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.
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
Whilst playing yesterday, out of nowhere I started shanking my sand wedge horribly and this spread to my other shorter irons.
Any golfing advice on how to remedy this would be appreciated? Further back in my stance perhaps?
I've had to give up golf but I recall the total embarrassment of a whole round of shanking in a competition.The only way to correct it is to aim about 90%left and it might go straight.It made me realise what what said about golf-it spoils a good walk-is true.I'd just give up and take up billiards.
How do you guarantee the permanence of the Scottish Parliament by a fully sovereign Westminster Parliament that cannot bind it's successors? Surely that it a constitutional impossibility.
I note Cameron doesn't seem keen on an English parliament.
Good morning all. The more I think about it, the more I find EV4EL less problematic. It is not ideal, but then our constitutional settlement is delightfully haphazard anyway.
- One challenge against EV4EL is about distinguishing what legislation applies to certain areas, but surely the McKay Commission must have dealt with this in its proposal about English based MPs only voting at committee stage?
- On the issue of two types of MPs. Simply ensure that English based MPs become Members of the English Grand Committee (MEGPs) when sitting on English only issues. That way they become MPs on UK days. This may mean you split salaries for each role. If the UK role is less time consuming and paid less, then I have no big concern with MSPs seeking election as MPs either. I would even consider letting those non-English based MPs contribute to debates without voting on english laws (get more views etc) although this may blue the grand committee line. The committee is essentially the English Parliament without the new building and politicians.
- On executive functions. English based only MPs could be convention serve in cabinet roles for devolved areas. I am less fussy about junior ministers, but I guess they should come from he Grand Committee too.
- It should be the English Grand Commmitee that determines devolution within England.
- Big challenge then is the split majority situation. I think it will emerge less often (especially with possibly further reduction in non-English based MPs), but I think here a compromise is needed. The party with majority in UK should probably form the government, but of course have to win an English majority in the Grand Committee. A lost vote is now less significant with the fixed term Parliament act.
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.
It sounds like it's been a strategic error for 9 years or 4 years... to bemoan that prolonged failing whilst in the last few days of trying to save the Union, seems rather poor timing don't you agree?
"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.”"
and......
“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!”
Made me LOL!
I'm up to Aberdeen later so I hope it isn't f**king freezing
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.
There was a report a couple of years back that the MoD were moving at least one Scottish unit out of Scotland to elsewhere in the UK, to make room for another (non-Scots) unit from BAOR. Seemed odd at the time which is why I recall it, and even odder if it did actually happen, for it would have disfranchised the poor squaddies (for whom I have considerable sympathy). Possibly there was some justification in terms of specialist equipment or needs.
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.
How do you guarantee the permanence of the Scottish Parliament by a fully sovereign Westminster Parliament that cannot bind it's successors? Surely that it a constitutional impossibility.
I note Cameron doesn't seem keen on an English parliament.
This is all a mess.
I was wondering precisely that - and having Mr Clegg (tuition fees) in the lineup will not help, nor will the breach (in spirit, if not in strict law) of the Edinburgh Agreement over the introduction of new proposals during purdah. I'd be very interested if some knowledgeable PBer can give a view on how watertight the Vow is.
NUJ Scotland @NUJScotland · 18h Statement on NUJ web site as union call for stop to abuse of journalists for rest of #indyref
NUJ Scotland @NUJScotland 15h Just for clarification- the journalists considering police action - not from BBC. Physical violence threats were against two pro-Yes members
Wether the indy/ref outcome is YES or NO Cameron is fatally wounded. Being seen as a PM and politician of very little political savvy - except where his own immediate survival is endangered. Well this time his F**K UP of endangering the nation is plain for all the nation to see. And this time his absolute panic is also plain to see. He won't be forgiven.
On canvas returns - Is it possible that No and Yes canvassers are getting different results? That, given the divisiveness of the campaign, many voters are simply agreeing with whoever is at the front door.
Wether the indy/ref outcome is YES or NO Cameron is fatally wounded. Being seen as a PM and politician of very little political savvy - except where his own immediate survival is endangered. Well this time his F**K UP of endangering the nation is plain for all the nation to see. And this time his absolute panic is also plain to see. He won't be forgiven.
Actually.....the polling evidence is that the majority think he shouldn't resign.....
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
I'm not sure the Tories have every really recovered from the manner in which Thatcher was upended. It wasn't even so much the fact that she was, but the vicious manner of it. However, it possibly goes deeper even than that.
The problem with the Conservative party is that it is a mass of contradictions. There are at least two forces, and at certain times the factions re-emerge.
A. Thatcher exemplified brilliantly, regardless of how you view her, the financial laissez-faire force. She was the girl made good: the grammar school success story who valued entrepreneurs and enterprise. She used sound common sense and knew the housewives' purse. Certainly in the early days she would never have been caught out about the price of bread. She was anti a lot of establishment, and especially rotten fusty establishment, and she ruthlessly put the sword to it.
B. Which brings us to the old fusty Tories: the omni-benevolent country squires. We all know their ilk, and their heirs, in the OE's and gentry. These are the Tories by class and who are, instinctively, conservative in a way that A simply aren't.
It isn't quite as simple as to say that A. are republican, separatist and ruthlessly opposed to federalism (and therefore less unionist) just as it isn't so simple to categorise B as more pro-Europe and strongly unionist, but there are tendencies in those directions.
