Are @malcolmg / @stuartdickson or any other nationalists about? I'd love to get your perspective on which council area will have the highest yes vote %. We've now got 4 bookies who have priced this up;
Personally, I'm far from convinced that Dundee will be as *yes* as the media portray. I just don't think the odds should be as low as they are..
Anyway, last night I had a quick go at this, trying to identify the value in the odds - I compared the 32 council areas for 1997 referendum (tax powers) %, 2012 Tory vote, 2012 SNP vote and SIMD (deprivation by council area). I also did a crude ajustment for rural/urban - slightly favouing yes for the towns and no for the fields. The guardian map for yes% support, based on polling data is also interesting, but unfortunately not that useful.
The outstanding value bet, IMO is Clackmannanshire, available at 8/1 with William Hill (5/1 elsewhere).
My other long odds punts are;
North Lanarkshire @ 50/1 BFSB West Dumbartonshire @ 33/1 PP/BFSB East Ayrshire @ 25/1 WH
Am I missing anything, or are these all decent bets?
I tend to agree, Dundee is likely winner but far too short a price. Your 8-1 would be my bet , the others are all Labour areas and so if as expected their supporters are moving in droves as they become more and more Tory , could be some good outsiders there. Think N Lanarkshire is worst one though. Lots of labour areas around Glasgow could go to YES in big way. Have been surprised at Motherwell recently so even North Lanarkshire could be possible. What price is South lanarkshire it could be a possible.
66/1 Betfair Sportsbook
Surprised given some of the areas but it does have a fair bit of rural in it and the fields tend to be NO. Hamilton which is fair bit of it will be YES though.
We're approaching dodo shoot levels of self-interest.
I'm looking forward to labour going to the country with a policy of denying the English what they are only too happy to give the Scots....
This is getting very silly really. The Establishment has panicked at the thought of the Scots floating off with the Salmond Pied Piper act (even if he does lead them over a cliff) , and are making it up as they go along. Gordon, risen like the political undead, is wandering the Caledonian Central Belt with his shopping list to tick off, the Lib Dems want anything that slices the country up into small enough bits so they can polka dot the odd area with yellow whilst being in a blue or red sea elsewhere, and Cameron who has been tactically inept and has been caught playing with referendum matches near Labour's devolution bonfire clearly hasn't given much thought to what on earth to do about England, he just wants to get to Friday lunchtime in one piece. Then up pops Peter Hain jabbering on about the break up of the UK (well I didn't hear much talk of that from the member for Neath when Wales' referendum was won by all of 1% in 1999 did I Peter?)
It really really is disappointing that we are being led like this all round. Oddly a Yes resolves much of this constitutionally whilst opening up a Pandora's box of other nasties. A No puts the lid on many things (at present) but might lead us to cobbling together far reaching change at a gallop all in time for Christmas. Gawd help us.
We're clearly better off without the entire political class, Farage and Salmond included.
Are @malcolmg / @stuartdickson or any other nationalists about? I'd love to get your perspective on which council area will have the highest yes vote %. We've now got 4 bookies who have priced this up;
Personally, I'm far from convinced that Dundee will be as *yes* as the media portray. I just don't think the odds should be as low as they are..
Anyway, last night I had a quick go at this, trying to identify the value in the odds - I compared the 32 council areas for 1997 referendum (tax powers) %, 2012 Tory vote, 2012 SNP vote and SIMD (deprivation by council area). I also did a crude ajustment for rural/urban - slightly favouing yes for the towns and no for the fields. The guardian map for yes% support, based on polling data is also interesting, but unfortunately not that useful.
The outstanding value bet, IMO is Clackmannanshire, available at 8/1 with William Hill (5/1 elsewhere).
My other long odds punts are;
North Lanarkshire @ 50/1 BFSB West Dumbartonshire @ 33/1 PP/BFSB East Ayrshire @ 25/1 WH
Am I missing anything, or are these all decent bets?
I have been struck by the number of moderate English-domiciled posters on here who have expressed a hope for a Yes vote. We are of course a small and self-selecting community yet I would not be surprised if the feelings expressed here are not those more widely held in England. Cameron, with his silly "Vow" and "Home Rule Bill" may be misreading the state of play in England very badly.
I'm giving the benefit of the doubt until we see the proposals and what it gives to England. EV4EL (or something of equivalent level) has to be on the table.
If Cameron fails at this, then UKIP will simply say: how can Cameron claim he will stand up to the EU when he cannot even stand up to Scotland?
Afternoon all and Andy can you pl give a link to your predictions? If Shetland is going YES, don't fancy the chances for UK plc.
If Scotland votes NO I don't think the promise from Dave, Ed and Nick will be worth the toilet paper it has been printed on, judging by comments I have heard from both Tory and Labour MPs in England on the box this morning.
Why is the Labour leadership still talking to rooms full of Labour party activists? They should be out on the streets if they seriously want to save the union.
This isn't my final prediction. I'll be taking tomorrow's polls into account.
Thanks Andy, much appreciated. I think you have a fair number in the NO camp which will be clear wins for YES. Glasgow and Highland are 2 such councils.
Moderator trigger warning.Ukip showing their true colours,Absolutely vile.
What is vile is the labour championed political correctness, that directly led to the abuse
Think you've sneaked past this scandal mate? think again.
Getting angry with people who are angry about their failings just shows how they haven't learned anything, and probably won't. Read Shaun Wrights resignation letter, not an ounce of regret for his failings, just regret that he is in the the shit
One reputation which will be on the line on Thursday which hasn't been discussed is that of Prof John Curtice. I know Mike thinks he is the bees knees but many of us think he talks keech as he rarely sees beyond his Labour Party-tinted glasses. He has been refusing to say anything other than NO will win.
One reputation which will be on the line on Thursday which hasn't been discussed is that of Prof John Curtice. I know Mike thinks he is the bees knees but many of us think he talks keech as he rarely sees beyond his Labour Party-tinted glasses. He has been refusing to say anything other than NO will win.
I have been struck by the number of moderate English-domiciled posters on here who have expressed a hope for a Yes vote. We are of course a small and self-selecting community yet I would not be surprised if the feelings expressed here are not those more widely held in England. Cameron, with his silly "Vow" and "Home Rule Bill" may be misreading the state of play in England very badly.
I'm giving the benefit of the doubt until we see the proposals and what it gives to England. EV4EL (or something of equivalent level) has to be on the table.
If Cameron fails at this, then UKIP will simply say: how can Cameron claim he will stand up to the EU when he cannot even stand up to Scotland?
But let's wait and see what is offered.
We do not really have much option other than to wait and see, it is not as if we can do anything about it. However, when I go to the local town tomorrow I shall stop at the bookies and see if I can get some more money on the Conservatives getting thumped next May and what odds they will give me on UKIP winning 10 plus seats.
"Getting angry with people who are angry about their failings just shows how they haven't learned anything, and probably won't."
To be fair to the Labour party, some of them are very well aware of the failings and have admitted them. Of course, they will probably have no future in the party as a result, but don't tar them all with the same brush.
"South Yorkshire's Police and Crime Commissioner Shaun Wright has resigned over the Rotherham child abuse scandal.
Mr Wright faced repeated calls to step down in the wake of a report which found at least 1,400 children were abused in the town from 1997 to 2013."
What price the first UKIP PCC in the by-election? Somehow I suspect turnout may be better than in the West Midlands.
I think this one is UKIP's to lose.
Alternative for Germany just made huge gains in the German state elections on a law & order platform. Meanwhile UKIP get around 25% of the public saying they have the best policies on Europe and immigration, but just 5% say they do on crime and antisocial behaviour. UKIP are missing a serious trick here: it's an issue they can hammer the other three parties on, and would unite the rural ex-Tory and WWC ex-Labour parts of the party.
Norman Smith on the BBC news has just said it is now Gordon Brown who is in charge of the NO campaign in order to try and stem the flood of Scottish Labour voters to the YES camp. So those of you who think NO will win, remember Jonah Brown's track record!
