It was. In fact from the TV pictures it looked entirely peaceful - I gather there were a couple of arrests, but I'm not sure of the details of those.
"The point is that he had every right to speak."
And by God was he allowed to speak. If only the Scottish Greens were being given the same opportunity tonight -
Scottish Greens have lodged an official complaint with the BBC about the lack of balance on Question Time, and have asked for an urgent meeting with corporation managers so they can explain how they will remedy the problem.
Tonight's edition of the programme comes from Edinburgh, features an audience of 16 and 17 year olds and is billed on the BBC website as including discussion on independence.
The panel comprises a representative of the SNP, a non-party political journalist and four anti-independence politicians, two of whom do not represent Scottish constituencies nor do they have any party representation in Scotland. Yet there is no Scottish Green representation despite the party having 2 MSPs and 14 councillors. Scottish Greens have only appeared on Question Time once in the 14 years since the start of the Scottish Parliament – and that was over two years ago.
Scottish Greens Co-convener Patrick Harvie MSP said:
"Tonight's Question Time line up is particularly bizarre, and following a telephone discussion with the editor it is clear to me that this programme has been contrived to deliver sensationalist confrontation, rather than serious debate. The lack of balance is staggering and I know from comments we've received it's not just Green supporters who are alarmed.
"This situation is particularly unacceptable a week before the Scottish Parliamentary by-election in Aberdeen Donside, which should require particular attention to political balance. The BBC has shown serious misjudgement in allowing tonight's programme to go ahead and we look forward to meeting senior managers to discuss how they intend to rectify a situation that will have harmed the broadcaster's reputation for fairness."
No, he wasn't allowed to speak as planned. It's a shame you feel no regret that a visitor to your fine country was harangued, told to leave and had to be given a police escort away from a press conference.
I can't wait for Neil Oliver's next tourism advert. Although thinking about it, one of the ads fits: "Scotland might surprise you. Whether you’re after dramatic scenery.... or dramatic scenes..."
"Tonight's Question Time line up is particularly bizarre, and following a telephone discussion with the editor it is clear to me that this programme has been contrived to deliver sensationalist confrontation, rather than serious debate.
A Farage and Galloway slanging match. Lame.
I do wonder whether Galloway will still be supporting Assad following Griffin's visit to Syria at Assad's intervention. Will he find it easier to say something nice about Griffin than something critical about Assad?
Someone should take this OECD report and stick it down Nagel Farage and Lynton Crosbys throats (Metaphorically, not in a Peter Greenaway way)
"So, ladies and gentlemen, we have come back to the beginning. One of the world’s most credible economic analysts has concluded that because of immigration to the UK, British taxes are lower, spending is higher and the deficit is smaller. So, just for fun, let me ask the question again. Immigrants: don’t you just love ‘em?"
@jameskirkup: Immigration and the British economy: the awful truth is revealed: Immigrants: don’t you just love ‘em? They tr... http://t.co/5I5EFS45xj
Typically aggressive from tim, with only part of the story.
The problems with the excessive immigration that we have seen over the last 15 years are not primarily economic, but social. The shortage of housing is the most obvious. Big increases in HB (an economic factor?), weakening of the green belt and over-development of our towns and countryside are all linked to the huge growth in population caused solely by nett immigration.
UKIP want a moratorium on immigration for 5 years, to allow the country to assimilate fully all the recent arrivals.
The opportunity to control immigration is less important than the other economic benefits of quitting the EU.
"It's a shame you feel no regret that a visitor to your fine country was harangued, told to leave and had to be given a police escort away from a press conference."
I'm sorry, but what is your problem with people "haranguing" Farage? It seems to be you who has the issue with free speech. The young should shut up in the presence of their superiors?
"It's a shame you feel no regret that a visitor to your fine country was harangued, told to leave and had to be given a police escort away from a press conference."
I'm sorry, but what is your problem with people "haranguing" Farage? It seems to be you who has the issue with free speech. The young should shut up in the presence of their superiors?
That's a ridiculous conclusion to form from what I'm saying.
Mr. Jessop, I quite agree regarding Farage. It's a rather depressing state of affairs when a politician can be hounded out of a pub and then shouted down by lunatics, who ironically manage to combine accusations of racism with chanting for him to go back to England.