And so back to Thatcher's assassination. In part the old guard, the B camp, stabbed her. The community charge aka. poll tax was the final straw in a long saga of measures that appeared to crush the very people she represented, and this was an affront to the old altruistic Tories (B), for whom Heseltine wielded the knife.
The two forces clash every so often like tectonic plates. Occasionally, as over Europe in Major's time, it produces an earthquake. If on Thursday Scotland votes 'Yes' I fear we're in for another shaking high up on the Richter scale.
FPT, I wouldn't set too much store on canvass returns. Canvassing is great for identifying your own supporters. Poor at picking up numbers for the opposition.
Such a huge, irrevocable, decision about Scotland's future must be accompanied by a realistic assessment of the risks and problems associated with it, so as not inadvertently to condemn Scotland, and particularly the poorest members of our society, to a less prosperous and more unstable future. That, surely, is the responsibility of every one of us. Some will choose to opt for independence regardless, and we respect their decision, but it is our view that the case has not been proven beyond reasonable doubt.......
....But in promoting its manifesto for Scottish independence, a Panglossian emphasis on the best-case scenario has at times strained its credibility. On oil revenues, entering a currency union, achieving EU membership promptly and smoothly, securing affordable rates of interest for borrowing on the international markets and its capacity to withstand global economic currents, the case for independence has been built upon a string of ideal outcomes.
Even the other party in this great divorce, the Government at Westminster, would, it is assumed, act at all times during separation negotiations in accordance with the Scottish Government's wishes. The currency union is just one major hurdle.
This approach has inevitably produced a clamour of dissent. A formidable line-up of independent experts, including think tanks, academics, leading oil industry figures and the Governor of the Bank of England, has contested the reliability of these assumptions. Unfortunately, a tactical decision appears to have been made by Yes Scotland to portray most objections as contemptible negativity or the pessimism of the fearties. A sense of realism and healthy scepticism has been derided, especially in the latter stages of the campaign.
The Prime Minister told Newsnight he had permitted the vote because he was a “democrat”, and said he had been “faced by a situation where one part of our United Kingdom voted for a Scottish National Party government who wanted a referendum.”
He also batted away calls for English devolution urged by some Tory MPs in the wake of a promise for more powers for Scotland, saying: ”I don’t think we’re remotely at that stage.” .................. Well the Tory backbenchers won't like that last para, one bit and I don't think it will work this time. After all he batted away the Indy/ref for two years and look where its got him and the nation: up shits creek.
People are talking on my train to work, in South East London, about the Barnett formula. I think people have finally noticed what's going on...
Yes, while the arcana of the details will pass most people by, but Scots getting free stuff the English don't is already leading to resentment - I think UKIP have a new popular and populist campaign....given the three traditional parties have tied their hands on this....
This Bloomberg report demands a response from the monarchist separatists and from the bourgeois elitist Green party who are putting green investment in renewable at risk.The public needs reminding the Green Investment Bank is a good policy of the last Labour government,knicked by the effing Tories.It is the smart way to achieve the green jobs. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-09-15/scots-independence-is-risk-for-clean-energy-projects-bnef-says.html
I don't understand Dave's reluctance to offer something to England. If it's a NO then we head into Devomax legislation. The legislation should outline heavy Devomax and EVFEL. Labour could not oppose it.
On canvas returns - Is it possible that No and Yes canvassers are getting different results? That, given the divisiveness of the campaign, many voters are simply agreeing with whoever is at the front door.
Certainly in view of reports of intimidation and violence I would be reluctant to say 'No' to a 'Yes' campaigner. I might go into their little black book and they have proved to be vindictive from top to bottom.
The Prime Minister told Newsnight he had permitted the vote because he was a “democrat”, and said he had been “faced by a situation where one part of our United Kingdom voted for a Scottish National Party government who wanted a referendum.”
He also batted away calls for English devolution urged by some Tory MPs in the wake of a promise for more powers for Scotland, saying: ”I don’t think we’re remotely at that stage.” .................. Well the Tory backbenchers won't like that last para, one bit and I don't think it will work this time. After all he batted away the Indy/ref for two years and look where its got him and the nation: up shits creek.
Mike - even someone as one eyed as you can appreciate that pre Thursday is not the time to mention such matters. Cam batted back Kuessenberg with some panache - he had a single focus on the Sindy ref.
On canvas returns - Is it possible that No and Yes canvassers are getting different results? That, given the divisiveness of the campaign, many voters are simply agreeing with whoever is at the front door.
Certainly; it is also possible that canvassing tends to be focussed on areas of known support, for use in GOTV ops on the day.
On canvas returns - Is it possible that No and Yes canvassers are getting different results? That, given the divisiveness of the campaign, many voters are simply agreeing with whoever is at the front door.
This happens in every campaign anyway, although in this one it may well be an even greater factor.
Giles Watling@g15ssy·17m Amazing afternoon canvassing in Bocking's Elm, #Clacton. Even had Labour voters pledging support on the doorstep for by-election. Wonderful.
Anecdotally I haev heard of a lot of people who have changed their minds. More than once. I could be that the Don't Knows are genuinely DKs and that canvassers gong round doors do actually convince people to change to their point of view only for them to change back again when they talk about it with other people.