Like fighting the Tories to a near-draw after 13 years in power and a gigantic global economic crisis? Yes, OK, we'll keep that in mind. In return, if No wins, I'm sure you'll be congratulating him?
Norman Smith on the BBC news has just said it is now Gordon Brown who is in charge of the NO campaign in order to try and stem the flood of Scottish Labour voters to the YES camp. So those of you who think NO will win, remember Jonah Brown's track record!
Like fighting the Tories to a near-draw after 13 years in power and a gigantic global economic crisis? Yes, OK, we'll keep that in mind. In return, if No wins, I'm sure you'll be congratulating him?
52.5-47.5 for No is my guess.
It was the Lib Dems that denied the Tories a majority, not Labour.
Hollande at another popularity record low at 13%, down another 3 points from last month. Also to add salt to Hollande's wounds, his government is facing a no confidence vote in the national assembly today (chances 55/45 he wins the vote).
I take it punters aren't buying the supposed data from the leaked Labour canvas returns showing No ahead by 57/43 in Dundee, 64/36 in Glasgow, and 70/30 in Aberdeen:
If that were true, NO would win by a landslide. But canvass returns are a self selecting sample, subject to confirmation bias, doorstep smoke & mirrors and therefore, usually, utterly unreliable.
"I'm convinced not only that we will prevail, but that out of the horror of combat will come the recognition that no nation can stand against a world united. No nation will be permitted to brutally assault its neighbour." - 1991
"Because we're acting today, it is less likely that we will face these dangers in the future." - 1998
I take it punters aren't buying the supposed data from the leaked Labour canvas returns showing No ahead by 57/43 in Dundee, 64/36 in Glasgow, and 70/30 in Aberdeen:
All canvass returns should be taken with a pillar of salt, they are released to motivate the activists and demoralise the opposition. Often they are bollocks.
HOWEVER the unexpectedly high figure for NO does tally with info I'm getting from other sources.
Still think it will be tight, still think NO will edge it. The NHS whistleblower thing is a nicely timed maneuver from NO.
They are utter utter bollocks. The NHS crap on efficiency whilst we have a real time increased budget recently passed by parliament shows how desperate NO are. Much more telling than the fake canvas data. Even Brillo today coudl not champion NO as being bouyant.
Apparently (can't find it online) the Dundee Courier came out for 'No', as did the Herald....I fear more discombobulation awaits!
Yes the mighty Courier had a clear editorial yesterday which stated that the case for independence was not made out and that there were too many unanswered questions. (They also said that the BT campaign had been a bit rubbish).
I agree with Mike on this one but for different reasons. I have been very suspicious on weighting applied to polling based on previous voting, particularly the 2011 result. As I understand it Ipsos Mori weight by age and social class which should produce more accurate results in a one off like this. They are less likely (on this basis) to be caught out by the incredible wave of new voters registered for this poll because they are already reflected in the census etc and should have been weighted accordingly.
Norman Smith on the BBC news has just said it is now Gordon Brown who is in charge of the NO campaign in order to try and stem the flood of Scottish Labour voters to the YES camp. So those of you who think NO will win, remember Jonah Brown's track record!
Like fighting the Tories to a near-draw after 13 years in power and a gigantic global economic crisis? Yes, OK, we'll keep that in mind. In return, if No wins, I'm sure you'll be congratulating him?
52.5-47.5 for No is my guess.
It was the Lib Dems that denied the Tories a majority, not Labour.
My first chance to comment for a few days and I'm NOT going to talk about Scotland (well, not directly).
Those talking about devolution In England should be aware that a re-ordering of structures is already happening from the bottom up as Councils collaborate across services.
I won't name the County Councilc concerned but here's an example using Councils A, B and C.
Council A runs the payroll for Councils B and C Council B provides property maintenance, advice and design services for Councils A and C. Council C provides Procurement and Legal Services for Councils A and B.
Councils A and B share a Head of Property Councils B and C share a Head of Procurement
One Call Centre (albeit with three different numbers) provides the first point of contact for all residents of Councils A, B and C
How many Councils are there - one, two or three ? This is being driven by Officers and some Cabinet Members yet there are still 250 Councillors in all. How long before that looks excessive ?
Yet this Council(s) still can't set its own Council Tax, Business Rates or take its own planning/housing decisions. The era of absurd Wgitehall/Westminster centralisation needs to come to an end but the solution isn't Regional Assemblies - rather, we use the Authorities that are already there and allow them to work together.
'We are of course a small and self-selecting community yet I would not be surprised if the feelings expressed here are not those more widely held in England. Cameron, with his silly "Vow" and "Home Rule Bill" may be misreading the state of play in England very badly.'
How can you claim that when the full proposal / details have not yet been thought through yet,let alone published?
You really believe that any proposal that didn't fully address the WLQ ,reduction of Scottish MP'S etc. would ever get voted through by Tory MP's ?
"South Yorkshire's Police and Crime Commissioner Shaun Wright has resigned over the Rotherham child abuse scandal.
Mr Wright faced repeated calls to step down in the wake of a report which found at least 1,400 children were abused in the town from 1997 to 2013."
What price the first UKIP PCC in the by-election? Somehow I suspect turnout may be better than in the West Midlands.
I think this one is UKIP's to lose.
Alternative for Germany just made huge gains in the German state elections on a law & order platform. Meanwhile UKIP get around 25% of the public saying they have the best policies on Europe and immigration, but just 5% say they do on crime and antisocial behaviour. UKIP are missing a serious trick here: it's an issue they can hammer the other three parties on, and would unite the rural ex-Tory and WWC ex-Labour parts of the party.
Mr. Socrates, I agree that there is a big link between the rural (and small town) ex-Conservative voter and the urban WWC and UKIP need to exploit this as no other party seems to give a toss about either group. However, getting sensible policies on crime and antisocial behaviour is not something to be rushed.
A start could of course be made by looking again at the "Honest Sentences" the Conservatives were keen on in opposition but seemed to drop immediately they took power. Fleshing out the role of the police and crime commissioners might be another fruitful area.
'We are of course a small and self-selecting community yet I would not be surprised if the feelings expressed here are not those more widely held in England. Cameron, with his silly "Vow" and "Home Rule Bill" may be misreading the state of play in England very badly.'
How can you claim that when the full proposal / details have not yet been thought through yet,let alone published?
You really believe that any proposal that didn't fully address the WLQ ,reduction of Scottish MP'S etc. would ever get voted through by Tory MP's ?
Given they don't have a majority, would they have a choice?
Also to add salt to Hollande's wounds, his government is facing a no confidence vote in the national assembly today (chances 55/45 he wins the vote).
I cant imagine the Socialist rebels would actually pull the Government down though. They'd get slaughtered in the elections. Another geopolitical risk the markets didnt see coming
"South Yorkshire's Police and Crime Commissioner Shaun Wright has resigned over the Rotherham child abuse scandal.
Mr Wright faced repeated calls to step down in the wake of a report which found at least 1,400 children were abused in the town from 1997 to 2013."
What price the first UKIP PCC in the by-election? Somehow I suspect turnout may be better than in the West Midlands.
I think this one is UKIP's to lose.
Alternative for Germany just made huge gains in the German state elections on a law & order platform. Meanwhile UKIP get around 25% of the public saying they have the best policies on Europe and immigration, but just 5% say they do on crime and antisocial behaviour. UKIP are missing a serious trick here: it's an issue they can hammer the other three parties on, and would unite the rural ex-Tory and WWC ex-Labour parts of the party.
Mr. Socrates, I agree that there is a big link between the rural (and small town) ex-Conservative voter and the urban WWC and UKIP need to exploit this as no other party seems to give a toss about either group. However, getting sensible policies on crime and antisocial behaviour is not something to be rushed.
A start could of course be made by looking again at the "Honest Sentences" the Conservatives were keen on in opposition but seemed to drop immediately they took power. Fleshing out the role of the police and crime commissioners might be another fruitful area.
There's some common sense things that could be brought in: (1) abolition of concurrent sentences, (2) minimum sentences (3) increasing the sentence for child rape aggravated by violence to 50 years.