"James If I was campaigning for Scottish independence I'd want this Home Counties golf club bore on every week along with Richard Littlejohn and Jeremy Clarkson"
Yes, I agree, if the audience are at all representative of Scottish 16 and 17 year olds, Farage is going to get the reaction from hell tonight, from unionists and nationalists alike. But it's the principle of the thing.
I very much doubt that a 16 or 17 year old who voluntarily spends an evening going along to watch Question Time will be at all representative of their peer group.
I lived for a while in the Forest of Dean. UKIPs more than 6,000 votes in the local elections is more than double the vote they achieved in the 2010GE, and would give them nearly 13% of the vote on the GE turnout.
The Parliamentary seat also includes parts of Tewkesbury district council, but UKIP didn't do so well there in the locals. While UKIP beat the Tories by just under 1,000 votes in the Forest of Dean, in Tewkesbury the Tories crushed them by more than 8,000 votes.
At the moment it looks likely that the Tewkesbury parts of the Forest of Dean seat will keep it Tory, but there appears to be a strong Labour vote in the Forest and a strong Lib Dem vote in Tewkesbury, so it might become a four-way marginal.
Thanks Andy for all your hard work with this spreadsheet. It looks like a great resource.
Presumably you don't include a moratorium on inter-corporate transfers. So, Thomson Reuters can move the CFO of its media division from New York to London. A large number of those coming to the UK to work are not planning on staying. Is the plan to distinguish between temporary workers (in fruit picking for example) who don't plan to be around for long, and permanent immigrants?
And membership of the EEA requires you sign up to freedom of movement (although, as Richard Tyndall has pointed out, you can impose lots of 'soft' conditions to discourage migrants - or at least, unemployed ones). Is the policy to leave the EEA? Or to stay?
"I'm sorry that you think that the freedom of speech can be abused to stop other people exercising their right of freedom of speech."
For example by using a trivial incident a few weeks ago as a feeble excuse for the silencing of the Scottish Green Party, and for pro-independence voices being outnumbered by four to one?
"the huge growth in population caused exclusively by nett immigration."
Obviously the increase in life expectancy played a part, and since 2003 the "native" birth rate has thankfully being rising so that in tandem with immigration we have hopefully avoided the demographic timebomb that we were facing and is no sending shivers down the spines of policy makers in countries such as Italy and Spain. Germany was heading in the same forlorn direction but appears to have had a big million person migrant input this last year which will help a lot.
Farage should be on his knees thanking Blair for defusing the demographic time bomb, and of course Thatcher,Major and Heath for the framework they put in place,and the expansion of the EU to the East.
But you're right in one aspect, we should use some of the big fiscal benefits of immigration to build houses and force down price/income ratios, rents and housing benefits.
Where there is fixed supply, as with housing, there is a shortage only when there is excess demand. Social changes---such as an increase in single-person households---are not nearly as important as immigration.
The country is facing a problem with an aging population---each person of working age is having to support a growing number of pensioners. It may be politically more attractive to import young workers than to raise the age when a pension can be taken. But it is not more sensible.
I was saying that this was the best bet because its coverage is far wider than just Theresa May.
Fair point, though I can't really see who the other woman is in the immediate future, maybe if the context takes place in 3 or 4 years (which is far from impossible, of course). By the way, will there be an Aberdeen Donside column on PB before the by-election? Betting opportunities are pretty slim, but it's still a decent sized election.
"By the way, will there be an Aberdeen Donside column on PB before the by-election?"
Nah, there's no way of making it "interesting to a non-Scottish audience". For what it's worth, I was a bit nervous at the start, but the campaign has gone very smoothly for the SNP, so I think they'll win very comfortably.
Apparently, Cameron's seat of Witney is coterminous with West Oxfordshire District Council. The shares of the vote in the local elections, with changes on the 2010 GE, are:
Conservative 43.0% -15.8 UKIP 20.5% +17.0 Labour 17.4% +4.4 Lib Dem 11.3% -8.1 Green 7.8% +3.7
Only UKIP can beat Cameron in Witney...
[Thanks to Andy again for his great work on the spreadsheet]
Presumably you don't include a moratorium on inter-corporate transfers. So, Thomson Reuters can move the CFO of its media division from New York to London. A large number of those coming to the UK to work are not planning on staying. Is the plan to distinguish between temporary workers (in fruit picking for example) who don't plan to be around for long, and permanent immigrants?