My problem with it is that the three amigos are making promises on my behalf that I haven't been consulted on
Isabel Hardman (@IsabelHardman) 16/09/2014 08:19 The problems with that promise from Cameron, Clegg and Miliband specc.ie/YNNNTd #indyref pic.twitter.com/2wAHiekJEI
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
I'm not sure the Tories have every really recovered from the manner in which Thatcher was upended. It wasn't even so much the fact that she was, but the vicious manner of it. However, it possibly goes deeper even than that.
A. Thatcher exemplified brilliantly, regardless of how you view her, the financial laissez-faire force. She was the girl made good: the grammar school success story who valued entrepreneurs and enterprise. She used sound common sense and knew the housewives' purse. Certainly in the early days she would never have been caught out about the price of bread. She was anti a lot of establishment, and especially rotten fusty establishment, and she ruthlessly put the sword to it.
B. Which brings us to the old fusty Tories: the omni-benevolent country squires. We all know their ilk, and their heirs, in the OE's and gentry. These are the Tories by class and who are, instinctively, conservative in a way that A simply aren't.
It isn't quite as simple as to say that A. are republican, separatist and ruthlessly opposed to federalism (and therefore less unionist) just as it isn't so simple to categorise B as more pro-Europe and strongly unionist, but there are tendencies in those directions.
And so back to Thatcher's assassination. In part the old guard, the B camp, stabbed her. The community charge aka. poll tax was the final straw in a long saga of measures that appeared to crush the very people she represented, and this was an affront to the old altruistic Tories (B), for whom Heseltine wielded the knife.
The two forces clash every so often like tectonic plates. Occasionally, as over Europe in Major's time, it produces an earthquake. If on Thursday Scotland votes 'Yes' I fear we're in for another shaking high up on the Richter scale.
Simplifying: the Tories are the Party for people who have made money by any means short of kidnapping and bank robbery. And they are the Party for those people's children and grandchildren. However, making money and inheriting it are two different things.
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.
It sounds like it's been a strategic error for 9 years or 4 years... to bemoan that prolonged failing whilst in the last few days of trying to save the Union, seems rather poor timing don't you agree?
But Cameron is exacerbating it by STILL not doing anything about the English democratic deficit. and by pledging even MORE powers for Scotland.
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!”
Has it not occurred to you that these people are your friends? You might find you need some of those if you turn your back on the rest of the UK.
My problem with it is that the three amigos are making promises on my behalf that I haven't been consulted on
Isabel Hardman (@IsabelHardman) 16/09/2014 08:19 The problems with that promise from Cameron, Clegg and Miliband specc.ie/YNNNTd #indyref pic.twitter.com/2wAHiekJEI
Would probably be for after the next General though?
My problem with it is that the three amigos are making promises on my behalf that I haven't been consulted on
Isabel Hardman (@IsabelHardman) 16/09/2014 08:19 The problems with that promise from Cameron, Clegg and Miliband specc.ie/YNNNTd #indyref pic.twitter.com/2wAHiekJEI
Nigel Farage has already said David Cameron has been ‘moronic’ to make these promises. Now you can just see his response to that Daily Record front page, where three party leaders in an era of four party politics get together to screw over the English, as he might put it.
Last night tim montgomerie was getting on my wick....again and not Man U related which is a change.
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
A. Thatcher exemplified brilliantly, regardless of how you view her, the financial laissez-faire force. She was the girl made good: the grammar school success story who valued entrepreneurs and enterprise. She used sound common sense and knew the housewives' purse. Certainly in the early days she would never have been caught out about the price of bread. She was anti a lot of establishment, and especially rotten fusty establishment, and she ruthlessly put the sword to it.
B. Which brings us to the old fusty Tories: the omni-benevolent country squires. We all know their ilk, and their heirs, in the OE's and gentry. These are the Tories by class and who are, instinctively, conservative in a way that A simply aren't.
It isn't quite as simple as to say that A. are republican, separatist and ruthlessly opposed to federalism (and therefore less unionist) just as it isn't so simple to categorise B as more pro-Europe and strongly unionist, but there are tendencies in those directions.
And so back to Thatcher's assassination. In part the old guard, the B camp, stabbed her. The community charge aka. poll tax was the final straw in a long saga of measures that appeared to crush the very people she represented, and this was an affront to the old altruistic Tories (B), for whom Heseltine wielded the knife.
The two forces clash every so often like tectonic plates. Occasionally, as over Europe in Major's time, it produces an earthquake. If on Thursday Scotland votes 'Yes' I fear we're in for another shaking high up on the Richter scale.
Simplifying: the Tories are the Party for people who have made money by any means short of kidnapping and bank robbery. And they are the Party for those people's children and grandchildren. However, making money and inheriting it are two different things.
Actually the vast majority of money-making done in this country is through entirely fair and legitimate means. The left's hatred of financial improvement is what will run this country into the ground.
The Prime Minister told Newsnight he had permitted the vote because he was a “democrat”, and said he had been “faced by a situation where one part of our United Kingdom voted for a Scottish National Party government who wanted a referendum.”
He also batted away calls for English devolution urged by some Tory MPs in the wake of a promise for more powers for Scotland, saying: ”I don’t think we’re remotely at that stage.” .................. Well the Tory backbenchers won't like that last para, one bit and I don't think it will work this time. After all he batted away the Indy/ref for two years and look where its got him and the nation: up shits creek.