Norman Smith on the BBC news has just said it is now Gordon Brown who is in charge of the NO campaign in order to try and stem the flood of Scottish Labour voters to the YES camp. So those of you who think NO will win, remember Jonah Brown's track record!
Like fighting the Tories to a near-draw after 13 years in power and a gigantic global economic crisis? Yes, OK, we'll keep that in mind. In return, if No wins, I'm sure you'll be congratulating him?
52.5-47.5 for No is my guess.
It was the Lib Dems that denied the Tories a majority, not Labour.
They both did, but Labour beat the LibDems.
Wasn't it the Tories who denied Labour a majority ;-)
Norman Smith on the BBC news has just said it is now Gordon Brown who is in charge of the NO campaign in order to try and stem the flood of Scottish Labour voters to the YES camp. So those of you who think NO will win, remember Jonah Brown's track record!
Like fighting the Tories to a near-draw after 13 years in power and a gigantic global economic crisis? Yes, OK, we'll keep that in mind. In return, if No wins, I'm sure you'll be congratulating him?
52.5-47.5 for No is my guess.
It was the Lib Dems that denied the Tories a majority, not Labour.
They both did, but Labour beat the LibDems.
We could debate all afternoon: (1) the Tories shot themselves in the foot - repeatedly - from January onwards, (2) Peter Mandelson rapidly professionalised the Labour campaign and saved them 20 seats.
It could have been worse. There were lots of hyper marginals that the Tories won by the skin of their teeth. Had the effects of (1) and (2) been more pronounced, the Tories might have topped out at 290 seats and we'd have had a Lib-Lab coalition with an absolute majority, albeit a small one.
'We are of course a small and self-selecting community yet I would not be surprised if the feelings expressed here are not those more widely held in England. Cameron, with his silly "Vow" and "Home Rule Bill" may be misreading the state of play in England very badly.'
How can you claim that when the full proposal / details have not yet been thought through yet,let alone published?
You really believe that any proposal that didn't fully address the WLQ ,reduction of Scottish MP'S etc. would ever get voted through by Tory MP's ?
Mr. Zims, I made no claim. I merely expressed a concern. The full details of the "Home Rule Bill " may not have been thought through but it would seem Cameron has signed up them, else he would not have made his "Vow". That fact that he can vow to introduce something he hasn't actually thought through might make an honest person question his integrity (or for that matter his sanity) but I leave that for you.
To your substantive question, " You really believe that any proposal that didn't fully address the WLQ ,reduction of Scottish MP'S etc. would ever get voted through by Tory MP's ?" I have to answer, "Yes". Oh, to be sure there will be a few rebels, but Labour and Lib Dem votes will see the measure through.
One reputation which will be on the line on Thursday which hasn't been discussed is that of Prof John Curtice. I know Mike thinks he is the bees knees but many of us think he talks keech as he rarely sees beyond his Labour Party-tinted glasses. He has been refusing to say anything other than NO will win.
He has been very poor indeed
What better endorsement could there be Malcolm than your opposition.
A bizarre comment in the previous thread from Charles (although I'm not sure whether he actually agrees with the idea, opposes the idea or was merely repeating something which Hopi Sen had written):
"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."
Does Germany have such a zone along the border with Austria ?
(snip)
etc, etc, etc including
Does the UK have such a zone along the border with the Irish Republic ?
The crap the anti-English bigots are reduced to spouting gets more desperate by the day.
It was Hopi's comment, but I thought it was interesting. Your examples aren't relevant because this is talking about the problem of devolution *within* a UK. It is more of a hassle for companies to relocate across international borders.
The issue comes down to the fact that England is 85% of FUK (including Scotland). We need to think through carefully exactly how the balance of power should work. It clearly doesn't work right now, but I'm not convinced that just devolving the same power to England as Scotland has would work either.
Those talking about devolution In England should be aware that a re-ordering of structures is already happening from the bottom up as Councils collaborate across services.
I won't name the County Councilc concerned but here's an example using Councils A, B and C...
All very interesting stodge, but why not name the County Councils involved?
"They should be out on the streets if they seriously want to save the union."
Maybe they don't seriously want to save the Union. I remember a post from you on here several years ago in which you said that the Union would go when the English had had enough of it and told the Scots to sod off. Maybe what you are complaining about is just a manifestation of that sentiment. "We will go through the motions, people, and hope to buggery they vote Yes".
I have been struck by the number of moderate English-domiciled posters on here who have expressed a hope for a Yes vote. We are of course a small and self-selecting community yet I would not be surprised if the feelings expressed here are not those more widely held in England. Cameron, with his silly "Vow" and "Home Rule Bill" may be misreading the state of play in England very badly.
Had an interesting chat with my taxi driver yesterday (driving past @SeanT in Trafalgar Sq).
He asked what the demo was about - hadn't been following the debate at all. His instinctive reaction was that he didn't really care if they left but that it was probably a good thing.
Hopi Sen is a die hard leftie. And like all the others is desperate to ensure England never exists - despite the fact that it does.
Eff off. Don't tell me what I think.
England still exists despite being divided into dozens of counties.
England can survive a sensible sub-division into Wessex, Mercia, Yorkshire, etc, for the purposes of creating a Federal UK with balanced devolution.
An English Parliament, or English Votes for English Laws, is merely a stepping stone to English independence. A Federal UK simply won't survive the power imbalance English devolution would create.
Those talking about devolution In England should be aware that a re-ordering of structures is already happening from the bottom up as Councils collaborate across services.
I won't name the County Councilc concerned but here's an example using Councils A, B and C...
All very interesting stodge, but why not name the County Councils involved?
A bizarre comment in the previous thread from Charles (although I'm not sure whether he actually agrees with the idea, opposes the idea or was merely repeating something which Hopi Sen had written):
"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."
Does Germany have such a zone along the border with Austria ?
(snip)
etc, etc, etc including
Does the UK have such a zone along the border with the Irish Republic ?
The crap the anti-English bigots are reduced to spouting gets more desperate by the day.
It was Hopi's comment, but I thought it was interesting. Your examples aren't relevant because this is talking about the problem of devolution *within* a UK. It is more of a hassle for companies to relocate across international borders.
The issue comes down to the fact that England is 85% of FUK (including Scotland). We need to think through carefully exactly how the balance of power should work. It clearly doesn't work right now, but I'm not convinced that just devolving the same power to England as Scotland has would work either.
(and I'm neither anti-English, nor a bigot)
I don't see the issue. Tax competition is a good thing.
Norman Smith on the BBC news has just said it is now Gordon Brown who is in charge of the NO campaign in order to try and stem the flood of Scottish Labour voters to the YES camp. So those of you who think NO will win, remember Jonah Brown's track record!
Like fighting the Tories to a near-draw after 13 years in power and a gigantic global economic crisis? Yes, OK, we'll keep that in mind. In return, if No wins, I'm sure you'll be congratulating him?
Norman Smith on the BBC news has just said it is now Gordon Brown who is in charge of the NO campaign in order to try and stem the flood of Scottish Labour voters to the YES camp. So those of you who think NO will win, remember Jonah Brown's track record!
Like fighting the Tories to a near-draw after 13 years in power and a gigantic global economic crisis? Yes, OK, we'll keep that in mind. In return, if No wins, I'm sure you'll be congratulating him?
52.5-47.5 for No is my guess.
A near draw??????????????????????????????????
Think of it like Spurs nearly qualifying for the Champions League...
Norman Smith on the BBC news has just said it is now Gordon Brown who is in charge of the NO campaign in order to try and stem the flood of Scottish Labour voters to the YES camp. So those of you who think NO will win, remember Jonah Brown's track record!
Like fighting the Tories to a near-draw after 13 years in power and a gigantic global economic crisis? Yes, OK, we'll keep that in mind. In return, if No wins, I'm sure you'll be congratulating him?
52.5-47.5 for No is my guess.
A near draw??????????????????????????????????
Think of it like Spurs nearly qualifying for the Champions League...