And membership of the EEA requires you sign up to freedom of movement (although, as Richard Tyndall has pointed out, you can impose lots of 'soft' conditions to discourage migrants - or at least, unemployed ones). Is the policy to leave the EEA? Or to stay?
The problem of nett immigration is not one of principle; it is exclusively one of scale. Everybody recognises how valuable immigration has always been. The object is not to discourage the unusually able to work here, not to make it tougher for firms to operate.
How many of the recent Polish immigrants have been 'inter-corporate tranfers'? How many Bulgarians, or Roumanians?
The problem of nett immigration is not one of principle; it is exclusively one of scale. Everybody recognises how valuable immigration has always been. The object is not to discourage the unusually able to work here, not to make it tougher for firms to operate.
How many of the recent Polish immigrants have been 'inter-corporate tranfers'? How many Bulgarians, or Roumanians?
I'm just asking for what it is exactly you are proposing: a blanket five year immigration moratorium, or something more sophisticated?
It also sucks if you - let us say - go off to the US to study at CalTech, meet a girl, marry her... and, oh no, she can't move to the UK now. That's OK. Because now you, a CalTech graduate, will choose to stay in the US.
The problem of nett immigration is not one of principle; it is exclusively one of scale. Everybody recognises how valuable immigration has always been. The object is not to discourage the unusually able to work here, not to make it tougher for firms to operate.
How many of the recent Polish immigrants have been 'inter-corporate tranfers'? How many Bulgarians, or Roumanians?
I'm just asking for what it is exactly you are proposing: a blanket five year immigration moratorium, or something more sophisticated?
It also sucks if you - let us say - go off to the US to study at CalTech, meet a girl, marry her... and, oh no, she can't move to the UK now. That's OK. Because now you, a CalTech graduate, will choose to stay in the US.
How's that a loss ? Anyone with any sense would stay in California rather than rain drenched Britain :-)
Thanks for your appreciation. I'm not looking for any sympathy when I say this, but if anyone thinks it was just a simple case of copying and pasting to compile these spreadsheets, nothing could be further from the truth.
The majority of councils present their results in a way they believe is helpful but which in fact makes it impossible to copy the results into a spreadsheet, which means you have to type each and every individual result in yourself, which takes ages.
Ironically, about 10 years ago when councils first started putting their results online, they would just offer a downloadable spreadsheet, which made things a lot easier but most don't do that now.
,just because Nige doesn't want young immigrants....
Has he actually said that?
What NIge is promising is a distillation of immigration, not a ban on it.
He proposes to take back powers to let in the 10-year old malt Australia engineers, whilst allowing the rough spirit of Romanian gangsters to evaporate.
I don't know if he can do that. I have my doubts. But that is what he is promising, isn't it?
The problem of nett immigration is not one of principle; it is exclusively one of scale. Everybody recognises how valuable immigration has always been. The object is not to discourage the unusually able to work here, not to make it tougher for firms to operate.
How many of the recent Polish immigrants have been 'inter-corporate tranfers'? How many Bulgarians, or Roumanians?
I'm just asking for what it is exactly you are proposing: a blanket five year immigration moratorium, or something more sophisticated?
It also sucks if you - let us say - go off to the US to study at CalTech, meet a girl, marry her... and, oh no, she can't move to the UK now. That's OK. Because now you, a CalTech graduate, will choose to stay in the US.
Don't forget the pensioners forced to work in Farages garden gnome or golf tee factories until they are 75 rather than retiring to the Med,just because Nige doesn't want young immigrants
It would probably be better for the health of people of pensionable age to work part time anyway.
No doubt the slave trade was good for the economy of the country they were sold to, and no doubt the people who used them crowed about the economic benefits then as well
Everybody recognises how valuable immigration has always been.
Quite. Trouble is, people are wondering why we can't get the smooth of mass immigration without, not to put too fine a point on it, the rough.
If its really impossible, or even undesirable, to have one without the other, then politicians should maybe have the courage to tell us.
The point surely is to be selective, and to let in Caltech graduates who want to move here, and keep out the unskilled and criminal.