Mike - even someone as one eyed as you can appreciate that pre Thursday is not the time to mention such matters. Cam batted back Kuessenberg with some panache - he had a single focus on the Sindy ref.
However come Friday once its settled...
Do you really think that a man who has done nothing for NINE years and has been openly hostile to doing anything is going to do something on Friday ?
Perhaps you'd like to tell us what you expect Cameron to actually do ?
Still value IMO, other firms will surely not be so generous?
UKIP tend to build momentum in by-elections. Unless a poll comes out showing Labour miles ahead, I suspect that price will be pushed to about 4/1 and 1/6 respectively. Surprised WH started at 1/50, makes me wonder if they are willing to go as long as 1/6 though.
Guido Fawkes @GuidoFawkes 41m Leaders of Parties That Promised An EU Referendum Vow:“We’re Politicians, Trust Us This Time" http://guyfawk.es/1yaiLEB pic.twitter.com/GTuT3lCNnD
On canvas returns - Is it possible that No and Yes canvassers are getting different results? That, given the divisiveness of the campaign, many voters are simply agreeing with whoever is at the front door.
Or one side has a much smaller spread of canvass returns. I (in Glasgow) haven't been canvassed once by Bettertogether, 3 times by Yes; this is actually worse than my experience of last GE and Holyrood elections, during which if I recall correctly we had at least one Labour canvass during both.
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?
On reflection I think Friday week would be more likely. Calling it at 24 hours' notice would simply lead to the place being half-empty, which wouldn't give the desired impression. The Labour conference only starts Sunday, but MPs will be all over the globe anyway (lots don't attend their party conferences). Friday week would give time to sort it out and arrange travel back and it would give everyone time to think what they actually wanted to say. If your partner declares they want to divorce you, it's unwise to call a meeting of the solicitors the very next day.
A (Scottish-born) constituent tells me that he's had serious-looking threats yesterday from nationalists on a blog and has been offered police protection as a result. He is admittedly a mirror-image malcolmg and I've no doubt that he expressed himself about Salmond in an inflammatory way, but still, it's not good. We need to have a result and get on with dealing with it.
The Prime Minister told Newsnight he had permitted the vote because he was a “democrat”, and said he had been “faced by a situation where one part of our United Kingdom voted for a Scottish National Party government who wanted a referendum.”
He also batted away calls for English devolution urged by some Tory MPs in the wake of a promise for more powers for Scotland, saying: ”I don’t think we’re remotely at that stage.” .................. Well the Tory backbenchers won't like that last para, one bit and I don't think it will work this time. After all he batted away the Indy/ref for two years and look where its got him and the nation: up shits creek.
Mike - even someone as one eyed as you can appreciate that pre Thursday is not the time to mention such matters. Cam batted back Kuessenberg with some panache - he had a single focus on the Sindy ref.
However come Friday once its settled...
Do you really think that a man who has done nothing for NINE years and has been openly hostile to doing anything is going to do something on Friday ?
Perhaps you'd like to tell us what you expect Cameron to actually do ?
I would have a problem if Scotland gets more powers yet Scottish MPs still get to vote on English only matters.
I don't need it in law by 9.15 on Friday though.
Again - best politics to focus all on the Sindy until Thursday - Cam did that well. There is a reason he is PM.
My problem with it is that the three amigos are making promises on my behalf that I haven't been consulted on
Isabel Hardman (@IsabelHardman) 16/09/2014 08:19 The problems with that promise from Cameron, Clegg and Miliband specc.ie/YNNNTd #indyref pic.twitter.com/2wAHiekJEI
Would probably be for after the next General though?
Could be wrong but I thought Cameron said yesterday something like
"These aren't idle promises they'll be in place by January with cross party consent"
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.
An entirely inappropriate series of calls for Sir Peter to have placed.
Businesses are private actors. They have the right to a view. Sir Peter is a public employee who should be neutral on a matter of his significance.
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 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!”
What did you expect? Thousands of Londoners to catch an evening flight to Edinburgh on a Monday night?
This was a rally by the rest of the UK to show Scottish residents that we respect it's their decision either way, but there are thousands of us who do care and wish to express our hope that Scotland decides to stay. Because we'd all be much worse off without them.
I was there and can vouch for the fact that there were plenty of (disenfranchised) Scottish ex-patriots, as were two of the speakers. Geldof was great (superb even) Dan Snow passionate and Al Murray more understated, but celebrity presence did guarantee full media coverage. Given it was organised at less than 3 days notice, it was a great success.
Of course, if you weren't truly bothered about it's impact, you wouldn't be trying to ridicule it. You'd just ignore it.
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.
So the current names of NHS England, NHS Scotland, etc aren't clear enough?
PfP posted 8 Sept: "Personally I favour ...... William Hague - yes he is retiring but could probably be persuaded to hold the fort until the next GE 56/1 (Betfair)" Another missed hat tip?
Last night tim montgomerie was getting on my wick....again and not Man U related which is a change.
