will not have a say on the future of the Union.
Only those who still have an address in Scotland will be able to take part, affecting troops stationed in England, Cyprus and Germany."
Now we have 3 known liars signing more false pledges or "VOWS" how low can these unionists stoop in their desperate attempt to cling on to the trough.
Why do they need to "VOW" to treat us fairly in the future ......... Doh
Though most calls for Camerons resignation come from those who call for his resignation at the drop of a hat anyway!
Snigger.
I do worry that an independent Scotland would be burdened by a business class of the most extraordinary timidity and cowardice.
In 1940 what was the advice?: Keep Calm and Carry On.
Show a bit of British phlegm please. How would a vote of no confidence and immenent election calm the markets?
One minute he's tweeting pictures about attending the london rally for better together, next he's bemoaning that Cameron's 'vow' being made with Clegg and Miliband is poor strategy as it leaves England open to being represented by Farage and UKIP.
Cammo said the country is more important to him than his party, some may doubt that but I don't actually, so it's a logical thing to do.
Talk about having your cake as a pundit..
.Tim Montgomerie@TimMontgomerie·9h
Only Nigel Farage left to speak for England after this "vow". Another strategic political error by Cameron pic.twitter.com/5FbX6rvy87
So what we have is a vote of no confidence in the Conservative party leadership, which could only realistically coming from within the party.
So, is there a betting situation on who will bring the motion to the floor of the house?
More generally the franchise is in accordance with UK electoral law and the Edinburgh Agreement. It has already been judicially reviewed at least twice (expats and prisoners respectively) IIRC.
Montgomerie it seems would prefer that Britain continues to exist but stops treating the English as second class citizens and is pointing out that Cameron's plan to further disadvantage the English would benefit UKIP at the expense of the Conservative party.
Make the dividing line in management responsibility more obvious.
https://theconversation.com/scotlands-indyref-history-will-now-be-decided-in-a-final-battle-between-hope-and-fear-31700?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Latest+from+The+Conversation+for+16+September+2014+-+1921&utm_content=Latest+from+The+Conversation+for+16+September+2014+-+1921+CID_b919d78b05c121e0cb26847596c2cf46&utm_source=campaign_monitor_uk&utm_term=astonishing turnaround
The ARSE methodology ticks no evidential boxes and requires a good old fashioned British enema-high,hot and a hellavalot, although Sunil'sELBOW methods may be on steroids.
The answer is always in the charts,always follow the charts.
The Tories are only few points behind Labour in polls and may well take the lead in polls before an election. If English voters see Scotland going independent, therefore losing Scottish MP's sometime in 2016, then they may decide to support the Tories. They may think that the Tories who have virtually no political interest in Scotland, will be much tougher in negotiations with Scotland, than Labour. Because Labour have so much at stake in Scotland, they may be more willing to provide a very good divorce settlement to Scotland.
Amused to see PBers dealing with cold-turkey poll-free Tuesday on the last thread - chewing over rumours! of canvass returns! and counting posters in Aberdeen! Calm down. Have a nice cup of tea. All will be revealed shortly...
Recounts on the other hand...
Over two thousand people flocked into Trafalgar Square to wave flags and point excitedly at celebrities – including musician Bob Geldof and comedian, Eddie Izzard – in the utterly misguided belief that their actions would have even the faintest impact on Scottish voters as they approach Thursday’s historic vote on independence.
Irish-born Geldof (62) enthralled the audience as he talked at length about the many and varied things he loves about Scotland, from “those little purple flower things” to its “many tasty biscuits.”
“I love Scotland!” cheered rally attendee, Lucy Hawkes (27). “It’s one of my favourite places in the whole world, and I’d hate to see it go!”
OF course speaking personally, on Saturday I will be starting to prepare for a new Scotland if the vote is indeed YES.
Cameron has had nine years as leader of the Conservative party to propose ideas to deal with the English democratic deficit.
Cameron has had four years as prime minister to do something about the English democratic deficit.
Yet he has proposed nothing and done nothing.
Its clear that Cameron does not care about the English democratic deficit.
Now compare with his panic stricken pledges for more powers to Scotland.
Its clear that Cameron does care about maintaining the Union.
But this leaves an opening for a party which is willing to address the English democratic deficit and 'put England first'. UKIP will fill this role and consequently pick up votes the Conservative party would otherwise have had.
That is why Cameron has committed a strategic error.
Any golfing advice on how to remedy this would be appreciated? Further back in my stance perhaps?
http://www.parliament.uk/about/how/occasions/recallparliament/
He cannot do it on his own volition.
However, there is a real danger of future terrorist violence from aggrieved extreme nationalists, like the IRA insurgencies, which could yet lead to Scottish secession if the British authorities mis-handle the situation.
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=A55_KIhv2nsC&pg=PA51&lpg=PA51&dq="scottish+health+service"+forsyth+"NHS+in+Scotland"&source=bl&ots=hRwcoilKRX&sig=AG5Kk5-FVzYP7ZONwGDx-r7hinI&hl=en&sa=X&ei=1eQXVOiHNozZaseKgLgM&ved=0CFIQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q="scottish health service" forsyth "NHS in Scotland"&f=false
Wouldn't it have been better to hold it in Scotland and invite a load of Scots.
It's an interesting fantasy. To push it further: Cameron asks Miliband to join him in a Grand Coalition, and Miliband quotes Attlee: "No, sir. I won't have you, and I believe the country won't have you, either."
But there were no Kippers in them days... and Boris isn't exactly Churchill, either...
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2014/07/26/what-the-independence-referendums-in-quebec-suggest-about-scotland/
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/73259dcc-3cbc-11e4-871d-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3DSZmLPQk
Again, a rather different perspective from some others. Quite striking.