The "demographic timebomb" is vastly overstated. Decrepitude is mostly in the very last few years of life, and where health and social care costs are concentrated. The young elderly are generally very fit, and as most modern work is less physically demanding than historically, plenty of suitable jobs. Checkout operators and MacDonalds staff are quite elderly in some parts of the world, and often give much better customer service than surly teenagers. At Mount St Bernards Monastry in Charnwood, the gift shop is run by a delightful 94 year old, who has certainly the gift of the gab!
Phil Mullan has an interesting book on the phenomenon, to quote a review:
"Mullan draws attention to the way in which the concept of ‘retirement’ has been created in the course of the twentieth century. Bismarck in 1889 introduced state pensions for those retiring at age 70, when life expectancy was about 50—so that the cost to the public purse was minimal. In Britain, the male pensionable age was reduced to 65 in 1925 to encourage people to stop working earlier and help bring about a reduction in the then high rate of unemployment. At the same time, pension entitlement was tied to retirement from work, so that old age became identified with moving to a new stage in life without remunerated employment. Before the introduction of pensions, two-thirds of men aged 65 and over were in full-time work.
So the phenomenon of ‘retirement’ is recent, and is a creation of the welfare state. The subsequent advent of occupational pensions has allowed retirement commonly to take place well before the formal age of pension entitlement. As we live longer and healthier lives, we find, paradoxically, that work runs out earlier. One likely response to the economic and financial anxieties associated with population ageing is to take advantage of this new reserve army of labour. The challenge is to develop institutional arrangements to make this possible."
The problem of nett immigration is not one of principle; it is exclusively one of scale. Everybody recognises how valuable immigration has always been. The object is not to discourage the unusually able to work here, not to make it tougher for firms to operate.
How many of the recent Polish immigrants have been 'inter-corporate tranfers'? How many Bulgarians, or Roumanians?
I'm just asking for what it is exactly you are proposing: a blanket five year immigration moratorium, or something more sophisticated?
It also sucks if you - let us say - go off to the US to study at CalTech, meet a girl, marry her... and, oh no, she can't move to the UK now. That's OK. Because now you, a CalTech graduate, will choose to stay in the US.
How's that a loss ? Anyone with any sense would stay in California rather than rain drenched Britain :-)
Tell that to Gary McKinnon.
yeah tim, slightly different, that's the choice between walking in the rain in the UK or sweating in a cell in CA. I think McKinnon has called this one right.
"I'm sorry that you think that the freedom of speech can be abused to stop other people exercising their right of freedom of speech."
For example by using a trivial incident a few weeks ago as a feeble excuse for the silencing of the Scottish Green Party, and for pro-independence voices being outnumbered by four to one?
The Green Party are hardly being silenced, and especially not in the same way. It's a shame that someone as undoubtedly intelligent as you seems to think that what happened to Farage was fine, especially after your synthetic anger about the Economist cover.
However if it is to be an independence special as you claim, then the Greens and other parties should probably be there. But I also question the timing of such a show just before a by-election.
Actually, going to the BBC website shows that there may be a connection: "David Dimbleby presents Question Time from Edinburgh, with an audience of 16 and 17-year-olds. The 2014 referendum on Scottish independence will be the first time anyone under 18 has had a vote in the UK."
The point surely is to be selective, and to let in Caltech graduates who want to move here, and keep out the unskilled and criminal.
Well absolutely, but the way various governments have flailed around with immigration, it seems this apparently straightforward task is actually inordinately difficult.
The FX market is the biggest financial market there is. This is effectively stealing money off millions of people for the benefit of a few powerful institutions and their traders.
Has anyone been arrested for the LIBOR fixing yet? Why the hell does our media not have this stuff on the front page of every website? Why are MPs not demanding answers in parliament? The whole system is corrupt, and the people supposed to be informing the public aren't doing their jobs.
"I'm sorry that you think that the freedom of speech can be abused to stop other people exercising their right of freedom of speech."
For example by using a trivial incident a few weeks ago as a feeble excuse for the silencing of the Scottish Green Party, and for pro-independence voices being outnumbered by four to one?
The Green Party are hardly being silenced, and especially not in the same way. It's a shame that someone as undoubtedly intelligent as you seems to think that what happened to Farage was fine, especially after your synthetic anger about the Economist cover.
However if it is to be an independence special as you claim, then the Greens and other parties should probably be there. But I also question the timing of such a show just before a by-election.