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
A. Thatcher exemplified brilliantly, regardless of how you view her, the financial laissez-faire force. She was the girl made good: the grammar school success story who valued entrepreneurs and enterprise. She used sound common sense and knew the housewives' purse. Certainly in the early days she would never have been caught out about the price of bread. She was anti a lot of establishment, and especially rotten fusty establishment, and she ruthlessly put the sword to it.
B. Which brings us to the old fusty Tories: the omni-benevolent country squires. We all know their ilk, and their heirs, in the OE's and gentry. These are the Tories by class and who are, instinctively, conservative in a way that A simply aren't.
It isn't quite as simple as to say that A. are republican, separatist and ruthlessly opposed to federalism (and therefore less unionist) just as it isn't so simple to categorise B as more pro-Europe and strongly unionist, but there are tendencies in those directions.
And so back to Thatcher's assassination. In part the old guard, the B camp, stabbed her. The community charge aka. poll tax was the final straw in a long saga of measures that appeared to crush the very people she represented, and this was an affront to the old altruistic Tories (B), for whom Heseltine wielded the knife.
The two forces clash every so often like tectonic plates. Occasionally, as over Europe in Major's time, it produces an earthquake. If on Thursday Scotland votes 'Yes' I fear we're in for another shaking high up on the Richter scale.
Simplifying: the Tories are the Party for people who have made money by any means short of kidnapping and bank robbery. And they are the Party for those people's children and grandchildren. However, making money and inheriting it are two different things.
Actually the vast majority of money-making done in this country is through entirely fair and legitimate means. The left's hatred of financial improvement is what will run this country into the ground.
In the first place, I didn't suggest otherwise. In the second place, I thought you believed it had already done so.
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.
So the current names of NHS England, NHS Scotland, etc aren't clear enough?
It would seem not. Quite a few folk (including some health services employees) think it is one large body (and a friend of mine confirms this from personal experience).
The issue's salience arises in part because some in the No Campaign have been presenting the NHS as if it is a monolithic UK-wide organization, so that if Scotland leaves the UK it leaves the NHS behind (or so they seek to portray). (Which makes the approach suggested by Mr Chestnut, rational as it is in itself, and analogous recent statements, into a bit of a mixed message.)
Blimey, you don't often see politicians lying quite as brazenly as this. Normally they make at least a token effort to fudge the question so as not to have to lie outright:
Asked whether an independent Scotland would have to pay more to borrow money, the first minister replies: "No, you have to have sustainable level of borrowing and debt. As far as the cost is concerned, we'll be borrowing at Sterling rates."
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.
@HopiSen made an interesting point the other day. With England being 85% of the UK, an English Parliament would have the ability to abuse its power. Let's say the English Parliament created a zone alongside the Scottish border with 0% corporate tax, funded by higher borrowing spread over the rest of England. They could pretty much devastate the Scottish economy, without Scotland having the ability to respond effectively.
Blimey, you don't often see politicians lying quite as brazenly as this. Normally they make at least a token effort to fudge the question so as not to have to lie outright:
Asked whether an independent Scotland would have to pay more to borrow money, the first minister replies: "No, you have to have sustainable level of borrowing and debt. As far as the cost is concerned, we'll be borrowing at Sterling rates."
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 .....
Great to see you posting again Jack and congratulations for sticking to your guns. Should the Indy result indeed finish 60:40 in favour of No, we should all bow before you, recognising your great wisdom.
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 problem with the Conservative party is that it is a mass of contradictions. There are at least two forces, and at certain times the factions re-emerge. .
Am I the only one who is rather pis sed off at all the goodies being offered to 84% leftist Scotland to stay, when we haven't even been consulted on whether we agree with any of it?
If this is the price of UK's version of East Germany staying in the Union, I say they should just sod off and fail independently on their own dollar. Devo Max gives them everything they want including currency union, and it's my dollar.
In the wake of a Yes vote, Cameron should convene the House and announce an immediate cut in basic rate income tax, reflecting the ending of centuries of subsidy. It would be the English independence dividend.
The EU claims to have kept the peace in Europe, in reality they have sparked two wars in the Balkans and the Ukraine. At least these sanctions remove any doubt that the EU and NATO are the aggressor, time to accept defeat.
This Bloomberg report demands a response from the monarchist separatists and from the bourgeois elitist Green party who are putting green investment in renewable at risk.The public needs reminding the Green Investment Bank is a good policy of the last Labour government,knicked by the effing Tories.It is the smart way to achieve the green jobs. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-09-15/scots-independence-is-risk-for-clean-energy-projects-bnef-says.html
At one point Salmond was going around telling people that iScot would keep rUK green subsidies which would allow companies to keep investing in uneconomic wind energy in Scotland.
Not sure if he has taken that back yet, seems to have gone silent on the subject so maybe a tacit climb down rather than an overt one.
Am I the only one who is rather pis sed off at all the goodies being offered to 84% leftist Scotland to stay, when we haven't even been consulted on whether we agree with any of it?
If this is the price of UK's version of East Germany staying in the Union, I say they should just sod off and fail independently on their own dollar. Devo Max gives them everything they want including currency union, and it's my dollar.
In the wake of a Yes vote, Cameron should convene the House and announce an immediate cut in basic rate income tax, reflecting the ending of centuries of subsidy. It would be the English independence dividend.
Mr. G, don't Yes have Connery and Cumming [stop giggling] on-side?
I agree, though, that celebrities who aren't really politically involved shouldn't get their opinions taken seriously.