On a happy note, my US shares are now worth £111,000 which is a gain of about £7,000 in just over a week. Some of it is price appreciation but most is the £ sliding. Nice feeling.
Never mind all this Devo-Max/Vow nonsense. Given the ludicrous way the political class is behaving at the moment we'd be better off with the Belgian option i.e. no government for a year or more.
On Scotland their policy is panicked faffing about and promising the sun, moon and earth to whoever happens to be around at the moment.
On foreign policy, they're doing nothing other than saying stern things and hoping to b*ggery that nothing ghastly happens on our shores. We have to hope the intelligence and police services are doing their job.
A bit of old-fashioned competence and thinking before speaking would be welcome.
Hopi Sen is a die hard leftie. And like all the others is desperate to ensure England never exists - despite the fact that it does.
As a leftie, Mr P, I am not “desperate" to ensure England doesn’t exist. It does, and there’s clearly a very great deal of loyalty to it. Indeed, as far as this “leftie” is concerned, there’s a great deal to be proud of in England, and in GB. Whether everything’s as good as it possibly could be, and what we do to move towards that, and indeed what that Nirvana consists of, are entirely different questions.
Those talking about devolution In England should be aware that a re-ordering of structures is already happening from the bottom up as Councils collaborate across services.
I won't name the County Councilc concerned but here's an example using Councils A, B and C...
All very interesting stodge, but why not name the County Councils involved?
They are all Conservative-controlled County Councils in the south-east but not East Anglia.
Hopi Sen is a die hard leftie. And like all the others is desperate to ensure England never exists - despite the fact that it does.
Eff off. Don't tell me what I think.
England still exists despite being divided into dozens of counties.
England can survive a sensible sub-division into Wessex, Mercia, Yorkshire, etc, for the purposes of creating a Federal UK with balanced devolution.
An English Parliament, or English Votes for English Laws, is merely a stepping stone to English independence. A Federal UK simply won't survive the power imbalance English devolution would create.
How come it's only England that gets carved up? Scotland is almost three times the population of Northern Ireland. Why don't you support carving that country in two? For "balanced devolution", of course.
Hopi Sen is a die hard leftie. And like all the others is desperate to ensure England never exists - despite the fact that it does.
Eff off. Don't tell me what I think.
England still exists despite being divided into dozens of counties.
England can survive a sensible sub-division into Wessex, Mercia, Yorkshire, etc, for the purposes of creating a Federal UK with balanced devolution.
An English Parliament, or English Votes for English Laws, is merely a stepping stone to English independence. A Federal UK simply won't survive the power imbalance English devolution would create.
Yet another lefty who wants to Balkanise England. May I cordially invite you to eff off in return. If the choice is England gets shafted forever to maintain an otherwise unworkable union or the union splits because England is too big - well that's a no brainer! (Because both choices ultimately lead to English self rule). Blame Blair.
Norman Smith on the BBC news has just said it is now Gordon Brown who is in charge of the NO campaign in order to try and stem the flood of Scottish Labour voters to the YES camp. So those of you who think NO will win, remember Jonah Brown's track record!
Like fighting the Tories to a near-draw after 13 years in power and a gigantic global economic crisis? Yes, OK, we'll keep that in mind. In return, if No wins, I'm sure you'll be congratulating him?
52.5-47.5 for No is my guess.
A near draw??????????????????????????????????
Think of it like Spurs nearly qualifying for the Champions League...
When I say thank you, I of course mean you utter [moderated and immediately banned for 4 months]
Norman Smith on the BBC news has just said it is now Gordon Brown who is in charge of the NO campaign in order to try and stem the flood of Scottish Labour voters to the YES camp. So those of you who think NO will win, remember Jonah Brown's track record!
Like fighting the Tories to a near-draw after 13 years in power and a gigantic global economic crisis? Yes, OK, we'll keep that in mind. In return, if No wins, I'm sure you'll be congratulating him?
52.5-47.5 for No is my guess.
A near draw??????????????????????????????????
Think of it like Spurs nearly qualifying for the Champions League...
When I say thank you, I of course mean you utter [moderated and immediately banned for 4 months]
"South Yorkshire's Police and Crime Commissioner Shaun Wright has resigned over the Rotherham child abuse scandal.
Mr Wright faced repeated calls to step down in the wake of a report which found at least 1,400 children were abused in the town from 1997 to 2013."
What price the first UKIP PCC in the by-election? Somehow I suspect turnout may be better than in the West Midlands.
I think this one is UKIP's to lose.
Alternative for Germany just made huge gains in the German state elections on a law & order platform. Meanwhile UKIP get around 25% of the public saying they have the best policies on Europe and immigration, but just 5% say they do on crime and antisocial behaviour. UKIP are missing a serious trick here: it's an issue they can hammer the other three parties on, and would unite the rural ex-Tory and WWC ex-Labour parts of the party.
Mr. Socrates, I agree that there is a big link between the rural (and small town) ex-Conservative voter and the urban WWC and UKIP need to exploit this as no other party seems to give a toss about either group. However, getting sensible policies on crime and antisocial behaviour is not something to be rushed.
A start could of course be made by looking again at the "Honest Sentences" the Conservatives were keen on in opposition but seemed to drop immediately they took power. Fleshing out the role of the police and crime commissioners might be another fruitful area.
There's some common sense things that could be brought in: (1) abolition of concurrent sentences, (2) minimum sentences (3) increasing the sentence for child rape aggravated by violence to 50 years.
Don't get me wrong Mr. S., I am not saying there are things that should not be done, only that if they are to be successful then sufficient thought has to be given to the long term consequences. Thinking such matter through might be better than rushing for some headline policies.
I should for example be very unhappy about minimum sentences for, say, domestic burglary. I think it better to leave the discretion in the hands of the judges. However, on the third separate conviction for such an offence, then clearly the judges have got it wrong with relation to the individual, all chances of rehabilitation outside of prison have failed, so bang him/her up for 20 years (and I mean 20 years). Word will get around.
Given that North Wales and South Wales are divided by unpopulated mountain ranges, a linguistic split, and a very different economic context, anyone supporting the breaking up of England for reasons of "sensible devolution" should surely support the breaking up of Wales. If they don't, we can tell pretty clearly that it's just a beef about England.
I think we should have a strikes system for any crime as serious as domestic burglary or beyond. Heck, make it five strikes rather than three to stop the bleeding heart brigade whining. If you've been convicted four times and are still committing crime, it's only right that you've forfeited chance of rehabilitation.
Given that North Wales and South Wales are divided by unpopulated mountain ranges, a linguistic split, and a very different economic context, anyone supporting the breaking up of England for reasons of "sensible devolution" should surely support the breaking up of Wales. If they don't, we can tell pretty clearly that it's just a beef about England.
No, it’s just because no-one’s got round to worrying about it!
Those talking about devolution In England should be aware that a re-ordering of structures is already happening from the bottom up as Councils collaborate across services.
I won't name the County Councilc concerned but here's an example using Councils A, B and C...
All very interesting stodge, but why not name the County Councils involved?
They are all Conservative-controlled County Councils in the south-east but not East Anglia.
I bet you're talking about Surrey and I'm trying to guess the identities of the various Councils!! One must be SCC but not mine nor Epsom and Ewell with whom we share head of IT!
But I couldn't agree more with the thrust of your earlier refutation of the grotesque notion of adding another layer of government. Encourage unitaries in two tier Counties, inject greater accountability into the LEPs, let Coucnils use 100% of Business rates, abolish rate capping (ie compulsory referendum if the Govt norm is exceeded) plus other reforms, and that should be sufficient.
As perhaps the only regular poster here (tpfkar sadly only makes periodid appearances these days) who is a Councillor, let me assure fellow peebees, the folk out there don't want any more of us!
Socrates, your North/South Wales point is a good example of why devolution within England should be based on people's sense of identity and attachment and not administrative tidiness.
Socrates, your North/South Wales point is a good example of why devolution within England should be based on people's sense of identity and attachment and not administrative tidiness.
Indeed. And people's strongest sense of identity is Englishness.