Actually, going to the BBC website shows that there may be a connection: "David Dimbleby presents Question Time from Edinburgh, with an audience of 16 and 17-year-olds. The 2014 referendum on Scottish independence will be the first time anyone under 18 has had a vote in the UK."
"It's a shame that someone as undoubtedly intelligent as you seems to think that what happened to Farage was fine, especially after your synthetic anger about the Economist cover."
It wasn't synthetic. The Economist cover was an embarrassment to journalism. I can only raise a smile every time someone here trots out the "rue the day" comment as if that's a reminder of some kind of misstep by Alex Salmond - in reality he captured the mood of the nation perfectly.
If Farage can't take people disagreeing with him volubly, he's in the wrong trade. There seems to be an increasing intolerance of dissent south of the border which I must say I find slightly disturbing.
"It's a shame that someone as undoubtedly intelligent as you seems to think that what happened to Farage was fine, especially after your synthetic anger about the Economist cover."
It wasn't synthetic. The Economist cover was an embarrassment to journalism. I can only raise a smile every time someone here trots out the "rue the day" comment as if that's a reminder of some kind of misstep by Alex Salmond - in reality he captured the mood of the nation perfectly.
If Farage can't take people disagreeing with him volubly, he's in the wrong trade. There seems to be an increasing intolerance of dissent south of the border which I must say I find slightly disturbing.
Why did the Edinburgh police become involved if the partitionist mob was so peaceful ?
Forest of Dean council comprises 95% of the electorate of the constituency so the Tewkesbury element is pretty insignificant in the shape of the Highnam with Haw Bridge ward. UKIP didn't put up a candidate in the Highnam county council division.
"Why did the Edinburgh police become involved if the partitionist mob was so peaceful ?"
What partitionist mob? Did the Orange Order turn up later?
You've accused Edinburgh University of shoddy research and now you're denigrating Edinburgh's police. Could you please stop talking down Scotland's capital city ?
"You've accused Edinburgh University of shoddy research and now you're denigrating Edinburgh's police. Could you please stop talking down Scotland's capital city ?"
Well, as we're on the subject of 80s pop music, perhaps this is the moment to gently point out to you that the only place I say these things is in your dreams -
"It's a shame that someone as undoubtedly intelligent as you seems to think that what happened to Farage was fine, especially after your synthetic anger about the Economist cover."
It wasn't synthetic. The Economist cover was an embarrassment to journalism. I can only raise a smile every time someone here trots out the "rue the day" comment as if that's a reminder of some kind of misstep by Alex Salmond - in reality he captured the mood of the nation perfectly.
If Farage can't take people disagreeing with him volubly, he's in the wrong trade. There seems to be an increasing intolerance of dissent south of the border which I must say I find slightly disturbing.
Salmond's reaction to the Economist cover said more about the man than it did about the Economist. You could say that it was a sign of increasing intolerance of dissent north of the border.
As for your other point: it wasn't a case of Farage not being able to take people disagreeing with him voluably; he was not allowed to speak. It wasn't a debate; it was a bunch of idiots shouting him down and creating such a nuisance he had to leave.
Using free speech to prevent free speech is not free speech.
Tim Ross @TimRossDT Lib Dem MPs expected to be told they can stay away from Commons for Tory #EU referendum Bill "stunt" on July 5. Just like Labour.
So if both Lab and Lib don't up turn doesn't that mean there is a possibility that the bill will be carried? Does this mean it actually becomes law or would it have to be approved by the Lords?
Why do you want to stop British unskilled workers or retirees moving to other countries in the EU?
I don't, though there perhaps might be a quota for unskilled workers.
Indeed, if Spain said 'right, no more UK pensioners', that might concentrate the minds of a few UKIP voters who consider it their inalienable right to retire there, whilst at the same time blocking some EU citizens from coming here.
"You could say that it was a sign of increasing intolerance of dissent north of the border."
Salmond's comment WAS the dissent from the usual London establishment sneering about a Scotland that is "too wee, too poor, too stupid" to govern itself.
"You could say that it was a sign of increasing intolerance of dissent north of the border."
Salmond's comment WAS the dissent from the usual London establishment sneering about a Scotland that is "too wee, too poor, too stupid" to govern itself.
Dont worry, they think that about England as well!