Connery has not spoken for years and whilst Cumming supports YES I have yet to hear him whinging in Trafalger Square. He is Scottish and visits Scotland at times unlike the others. Geldorf would do well to spend time on his paternal duties rather than trying to tell us how to live.
There is nil "danger of future terrorist violence from aggrieved extreme nationalists", IMO, because they are simply too lazy. They want independence because they imagine there'll be free money, meaning less work. They want to get into the EU because the EU gives poor countries free money.
To imagine that these kind of idle tightwad riff raff would ever spend any of their benefits on buying diesel, sugar and fertiliser to make bombs is to misapprehend their motives.
Blimey, you don't often see politicians lying quite as brazenly as this. Normally they make at least a token effort to fudge the question so as not to have to lie outright:
Asked whether an independent Scotland would have to pay more to borrow money, the first minister replies: "No, you have to have sustainable level of borrowing and debt. As far as the cost is concerned, we'll be borrowing at Sterling rates."
I think the issue here is that Salmond really does believe that iScot would borrow at the same rate as rUK. In his mind it is not a lie.
Sure great experts like you will know otherwise. Chickens on here clucking do not set rates that an independent Scotland would borrow at. The amount of bullshit on here would fill the Grand Canyon
Look at the cast of characters that supported the Ukrainian disaster I would say Putin's role in Syria and Iran in negotiating peaceful outcomes was a prime motivator. Have you ever seen Russia Today's coverage of the occupation of Palestine?
"Actually.....the polling evidence is that the majority think he shouldn't resign....."
Yes, that's true, but I think nevertheless that he would, and should. He'd be so wounded, politically and personally.
Btw, I noticed your interpretation of Marf's cartoon yesterday and agreed with it. I have since had the opportunity to speak to the cartoonist and she confirms that it was correct, although it was deliberately left open to more than one possible interpretation.
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!”
What did you expect? Thousands of Londoners to catch an evening flight to Edinburgh on a Monday night?
This was a rally by the rest of the UK to show Scottish residents that we respect it's their decision either way, but there are thousands of us who do care and wish to express our hope that Scotland decides to stay. Because we'd all be much worse off without them.
I was there and can vouch for the fact that there were plenty of (disenfranchised) Scottish ex-patriots, as were two of the speakers. Geldof was great (superb even) Dan Snow passionate and Al Murray more understated, but celebrity presence did guarantee full media coverage. Given it was organised at less than 3 days notice, it was a great success.
Of course, if you weren't truly bothered about it's impact, you wouldn't be trying to ridicule it. You'd just ignore it.
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.
I lurve the way malky automatically applies the BBC pronunciation - "Geldorf" - to the spelling of Bob Geldof's name.
Bawb Geldorf used to be a pawp star you know Malc. You little middle class public sector Michael Henchard, you.
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.
An entirely inappropriate series of calls for Sir Peter to have placed.
Businesses are private actors. They have the right to a view. Sir Peter is a public employee who should be neutral on a matter of his significance.
LOL, surprise surprise , old silver spoon thinks civil servants should be pressuring private companies to support silver spoon troughers
Am I the only one who is rather pis sed off at all the goodies being offered to 84% leftist Scotland to stay, when we haven't even been consulted on whether we agree with any of it?
If this is the price of UK's version of East Germany staying in the Union, I say they should just sod off and fail independently on their own dollar. Devo Max gives them everything they want including currency union, and it's my dollar.
In the wake of a Yes vote, Cameron should convene the House and announce an immediate cut in basic rate income tax, reflecting the ending of centuries of subsidy. It would be the English independence dividend.
Walk me through the UK's current account deficit with and without the oil money.
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?
On reflection I think Friday week would be more likely. Calling it at 24 hours' notice would simply lead to the place being half-empty, which wouldn't give the desired impression. The Labour conference only starts Sunday, but MPs will be all over the globe anyway (lots don't attend their party conferences). Friday week would give time to sort it out and arrange travel back and it would give everyone time to think what they actually wanted to say. If your partner declares they want to divorce you, it's unwise to call a meeting of the solicitors the very next day.
A (Scottish-born) constituent tells me that he's had serious-looking threats yesterday from nationalists on a blog and has been offered police protection as a result. He is admittedly a mirror-image malcolmg and I've no doubt that he expressed himself about Salmond in an inflammatory way, but still, it's not good. We need to have a result and get on with dealing with it.
The super rich are largely foreigners. This is just a pretext for a bit of leftist bile against middle income earners. Labour in power always accepts the super rich bribes and leaves them alone.
Comments
http://www.heraldscotland.com/comment/herald-view/once-in-a-lifetime-opportunity-to-cast-a-future-that-meets-the-aspirations-of-sc.25295912
Mr. G, don't Yes have Connery and Cumming [stop giggling] on-side?
I agree, though, that celebrities who aren't really politically involved shouldn't get their opinions taken seriously.
How do you guarantee the permanence of the Scottish Parliament by a fully sovereign Westminster Parliament that cannot bind it's successors? Surely that it a constitutional impossibility.
I note Cameron doesn't seem keen on an English parliament.
This is all a mess.
- One challenge against EV4EL is about distinguishing what legislation applies to certain areas, but surely the McKay Commission must have dealt with this in its proposal about English based MPs only voting at committee stage?