"South Yorkshire's Police and Crime Commissioner Shaun Wright has resigned over the Rotherham child abuse scandal.
Mr Wright faced repeated calls to step down in the wake of a report which found at least 1,400 children were abused in the town from 1997 to 2013."
What price the first UKIP PCC in the by-election? Somehow I suspect turnout may be better than in the West Midlands.
I think this one is UKIP's to lose.
Alternative for Germany just made huge gains in the German state elections on a law & order platform. Meanwhile UKIP get around 25% of the public saying they have the best policies on Europe and immigration, but just 5% say they do on crime and antisocial behaviour. UKIP are missing a serious trick here: it's an issue they can hammer the other three parties on, and would unite the rural ex-Tory and WWC ex-Labour parts of the party.
Mr. Socrates, I agree that there is a big link between the rural (and small town) ex-Conservative voter and the urban WWC and UKIP need to exploit this as no other party seems to give a toss about either group. However, getting sensible policies on crime and antisocial behaviour is not something to be rushed.
A start could of course be made by looking again at the "Honest Sentences" the Conservatives were keen on in opposition but seemed to drop immediately they took power. Fleshing out the role of the police and crime commissioners might be another fruitful area.
There's some common sense things that could be brought in: (1) abolition of concurrent sentences, (2) minimum sentences (3) increasing the sentence for child rape aggravated by violence to 50 years.
The problem with minimum sentences is that juries will often acquit if they think the mandatory is too high for a particular case. Judges will get called in front on the Lord Chancellor if their sentences depart from guidelines too often. Maybe we should tighten that up, rather than remove all discretion from them.
Socrates, your North/South Wales point is a good example of why devolution within England should be based on people's sense of identity and attachment and not administrative tidiness.
Any regionalisation / balkanisation of England is surely a matter for an English Parliament to determine.
Afternoon all and Andy can you pl give a link to your predictions? If Shetland is going YES, don't fancy the chances for UK plc.
If Scotland votes NO I don't think the promise from Dave, Ed and Nick will be worth the toilet paper it has been printed on, judging by comments I have heard from both Tory and Labour MPs in England on the box this morning.
Why is the Labour leadership still talking to rooms full of Labour party activists? They should be out on the streets if they seriously want to save the union.
This isn't my final prediction. I'll be taking tomorrow's polls into account.
Thanks Andy, much appreciated. I think you have a fair number in the NO camp which will be clear wins for YES. Glasgow and Highland are 2 such councils.
Those two are prime candidates to be moved into the Yes column if the 5 polls tomorrow night are good for them.
Socrates, your North/South Wales point is a good example of why devolution within England should be based on people's sense of identity and attachment and not administrative tidiness.
Indeed. And people's strongest sense of identity is Englishness.
For some, not others. But I am not against an EngParl as part of the solution. It's just not enough.
Politicians who obsess about constitutional matters suffer from a sort of political OCD - they think that by obsessively arranging and rearranging and rearranging some more the political furniture a Nirvana will be reached. It's bollocks. All it does is create chaos and noise and annoy those in the next room who'd like to get on with living without someone shouting incessantly about whether the wardrobe should go 3 inches to the left or right.
We have some serious issues to deal with in this country: IS and the prospect of terrorism from their supporters here, the failures of our police, councils and social services in relation to child abuse, for instance. Scotland going independent or not is not the most important issue and the sky will not fall in if it does. And whatever the outcome a period of thought and calm is needed to determine what to do next.
Instead of which we have Brown who managed to f*ck up pretty much everything he touched grandly announcing what the future constitutional arrangements of the UK are going to be, Labour desperate to get themselves out of the devolution hole they've created, Cameron falling into a panic (and, IMO, into a Labour trap) and the LibDems pretending that they matter. It's unedifying and unprofessional and not very grown up. And it comes from people who are, apparently, the best our education system can offer. Pah!!
Those talking about devolution In England should be aware that a re-ordering of structures is already happening from the bottom up as Councils collaborate across services.
I won't name the County Councilc concerned but here's an example using Councils A, B and C...
All very interesting stodge, but why not name the County Councils involved?
They are all Conservative-controlled County Councils in the south-east but not East Anglia.
I bet you're talking about Surrey and I'm trying to guess the identities of the various Councils!! One must be SCC but not mine nor Epsom and Ewell with whom we share head of IT!
But I couldn't agree more with the thrust of your earlier refutation of the grotesque notion of adding another layer of government. Encourage unitaries in two tier Counties, inject greater accountability into the LEPs, let Coucnils use 100% of Business rates, abolish rate capping (ie compulsory referendum if the Govt norm is exceeded) plus other reforms, and that should be sufficient.
As perhaps the only regular poster here (tpfkar sadly only makes periodid appearances these days) who is a Councillor, let me assure fellow peebees, the folk out there don't want any more of us!
The consequnce of Regional Governments must be the end of one of the lower tiers. I live in a town with a Parish Council. It’s often difficult to know who is responsible for what and on occasion even harder to find who is prepared to accept responsibility.
On a happy note, my US shares are now worth £111,000 which is a gain of about £7,000 in just over a week. Some of it is price appreciation but most is the £ sliding. Nice feeling.
Very nice, Mr. Bond. However, should you not also be concerned about how much those pounds can buy you? You may be seven grand up in a week, but so what does that actually mean in purchasing power, i.e. wealth.
I notice unleaded fuel at my local Tesco has gone up 3p a litre in the last week.
Hopi Sen is a die hard leftie. And like all the others is desperate to ensure England never exists - despite the fact that it does.
Eff off. Don't tell me what I think.
England still exists despite being divided into dozens of counties.
England can survive a sensible sub-division into Wessex, Mercia, Yorkshire, etc, for the purposes of creating a Federal UK with balanced devolution.
An English Parliament, or English Votes for English Laws, is merely a stepping stone to English independence. A Federal UK simply won't survive the power imbalance English devolution would create.
How come it's only England that gets carved up? Scotland is almost three times the population of Northern Ireland. Why don't you support carving that country in two? For "balanced devolution", of course.
Correct. A federal UK means in effect a unified UK with 'scotland' broken up into regions. The notion of breaking up the work of Alfred the Great and his sons just to satisfy a bunch of lefties is pathetic. England is England that was the country that Scotland unified with. The big mistake is the original devolution - and of course that was done by Labour for its own then self serving motives.
Norman Smith on the BBC news has just said it is now Gordon Brown who is in charge of the NO campaign in order to try and stem the flood of Scottish Labour voters to the YES camp. So those of you who think NO will win, remember Jonah Brown's track record!
Like fighting the Tories to a near-draw after 13 years in power and a gigantic global economic crisis? Yes, OK, we'll keep that in mind. In return, if No wins, I'm sure you'll be congratulating him?
52.5-47.5 for No is my guess.
A near draw??????????????????????????????????
Think of it like Spurs nearly qualifying for the Champions League...
When I say thank you, I of course mean you utter [moderated and immediately banned for 4 months]
It it possible to [bite someone over the internet]?
Those talking about devolution In England should be aware that a re-ordering of structures is already happening from the bottom up as Councils collaborate across services.
I won't name the County Councilc concerned but here's an example using Councils A, B and C...
All very interesting stodge, but why not name the County Councils involved?
They are all Conservative-controlled County Councils in the south-east but not East Anglia.
I bet you're talking about Surrey and I'm trying to guess the identities of the various Councils!! One must be SCC but not mine nor Epsom and Ewell with whom we share head of IT!
But I couldn't agree more with the thrust of your earlier refutation of the grotesque notion of adding another layer of government. Encourage unitaries in two tier Counties, inject greater accountability into the LEPs, let Coucnils use 100% of Business rates, abolish rate capping (ie compulsory referendum if the Govt norm is exceeded) plus other reforms, and that should be sufficient.
As perhaps the only regular poster here (tpfkar sadly only makes periodid appearances these days) who is a Councillor, let me assure fellow peebees, the folk out there don't want any more of us!