Now the Electoral Reform Society have added their voice to the protest -
The Electoral Reform Society in Scotland seeks to inform and improve Scotland's democracy. With that in mind, we have being undertaking an inquiry into what a good Scottish democracy looks like.
A major theme that has emerged from this year long, citizen led inquiry, is the importance of the media to instruct, publicise and inform the debate. There has been support for a publicly funded media provider, but a strong sense that that body should be impartial and should seek to provide balanced and informed coverage of politics. Clearly this is of particular concern in the run up to the 2014 referendum.
We were concerned therefore to see the line-up for the BBC Question Time programme to be held in Edinburgh this evening (Thursday 13th June). Not only does the selection of panellists fail to represent the make-up of Scottish politics, but it also seems to be aimed more at pantomime than serious debate.
That this should be the case when the audience is, very pleasingly, to be made up of 16 and 17 year olds in recognition of the extension of the franchise to that group for the referendum is worrying.
It seems to show a lack of respect for these young audience members - implying that they do not deserve serious political debate. It also fails to allow them to hear from their elected representatives in this public debate forum which receives the widest of political attention. Two of the parties which will be competing for their vote in 2014 are un-represented and the Yes and Better Together campaigns are needlessly unequally represented. Were this not bad enough, available spaces on the platform are taken instead by George Galloway MP and Nigel Farage MEP, two individuals and parties who are not represented in Scotland.
"You could say that it was a sign of increasing intolerance of dissent north of the border."
Salmond's comment WAS the dissent from the usual London establishment sneering about a Scotland that is "too wee, too poor, too stupid" to govern itself.
No it wasn't. It was a fairly pathetic response from a usually competent politician.
"It was a fairly pathetic response from a usually competent politician."
The fact that this was almost the uniform response on PB is the surest indication that people interested in politics south of the border very often just don't "get" Scotland.
"It was a fairly pathetic response from a usually competent politician."
The fact that this was almost the uniform response on PB is the surest indication that people interested in politics south of the border very often just don't "get" Scotland.
Kelly , it's you who doesn't get Scotland.
My predictions about Scottish affairs over the past year have been uniformly right ,yours uniformly wrong. I'm afraid your enthusiasm has turned you into a crank and fanatic.
The Media Blog @TheMediaTweets What's worse, the shoplifting or the lack of ambition...? -> MT @HuffPostUK: Ukip councillor resigns after shoplifting from Poundstretcher
"Mr. Kelly, didn't the non-SNP Scots of pb also indicate that they too were unimpressed with Salmond's 'rue the day' moment?"
You mean the Scottish Tory contingent? There don't seem to be any other types of non-SNP Scots around (for which you can blame the anti-left wing culture on this site).
"It was a fairly pathetic response from a usually competent politician."
The fact that this was almost the uniform response on PB is the surest indication that people interested in politics south of the border very often just don't "get" Scotland.
Or that some people obsessed with Scottish independence just want to take offence.
I'm also rather amused by your ability to know the views of the whole of Scotland, especially as the polls currently seem to rather go against your view. I have travelled rather extensively in Scotland, perhaps more than many Scots, and know the land well. The view of someone in the Borders on most subjects tends to be rather different from those of Kintyre or Buchan.
Anyway, we're not going to agree on any of this, and the conversation has drifted rather spectacularly away from QT.
Mr. Kelly, didn't the non-SNP Scots of pb also indicate that they too were unimpressed with Salmond's 'rue the day' moment?
More to the point I would say the reaction of non-pb Scots was one of overwhelming disinterest. I wonder how many people outwith the ranks of the SNP even remember it.
Mr. Kelly, the point stands. You can hardly claim that not being of Caledonia pb doesn't 'get' Scotland and that claim those from north of the border who disagree with you don't count.
Why do you want to stop British unskilled workers or retirees moving to other countries in the EU?
I don't, though there perhaps might be a quota for unskilled workers.
Indeed, if Spain said 'right, no more UK pensioners', that might concentrate the minds of a few UKIP voters who consider it their inalienable right to retire there, whilst at the same time blocking some EU citizens from coming here.
I have no problems with other EU countries controlling their borders in a similar manner.
If they want to keep out criminal Brits, I cannot see how we could object!