- On the issue of two types of MPs. Simply ensure that English based MPs become Members of the English Grand Committee (MEGPs) when sitting on English only issues. That way they become MPs on UK days. This may mean you split salaries for each role. If the UK role is less time consuming and paid less, then I have no big concern with MSPs seeking election as MPs either. I would even consider letting those non-English based MPs contribute to debates without voting on english laws (get more views etc) although this may blue the grand committee line. The committee is essentially the English Parliament without the new building and politicians.
- On executive functions. English based only MPs could be convention serve in cabinet roles for devolved areas. I am less fussy about junior ministers, but I guess they should come from he Grand Committee too.
- It should be the English Grand Commmitee that determines devolution within England.
- Big challenge then is the split majority situation. I think it will emerge less often (especially with possibly further reduction in non-English based MPs), but I think here a compromise is needed. The party with majority in UK should probably form the government, but of course have to win an English majority in the Grand Committee. A lost vote is now less significant with the fixed term Parliament act.
"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.”"
and......
“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!”
Made me LOL!
I'm up to Aberdeen later so I hope it isn't f**king freezing
Statement on NUJ web site as union call for stop to abuse of journalists for rest of #indyref
NUJ Scotland @NUJScotland 15h
Just for clarification- the journalists considering police action - not from BBC. Physical violence threats were against two pro-Yes members
Wether the indy/ref outcome is YES or NO Cameron is fatally wounded. Being seen as a PM and politician of very little political savvy - except where his own immediate survival is endangered. Well this time his F**K UP of endangering the nation is plain for all the nation to see. And this time his absolute panic is also plain to see. He won't be forgiven.
That, given the divisiveness of the campaign, many voters are simply agreeing with whoever is at the front door.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/11098132/British-hostage-Alan-Henning-kidnapped-half-an-hour-after-crossing-Syrian-border.html
The problem with the Conservative party is that it is a mass of contradictions. There are at least two forces, and at certain times the factions re-emerge.
A. Thatcher exemplified brilliantly, regardless of how you view her, the financial laissez-faire force. She was the girl made good: the grammar school success story who valued entrepreneurs and enterprise. She used sound common sense and knew the housewives' purse. Certainly in the early days she would never have been caught out about the price of bread. She was anti a lot of establishment, and especially rotten fusty establishment, and she ruthlessly put the sword to it.
B. Which brings us to the old fusty Tories: the omni-benevolent country squires. We all know their ilk, and their heirs, in the OE's and gentry. These are the Tories by class and who are, instinctively, conservative in a way that A simply aren't.
It isn't quite as simple as to say that A. are republican, separatist and ruthlessly opposed to federalism (and therefore less unionist) just as it isn't so simple to categorise B as more pro-Europe and strongly unionist, but there are tendencies in those directions.
And so back to Thatcher's assassination. In part the old guard, the B camp, stabbed her. The community charge aka. poll tax was the final straw in a long saga of measures that appeared to crush the very people she represented, and this was an affront to the old altruistic Tories (B), for whom Heseltine wielded the knife.
The two forces clash every so often like tectonic plates. Occasionally, as over Europe in Major's time, it produces an earthquake. If on Thursday Scotland votes 'Yes' I fear we're in for another shaking high up on the Richter scale.
Such a huge, irrevocable, decision about Scotland's future must be accompanied by a realistic assessment of the risks and problems associated with it, so as not inadvertently to condemn Scotland, and particularly the poorest members of our society, to a less prosperous and more unstable future. That, surely, is the responsibility of every one of us. Some will choose to opt for independence regardless, and we respect their decision, but it is our view that the case has not been proven beyond reasonable doubt.......
....But in promoting its manifesto for Scottish independence, a Panglossian emphasis on the best-case scenario has at times strained its credibility. On oil revenues, entering a currency union, achieving EU membership promptly and smoothly, securing affordable rates of interest for borrowing on the international markets and its capacity to withstand global economic currents, the case for independence has been built upon a string of ideal outcomes.
Even the other party in this great divorce, the Government at Westminster, would, it is assumed, act at all times during separation negotiations in accordance with the Scottish Government's wishes. The currency union is just one major hurdle.
This approach has inevitably produced a clamour of dissent. A formidable line-up of independent experts, including think tanks, academics, leading oil industry figures and the Governor of the Bank of England, has contested the reliability of these assumptions. Unfortunately, a tactical decision appears to have been made by Yes Scotland to portray most objections as contemptible negativity or the pessimism of the fearties. A sense of realism and healthy scepticism has been derided, especially in the latter stages of the campaign.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/comment/herald-view/once-in-a-lifetime-opportunity-to-cast-a-future-that-meets-the-aspirations-of-sc.25295912
The Prime Minister told Newsnight he had permitted the vote because he was a “democrat”, and said he had been “faced by a situation where one part of our United Kingdom voted for a Scottish National Party government who wanted a referendum.”
He also batted away calls for English devolution urged by some Tory MPs in the wake of a promise for more powers for Scotland, saying: ”I don’t think we’re remotely at that stage.”
..................
Well the Tory backbenchers won't like that last para, one bit and I don't think it will work this time. After all he batted away the Indy/ref for two years and look where its got him and the nation: up shits creek.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-09-15/scots-independence-is-risk-for-clean-energy-projects-bnef-says.html
However come Friday once its settled...