The consequnce of Regional Governments must be the end of one of the lower tiers. I live in a town with a Parish Council. It’s often difficult to know who is responsible for what and on occasion even harder to find who is prepared to accept responsibility.
Parish, district, county, regional, national and European government is certainly far too much.
It is worth remembering that one of the consequences of any x strikes system is that nobody would ever plead guilty to the xth offence. This would have two consequences : the legal system would become slower and more expensive (especially as we would end up with jury rather than magistrate trials) and there would be lots of creative efforts by the police and the cps to subvert the system. (plead guilty to some different offence to avoid getting your xth offence in a category... Which the police would encourage because losing a policeman for two days for a jury trial is incredibly expensive)
Hopi Sen is a die hard leftie. And like all the others is desperate to ensure England never exists - despite the fact that it does.
Eff off. Don't tell me what I think.
England still exists despite being divided into dozens of counties.
England can survive a sensible sub-division into Wessex, Mercia, Yorkshire, etc, for the purposes of creating a Federal UK with balanced devolution.
An English Parliament, or English Votes for English Laws, is merely a stepping stone to English independence. A Federal UK simply won't survive the power imbalance English devolution would create.
How come it's only England that gets carved up? Scotland is almost three times the population of Northern Ireland. Why don't you support carving that country in two? For "balanced devolution", of course.
Correct. A federal UK means in effect a unified UK with 'scotland' broken up into regions. The notion of breaking up the work of Alfred the Great and his sons just to satisfy a bunch of lefties is pathetic. England is England that was the country that Scotland unified with. The big mistake is the original devolution - and of course that was done by Labour for its own then self serving motives.
And their current proposals are equally self-serving. Why Cameron is going along with them I don't know.
I have no liking for Salmond but the BT campaign has been woeful and insulting and I see no good reason why the rest of us should beg the Scots to stay. We should have a little more self-respect and we should respect the Scots' right to make the decision for themselves, even if it does them make them poorer.
"South Yorkshire's Police and Crime Commissioner Shaun Wright has resigned over the Rotherham child abuse scandal.
Mr Wright faced repeated calls to step down in the wake of a report which found at least 1,400 children were abused in the town from 1997 to 2013."
What price the first UKIP PCC in the by-election? Somehow I suspect turnout may be better than in the West Midlands.
I think this one is UKIP's to lose.
Alternative for Germany just made huge gains in the German state elections on a law & order platform. Meanwhile UKIP get around 25% of the public saying they have the best policies on Europe and immigration, but just 5% say they do on crime and antisocial behaviour. UKIP are missing a serious trick here: it's an issue they can hammer the other three parties on, and would unite the rural ex-Tory and WWC ex-Labour parts of the party.
Mr. Socrates, I agree that there is a big link between the rural (and small town) ex-Conservative voter and the urban WWC and UKIP need to exploit this as no other party seems to give a toss about either group. However, getting sensible policies on crime and antisocial behaviour is not something to be rushed.
A start could of course be made by looking again at the "Honest Sentences" the Conservatives were keen on in opposition but seemed to drop immediately they took power. Fleshing out the role of the police and crime commissioners might be another fruitful area.
There's some common sense things that could be brought in: (1) abolition of concurrent sentences, (2) minimum sentences (3) increasing the sentence for child rape aggravated by violence to 50 years.
The problem with minimum sentences is that juries will often acquit if they think the mandatory is too high for a particular case. Judges will get called in front on the Lord Chancellor if their sentences depart from guidelines too often. Maybe we should tighten that up, rather than remove all discretion from them.
I also think the victim of a crime should have a lot more input into the sentencing.
It is worth remembering that one of the consequences of any x strikes system is that nobody would ever plead guilty to the xth offence. This would have two consequences : the legal system would become slower and more expensive (especially as we would end up with jury rather than magistrate trials) and there would be lots of creative efforts by the police and the cps to subvert the system. (plead guilty to some different offence to avoid getting your xth offence in a category... Which the police would encourage because losing a policeman for two days for a jury trial is incredibly expensive)
It would be better if convicted criminals actually served the sentence they were given, instead of - usually - half. Why did the Tories ditch honesty in sentencing?
Those talking about devolution In England should be aware that a re-ordering of structures is already happening from the bottom up as Councils collaborate across services.
I won't name the County Councilc concerned but here's an example using Councils A, B and C...
All very interesting stodge, but why not name the County Councils involved?
They are all Conservative-controlled County Councils in the south-east but not East Anglia.
I bet you're talking about Surrey and I'm trying to guess the identities of the various Councils!! One must be SCC but not mine nor Epsom and Ewell with whom we share head of IT!
But I couldn't agree more with the thrust of your earlier refutation of the grotesque notion of adding another layer of government. Encourage unitaries in two tier Counties, inject greater accountability into the LEPs, let Coucnils use 100% of Business rates, abolish rate capping (ie compulsory referendum if the Govt norm is exceeded) plus other reforms, and that should be sufficient.
As perhaps the only regular poster here (tpfkar sadly only makes periodid appearances these days) who is a Councillor, let me assure fellow peebees, the folk out there don't want any more of us!
Thanks John. You'll figure out the rest in due course. The other point worth making is this is happening among Labour Councils as well - there's a lot of collaborative activity in East London for example.
It's hard to argue for the retention of the current two-tier structure though I know when this was last raised for Surrey it provoked a certain amount of angst between the County and District Councils to say the least. There's also a lot of joint working between public bodies such as the Police, Fire Services and the like along the sides of sharing senior staff, accommodation, working across borders etc.
It is for me the most effective and sensible future model for service delivery and the potential savings are considerable. The gap though comes with the powers - if Indyref achieves nothing else it has started to focus people in England around how little control exists locally through democratically-elected and accountable authorities and how much is exercised through central Government diktat.
The other side of this argument is the financing of local Government - many Authorities are developing schemes to become less dependent on central Government funding and extending the ability of Councils to act more commercially should (I would have thought) have been favoured by all Conservatives.
Betfair are already paying on a NO vote. Do they know something? Are all the polls completely wrong and the canny Scots are saying on thing and doing another. Can't believe that can you!
Betfair are already paying on a NO vote. Do they know something? Are all the polls completely wrong and the canny Scots are saying on thing and doing another. Can't believe that can you!
It's a marketing coup. That said, they're never going to pick the side they think is more likely to lose...
I would first like to thank Volcanopete for the biggest laugh of the day. I'm sure he was equally outraged by the behaviour of Damian McBride, Derek Draper, Sion Simon, Sally Bercow etc etc (not).
That Labour get so sweaty about that latest creation of aging juveniles called Twitter is indeed demonstrative of their value
I would also like to thank David Cameron for delivering many of UKIPs South East, Eastern and East Midlands targets for them. Having made his bribe of the Barnett Formula to the Scots he has condemned the lowest of PESA receiving regions (per capita) to another generation of 'cashcow' status with sub-standard public sector services.
Why is it he can never resist turning a crisis into a much wider disaster? The thing is this is exactly the same stunt he's trying with the EU and it just isn't working....
Minimum sentences removes power from judges and hands it to politicians. I don't think the judiciary is perfect by any means but they should not be depowered like that.
Betfair are already paying on a NO vote. Do they know something? Are all the polls completely wrong and the canny Scots are saying on thing and doing another. Can't believe that can you!
Its marketing & means nothing. I suspect very few people have used BetFair Sportsbook to wager on IndyRef, meaning their costs from doing this are low. The odds on the BetFair market are better & I imagine the volume of bets is much much greater also...
If indeed it should transpire that there has been a late shift in favour of the NO vote, this is most probably on account of the unequivocal commitment by the three major parties, or more particularly by their leaders, to stick with the incredibly generous Barnett Formula for funding all things Scottish. Of course, we can readily understand why Labour and the LibDems have gone with this, if only to preserve their respective seats North of the Border. But the same can certainly not be said of Cameron ...... so Dave, just why were you so ready to be so generous at the expense of the English taxpayer, I think we should be told.