British retirees receive British pensions in the Costas, and tend to return to the UK when they get frail. As I pointed out most health care and social care costs are in the final couple of years of life, so the costs are still mostly borne by the UK taxpayer.
If British pensioners were means tested to ensure that they had the wherewithal to support themselves, and insurance to cover emergencies, before they could have permanent residence, it would seem very reasonable to me.
"Mr. Kelly, the point stands. You can hardly claim that not being of Caledonia pb doesn't 'get' Scotland and that claim those from north of the border who disagree with you don't count."
Hardly. If you think Fitalass is representative of Scottish opinion, then...well perhaps you do think that. I rest my case.
Well precisely, why do you think Spain and France with their ageing populations would want to keep taking British retirees if we pull up the drawbridge for young French and Spanish people to come and work here?
I agree we shouldn't. We shouldn;t at all.
But the plain fact is that in terms of immigration, some countries are more equal than others. Pulling up the drawbridge to Romania or Pakistan is not the same as pulling up the drawbridge to Spain or France.
If you're saying that all immigration involves taking the rough with the smooth ie if you want Tinker Taylor then you've got to accept some beggar man thief, then fine I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you.
Many people seem to think we can and should have one without the other, though.
"I'm also rather amused by your ability to know the views of the whole of Scotland, especially as the polls currently seem to rather go against your view."
Are you serious? Have you seen the latest Holyrood polls? The SNP are defying gravity by maintaining a lead deep in mid-term (an utterly enormous lead in the most recent poll).
"Mr. Kelly, the point stands. You can hardly claim that not being of Caledonia pb doesn't 'get' Scotland and that claim those from north of the border who disagree with you don't count."
Hardly. If you think Fitalass is representative of Scottish opinion, then...well perhaps you do think that. I rest my case.
But the polls are showing fairly firmly at the moment that your pro-independence view is not representative of Scottish opinion as it currently stands. Unless you think the polls are wrong?
Why do you want to stop British unskilled workers or retirees moving to other countries in the EU?
I don't, though there perhaps might be a quota for unskilled workers.
Indeed, if Spain said 'right, no more UK pensioners', that might concentrate the minds of a few UKIP voters who consider it their inalienable right to retire there, whilst at the same time blocking some EU citizens from coming here.
I have no problems with other EU countries controlling their borders in a similar manner.
If they want to keep out criminal Brits, I cannot see how we could object!
British retirees receive British pensions in the Costas, and tend to return to the UK when they get frail. As I pointed out most health care and social care costs are in the final couple of years of life, so the costs are still mostly borne by the UK taxpayer.
If British pensioners were means tested to ensure that they had the wherewithal to support themselves, and insurance to cover emergencies, before they could have permanent residence, it would seem very reasonable to me.
How come there arent loads of Bulgarians and Romanians retiring to Spain?
"But the polls are showing fairly firmly at the moment that your pro-independence view is not representative of Scottish opinion as it currently stands. Unless you think the polls are wrong?"
According to the latest poll, neither the pro-independence nor anti-independence positions represent majority opinion in Scotland. Both are below 50% support, with don't knows making up the balance.
"I'm also rather amused by your ability to know the views of the whole of Scotland, especially as the polls currently seem to rather go against your view."
Are you serious? Have you seen the latest Holyrood polls? The SNP are defying gravity by maintaining a lead deep in mid-term (an utterly enormous lead in the most recent poll).
Yes, very serious. I was referring to your support for independence. As you well knew.
As I'm currently based in the Middle East I thought I'd check my Facebook page to catch up with the Fall Out from QuestionTimeGate back home. Nothing to report as yet.
Why do you want to stop British unskilled workers or retirees moving to other countries in the EU?
I don't, though there perhaps might be a quota for unskilled workers.
Indeed, if Spain said 'right, no more UK pensioners', that might concentrate the minds of a few UKIP voters who consider it their inalienable right to retire there, whilst at the same time blocking some EU citizens from coming here.
I have no problems with other EU countries controlling their borders in a similar manner.
If they want to keep out criminal Brits, I cannot see how we could object!
British retirees receive British pensions in the Costas, and tend to return to the UK when they get frail. As I pointed out most health care and social care costs are in the final couple of years of life, so the costs are still mostly borne by the UK taxpayer.