Labour 1/20 from 1/50
Still value IMO, other firms will surely not be so generous?
Be good and follow your good lady’s sage advice and hope to see you posting regularly soon.
Giles Watling@g15ssy·17m
Amazing afternoon canvassing in Bocking's Elm, #Clacton. Even had Labour voters pledging support on the doorstep for by-election. Wonderful.
Isabel Hardman (@IsabelHardman)
16/09/2014 08:19
The problems with that promise from Cameron, Clegg and Miliband specc.ie/YNNNTd #indyref pic.twitter.com/2wAHiekJEI
Paul_Henri_Cadier @PaulHenriCadier 1h
"Obama shoots EU in the Foot" as Russia reduces gas supplies as EU imposes sanctions #ColdEuropeanWinter #Hypothermia http://euobserver.com/foreign/125582
being a pro-EU Tory, you are not wrong!
Perhaps you'd like to tell us what you expect Cameron to actually do ?
Others may have wobbled but he is sticking to his prediction guns - touche !
Leaders of Parties That Promised An EU Referendum Vow:“We’re Politicians, Trust Us This Time" http://guyfawk.es/1yaiLEB pic.twitter.com/GTuT3lCNnD
Herald reporting comments by ICM boss re polling issues.
Soon there will only be one giant megabrewer..
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/retailandconsumer/leisure/11096496/SABMiller-shares-soar-as-markets-await-brewing-mega-deal.html
A (Scottish-born) constituent tells me that he's had serious-looking threats yesterday from nationalists on a blog and has been offered police protection as a result. He is admittedly a mirror-image malcolmg and I've no doubt that he expressed himself about Salmond in an inflammatory way, but still, it's not good. We need to have a result and get on with dealing with it.
I don't need it in law by 9.15 on Friday though.
Again - best politics to focus all on the Sindy until Thursday - Cam did that well. There is a reason he is PM.
"These aren't idle promises they'll be in place by January with cross party consent"
Businesses are private actors. They have the right to a view. Sir Peter is a public employee who should be neutral on a matter of his significance.
This was a rally by the rest of the UK to show Scottish residents that we respect it's their decision either way, but there are thousands of us who do care and wish to express our hope that Scotland decides to stay. Because we'd all be much worse off without them.
I was there and can vouch for the fact that there were plenty of (disenfranchised) Scottish ex-patriots, as were two of the speakers. Geldof was great (superb even) Dan Snow passionate and Al Murray more understated, but celebrity presence did guarantee full media coverage. Given it was organised at less than 3 days notice, it was a great success.
Of course, if you weren't truly bothered about it's impact, you wouldn't be trying to ridicule it. You'd just ignore it.
"Personally I favour ...... William Hague - yes he is retiring but could probably be persuaded to hold the fort until the next GE 56/1 (Betfair)"
Another missed hat tip?
Our politics are funded by these people in the main.
"The gap between the super rich and the rest of us is spiralling out of control, with Britain’s 1% grabbing more than their counterparts anywhere else in Europe"
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/sep/15/how-super-rich-got-richer-10-shocking-facts-inequality
@Martin1Williams: #AlexSalmond finally reveals what currency an independent Scotland will be having after the referendum http://t.co/MB61JVvhmT
The issue's salience arises in part because some in the No Campaign have been presenting the NHS as if it is a monolithic UK-wide organization, so that if Scotland leaves the UK it leaves the NHS behind (or so they seek to portray). (Which makes the approach suggested by Mr Chestnut, rational as it is in itself, and analogous recent statements, into a bit of a mixed message.)
Asked whether an independent Scotland would have to pay more to borrow money, the first minister replies: "No, you have to have sustainable level of borrowing and debt. As far as the cost is concerned, we'll be borrowing at Sterling rates."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-29213416
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PjC6UhAM16Y
RPI down 0.1% to 2.4%
Should the Indy result indeed finish 60:40 in favour of No, we should all bow before you, recognising your great wisdom.
If this is the price of UK's version of East Germany staying in the Union, I say they should just sod off and fail independently on their own dollar. Devo Max gives them everything they want including currency union, and it's my dollar.
In the wake of a Yes vote, Cameron should convene the House and announce an immediate cut in basic rate income tax, reflecting the ending of centuries of subsidy. It would be the English independence dividend.
Not sure if he has taken that back yet, seems to have gone silent on the subject so maybe a tacit climb down rather than an overt one.
That’s not to say Farage isn’t an idiot!
To imagine that these kind of idle tightwad riff raff would ever spend any of their benefits on buying diesel, sugar and fertiliser to make bombs is to misapprehend their motives.
Income inequality rose more under the previous (Thatcher/Major) Conservative government than it did under the Labour (Blair/Brown) administration.
"Actually.....the polling evidence is that the majority think he shouldn't resign....."
Yes, that's true, but I think nevertheless that he would, and should. He'd be so wounded, politically and personally.
Btw, I noticed your interpretation of Marf's cartoon yesterday and agreed with it. I have since had the opportunity to speak to the cartoonist and she confirms that it was correct, although it was deliberately left open to more than one possible interpretation.
Bawb Geldorf used to be a pawp star you know Malc. You little middle class public sector Michael Henchard, you.