I suspect very few people have used BetFair Sportsbook to wager on IndyRef, meaning their costs from doing this are low. The odds on the BetFair market are better & I imagine the volume of bets is much much greater also...
A 6 figure payout is suggested in the article (and of course this was probably being paid out anyway) versus millions matched on their exchange.
It is worth remembering that one of the consequences of any x strikes system is that nobody would ever plead guilty to the xth offence. This would have two consequences : the legal system would become slower and more expensive (especially as we would end up with jury rather than magistrate trials) and there would be lots of creative efforts by the police and the cps to subvert the system. (plead guilty to some different offence to avoid getting your xth offence in a category... Which the police would encourage because losing a policeman for two days for a jury trial is incredibly expensive)
It would be better if convicted criminals actually served the sentence they were given, instead of - usually - half. Why did the Tories ditch honesty in sentencing?
Well, it's worth remembering *why* people often serve only half their their time:
1. Politicians don't like building new jails. It's expensive and the locals usually don't like it. 2. When all government departments need to save money, letting out people a little earlier is an easy option. 3. Prison governors like having a tool to manage inmate behaviour: behave well and you'll get time off. (Giving prisoners extra time in prison requires them to commit a crime and to go through the whole trial thing...)
"South Yorkshire's Police and Crime Commissioner Shaun Wright has resigned over the Rotherham child abuse scandal.
Mr Wright faced repeated calls to step down in the wake of a report which found at least 1,400 children were abused in the town from 1997 to 2013."
What price the first UKIP PCC in the by-election? Somehow I suspect turnout may be better than in the West Midlands.
I think this one is UKIP's to lose.
Alternative for Germany just made huge gains in the German state elections on a law & order platform. Meanwhile UKIP get around 25% of the public saying they have the best policies on Europe and immigration, but just 5% say they do on crime and antisocial behaviour. UKIP are missing a serious trick here: it's an issue they can hammer the other three parties on, and would unite the rural ex-Tory and WWC ex-Labour parts of the party.
Mr. Socrates, I agree that there is a big link between the rural (and small town) ex-Conservative voter and the urban WWC and UKIP need to exploit this as no other party seems to give a toss about either group. However, getting sensible policies on crime and antisocial behaviour is not something to be rushed.
A start could of course be made by looking again at the "Honest Sentences" the Conservatives were keen on in opposition but seemed to drop immediately they took power. Fleshing out the role of the police and crime commissioners might be another fruitful area.
There's some common sense things that could be brought in: (1) abolition of concurrent sentences, (2) minimum sentences (3) increasing the sentence for child rape aggravated by violence to 50 years.
The problem with minimum sentences is that juries will often acquit if they think the mandatory is too high for a particular case. Judges will get called in front on the Lord Chancellor if their sentences depart from guidelines too often. Maybe we should tighten that up, rather than remove all discretion from them.
I also think the victim of a crime should have a lot more input into the sentencing.
But the same can certainly not be said of Cameron ...... so Dave, just why were you so generous at the expense of the English taxpayer, I think we should be told.
Whatever is offered in a trice and delivered by an Act can, of course, be withdrawn in a trice and removed as a paragraph of another Act. At some point Barnett will die. Just not yet.
"South Yorkshire's Police and Crime Commissioner Shaun Wright has resigned over the Rotherham child abuse scandal.
Mr Wright faced repeated calls to step down in the wake of a report which found at least 1,400 children were abused in the town from 1997 to 2013."
What price the first UKIP PCC in the by-election? Somehow I suspect turnout may be better than in the West Midlands.
I think this one is UKIP's to lose.
Alternative for Germany just made huge gains in the German state elections on a law & order platform. Meanwhile UKIP get around 25% of the public saying they have the best policies on Europe and immigration, but just 5% say they do on crime and antisocial behaviour. UKIP are missing a serious trick here: it's an issue they can hammer the other three parties on, and would unite the rural ex-Tory and WWC ex-Labour parts of the party.
Mr. Socrates, I agree that there is a big link between the rural (and small town) ex-Conservative voter and the urban WWC and UKIP need to exploit this as no other party seems to give a toss about either group. However, getting sensible policies on crime and antisocial behaviour is not something to be rushed.
A start could of course be made by looking again at the "Honest Sentences" the Conservatives were keen on in opposition but seemed to drop immediately they took power. Fleshing out the role of the police and crime commissioners might be another fruitful area.
There's some common sense things that could be brought in: (1) abolition of concurrent sentences, (2) minimum sentences (3) increasing the sentence for child rape aggravated by violence to 50 years.
The problem with minimum sentences is that juries will often acquit if they think the mandatory is too high for a particular case. Judges will get called in front on the Lord Chancellor if their sentences depart from guidelines too often. Maybe we should tighten that up, rather than remove all discretion from them.
I also think the victim of a crime should have a lot more input into the sentencing.
So, I'll spend less time in prison if I kill a homeless, friendless person?
Either everyone counts or no-one counts. (H/t Harry Bosch)
Hopi Sen is a die hard leftie. And like all the others is desperate to ensure England never exists - despite the fact that it does.
Eff off. Don't tell me what I think.
England still exists despite being divided into dozens of counties.
England can survive a sensible sub-division into Wessex, Mercia, Yorkshire, etc, for the purposes of creating a Federal UK with balanced devolution.
An English Parliament, or English Votes for English Laws, is merely a stepping stone to English independence. A Federal UK simply won't survive the power imbalance English devolution would create.
How come it's only England that gets carved up? Scotland is almost three times the population of Northern Ireland. Why don't you support carving that country in two? For "balanced devolution", of course.
Correct. A federal UK means in effect a unified UK with 'scotland' broken up into regions. The notion of breaking up the work of Alfred the Great and his sons just to satisfy a bunch of lefties is pathetic. England is England that was the country that Scotland unified with. The big mistake is the original devolution - and of course that was done by Labour for its own then self serving motives.
Iirc the England that Scotland unified with included Wales at the time.
Comments
I'm giving the benefit of the doubt until we see the proposals and what it gives to England. EV4EL (or something of equivalent level) has to be on the table.
If Cameron fails at this, then UKIP will simply say: how can Cameron claim he will stand up to the EU when he cannot even stand up to Scotland?
But let's wait and see what is offered.
Perhaps having specialist treatment in Libya ?
Key reason why an independent Scotland can't expect any favours from the US.
"Getting angry with people who are angry about their failings just shows how they haven't learned anything, and probably won't."
To be fair to the Labour party, some of them are very well aware of the failings and have admitted them. Of course, they will probably have no future in the party as a result, but don't tar them all with the same brush.
52.5-47.5 for No is my guess.
http://www.lepoint.fr/politique/emmanuel-berretta/barometre-ipsos-hollande-subit-de-plein-fouet-l-effet-trierweiler-15-09-2014-1863379_1897.php
Hollande at another popularity record low at 13%, down another 3 points from last month.
Also to add salt to Hollande's wounds, his government is facing a no confidence vote in the national assembly today (chances 55/45 he wins the vote).
"Because we're acting today, it is less likely that we will face these dangers in the future." - 1998
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/obama-becomes-fourth-president-in-a-row-to-go-on-tv-and-announce-iraq-bombings-9735707.html
I agree with Mike on this one but for different reasons. I have been very suspicious on weighting applied to polling based on previous voting, particularly the 2011 result. As I understand it Ipsos Mori weight by age and social class which should produce more accurate results in a one off like this. They are less likely (on this basis) to be caught out by the incredible wave of new voters registered for this poll because they are already reflected in the census etc and should have been weighted accordingly.
My first chance to comment for a few days and I'm NOT going to talk about Scotland (well, not directly).
Those talking about devolution In England should be aware that a re-ordering of structures is already happening from the bottom up as Councils collaborate across services.
I won't name the County Councilc concerned but here's an example using Councils A, B and C.
Council A runs the payroll for Councils B and C
Council B provides property maintenance, advice and design services for Councils A and C.
Council C provides Procurement and Legal Services for Councils A and B.
Councils A and B share a Head of Property
Councils B and C share a Head of Procurement
One Call Centre (albeit with three different numbers) provides the first point of contact for all residents of Councils A, B and C
How many Councils are there - one, two or three ? This is being driven by Officers and some Cabinet Members yet there are still 250 Councillors in all. How long before that looks excessive ?
Yet this Council(s) still can't set its own Council Tax, Business Rates or take its own planning/housing decisions. The era of absurd Wgitehall/Westminster centralisation needs to come to an end but the solution isn't Regional Assemblies - rather, we use the Authorities that are already there and allow them to work together.
'We are of course a small and self-selecting community yet I would not be surprised if the feelings expressed here are not those more widely held in England. Cameron, with his silly "Vow" and "Home Rule Bill" may be misreading the state of play in England very badly.'
How can you claim that when the full proposal / details have not yet been thought through yet,let alone published?
You really believe that any proposal that didn't fully address the WLQ ,reduction of Scottish MP'S etc. would ever get voted through by Tory MP's ?
A start could of course be made by looking again at the "Honest Sentences" the Conservatives were keen on in opposition but seemed to drop immediately they took power. Fleshing out the role of the police and crime commissioners might be another fruitful area.
Retaliating seems to be thought of worse than the original wrong doing, and allows the original slackers to move the goalposts
It could have been worse. There were lots of hyper marginals that the Tories won by the skin of their teeth. Had the effects of (1) and (2) been more pronounced, the Tories might have topped out at 290 seats and we'd have had a Lib-Lab coalition with an absolute majority, albeit a small one.
To your substantive question, " You really believe that any proposal that didn't fully address the WLQ ,reduction of Scottish MP'S etc. would ever get voted through by Tory MP's ?" I have to answer, "Yes". Oh, to be sure there will be a few rebels, but Labour and Lib Dem votes will see the measure through.
'Given they don't have a majority, would they have a choice?'
It wouldn't even get near a vote if the proposals were unacceptable.
The issue comes down to the fact that England is 85% of FUK (including Scotland). We need to think through carefully exactly how the balance of power should work. It clearly doesn't work right now, but I'm not convinced that just devolving the same power to England as Scotland has would work either.
(and I'm neither anti-English, nor a bigot)
Hopi Sen is a die hard leftie. And like all the others is desperate to ensure England never exists - despite the fact that it does.
He asked what the demo was about - hadn't been following the debate at all. His instinctive reaction was that he didn't really care if they left but that it was probably a good thing.
England still exists despite being divided into dozens of counties.
England can survive a sensible sub-division into Wessex, Mercia, Yorkshire, etc, for the purposes of creating a Federal UK with balanced devolution.
An English Parliament, or English Votes for English Laws, is merely a stepping stone to English independence. A Federal UK simply won't survive the power imbalance English devolution would create.
www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/man-caught-drinking-baileys-irish-4263468#rlabs=3
On Scotland their policy is panicked faffing about and promising the sun, moon and earth to whoever happens to be around at the moment.
On foreign policy, they're doing nothing other than saying stern things and hoping to b*ggery that nothing ghastly happens on our shores. We have to hope the intelligence and police services are doing their job.
A bit of old-fashioned competence and thinking before speaking would be welcome.
Whether everything’s as good as it possibly could be, and what we do to move towards that, and indeed what that Nirvana consists of, are entirely different questions.
And you know what? When UKIP say that Labour were responsible for Rotherham, they are absolutely right.
I should for example be very unhappy about minimum sentences for, say, domestic burglary. I think it better to leave the discretion in the hands of the judges. However, on the third separate conviction for such an offence, then clearly the judges have got it wrong with relation to the individual, all chances of rehabilitation outside of prison have failed, so bang him/her up for 20 years (and I mean 20 years). Word will get around.
Not Flash-Just Gordon.
I think we should have a strikes system for any crime as serious as domestic burglary or beyond. Heck, make it five strikes rather than three to stop the bleeding heart brigade whining. If you've been convicted four times and are still committing crime, it's only right that you've forfeited chance of rehabilitation.
But I couldn't agree more with the thrust of your earlier refutation of the grotesque notion of adding another layer of government. Encourage unitaries in two tier Counties, inject greater accountability into the LEPs, let Coucnils use 100% of Business rates, abolish rate capping (ie compulsory referendum if the Govt norm is exceeded) plus other reforms, and that should be sufficient.
As perhaps the only regular poster here (tpfkar sadly only makes periodid appearances these days) who is a Councillor, let me assure fellow peebees, the folk out there don't want any more of us!
We have some serious issues to deal with in this country: IS and the prospect of terrorism from their supporters here, the failures of our police, councils and social services in relation to child abuse, for instance. Scotland going independent or not is not the most important issue and the sky will not fall in if it does. And whatever the outcome a period of thought and calm is needed to determine what to do next.
Instead of which we have Brown who managed to f*ck up pretty much everything he touched grandly announcing what the future constitutional arrangements of the UK are going to be, Labour desperate to get themselves out of the devolution hole they've created, Cameron falling into a panic (and, IMO, into a Labour trap) and the LibDems pretending that they matter. It's unedifying and unprofessional and not very grown up. And it comes from people who are, apparently, the best our education system can offer. Pah!!
I notice unleaded fuel at my local Tesco has gone up 3p a litre in the last week.
The notion of breaking up the work of Alfred the Great and his sons just to satisfy a bunch of lefties is pathetic.
England is England that was the country that Scotland unified with.
The big mistake is the original devolution - and of course that was done by Labour for its own then self serving motives.
Is still open, entries close 11pm tomorrow:
http://www.electiongame.co.uk/scotland14/
Also available is New Zealand, which has the same deadline:
http://www.electiongame.co.uk/nz14/
Many thanks,
DC
I have no liking for Salmond but the BT campaign has been woeful and insulting and I see no good reason why the rest of us should beg the Scots to stay. We should have a little more self-respect and we should respect the Scots' right to make the decision for themselves, even if it does them make them poorer.
It's hard to argue for the retention of the current two-tier structure though I know when this was last raised for Surrey it provoked a certain amount of angst between the County and District Councils to say the least. There's also a lot of joint working between public bodies such as the Police, Fire Services and the like along the sides of sharing senior staff, accommodation, working across borders etc.
It is for me the most effective and sensible future model for service delivery and the potential savings are considerable. The gap though comes with the powers - if Indyref achieves nothing else it has started to focus people in England around how little control exists locally through democratically-elected and accountable authorities and how much is exercised through central Government diktat.
The other side of this argument is the financing of local Government - many Authorities are developing schemes to become less dependent on central Government funding and extending the ability of Councils to act more commercially should (I would have thought) have been favoured by all Conservatives.
That Labour get so sweaty about that latest creation of aging juveniles called Twitter is indeed demonstrative of their value
I would also like to thank David Cameron for delivering many of UKIPs South East, Eastern and East Midlands targets for them. Having made his bribe of the Barnett Formula to the Scots he has condemned the lowest of PESA receiving regions (per capita) to another generation of 'cashcow' status with sub-standard public sector services.
Why is it he can never resist turning a crisis into a much wider disaster? The thing is this is exactly the same stunt he's trying with the EU and it just isn't working....
I suspect very few people have used BetFair Sportsbook to wager on IndyRef, meaning their costs from doing this are low. The odds on the BetFair market are better & I imagine the volume of bets is much much greater also...
http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/104703/kenny_macaskill_ordinary_scots_not_benefitting_from_union.html
Of course, we can readily understand why Labour and the LibDems have gone with this, if only to preserve their respective seats North of the Border.
But the same can certainly not be said of Cameron ...... so Dave, just why were you so ready to be so generous at the expense of the English taxpayer, I think we should be told.
1. Politicians don't like building new jails. It's expensive and the locals usually don't like it.
2. When all government departments need to save money, letting out people a little earlier is an easy option.
3. Prison governors like having a tool to manage inmate behaviour: behave well and you'll get time off. (Giving prisoners extra time in prison requires them to commit a crime and to go through the whole trial thing...)
Either everyone counts or no-one counts. (H/t Harry Bosch)