If British pensioners were means tested to ensure that they had the wherewithal to support themselves, and insurance to cover emergencies, before they could have permanent residence, it would seem very reasonable to me.
As the OECD report shows, because of the age profile of those moving here and those leaving we are net beneficiaries financially from immigration.
To what end do you want to change that? Why would you want British pensioners means tested by foreign governments, what is it about all this which is so terrible that you are determined to cost the country so much money and limit the freedom to retire to the EU,or go and work there?
To many people, a sense of belonging and being part of a community are more important than money
"Mr. Kelly, didn't the non-SNP Scots of pb also indicate that they too were unimpressed with Salmond's 'rue the day' moment?"
You mean the Scottish Tory contingent? There don't seem to be any other types of non-SNP Scots around (for which you can blame the anti-left wing culture on this site).
Oi! Don't forget the massed ranks of independence-supporting Scottish Lib Dems.
"It sounds immensely arrogant that you assume the SNP to be the One True Voice of Scotland, and those who disagree to somehow not count or matter."
It would, if I did assume that. It sounds immensely comical that you can't seem to distinguish between pointing out that diehard Scottish Tories are on the fringe of Scottish public opinion, and a suggestion that nobody from outside the SNP can speak for Scotland.
"But the polls are showing fairly firmly at the moment that your pro-independence view is not representative of Scottish opinion as it currently stands. Unless you think the polls are wrong?"
According to the latest poll, neither the pro-independence nor anti-independence positions represent majority opinion in Scotland. Both are below 50% support, with don't knows making up the balance.
But it still shows your claim to be untrue. You may want Scottish opinion to mirror your own, but sadly it does not. Unless you're actually wavering on independence?
Why do you want to stop British unskilled workers or retirees moving to other countries in the EU?
I don't, though there perhaps might be a quota for unskilled workers.
Indeed, if Spain said 'right, no more UK pensioners', that might concentrate the minds of a few UKIP voters who consider it their inalienable right to retire there, whilst at the same time blocking some EU citizens from coming here.
I have no problems with other EU countries controlling their borders in a similar manner.
If they want to keep out criminal Brits, I cannot see how we could object!
British retirees receive British pensions in the Costas, and tend to return to the UK when they get frail. As I pointed out most health care and social care costs are in the final couple of years of life, so the costs are still mostly borne by the UK taxpayer.
If British pensioners were means tested to ensure that they had the wherewithal to support themselves, and insurance to cover emergencies, before they could have permanent residence, it would seem very reasonable to me.
As the OECD report shows, because of the age profile of those moving here and those leaving we are net beneficiaries financially from immigration.
To what end do you want to change that? Why would you want British pensioners means tested by foreign governments, what is it about all this which is so terrible that you are determined to cost the country so much money and limit the freedom to retire to the EU,or go and work there?
To many people, a sense of belonging and being part of a community are more important than money
You mean those British retirees who choose to group together in the south of Spain? The ones Farage is determined to cage in Lewisham or Leatherhead whether they want it or not? It's a disgrace what he wants to do to them, forcing them through means tests by Spanish officials, stopping them from achieving what they have dreamed of,saved for.
For one Farage has said nothing of the sort as far as I am aware... any evidence for your claim?
Secondly, the kind of OAPs that can afford to retire in Spain are a million miles away from the type that rely on state pensions to sustain them in towns (like Lewisham) where they now feel like strangers thanks to your immigration policies.
,just because Nige doesn't want young immigrants....
Has he actually said that?
What NIge is promising is a distillation of immigration, not a ban on it.
He proposes to take back powers to let in the 10-year old malt Australia engineers, whilst allowing the rough spirit of Romanian gangsters to evaporate.
I don't know if he can do that. I have my doubts. But that is what he is promising, isn't it?
Why do you want to stop British unskilled workers or retirees moving to other countries in the EU?
I don't, though there perhaps might be a quota for unskilled workers.
Indeed, if Spain said 'right, no more UK pensioners', that might concentrate the minds of a few UKIP voters who consider it their inalienable right to retire there, whilst at the same time blocking some EU citizens from coming here.
I have no problems with other EU countries controlling their borders in a similar manner.
If they want to keep out criminal Brits, I cannot see how we could object!
British retirees receive British pensions in the Costas, and tend to return to the UK when they get frail. As I pointed out most health care and social care costs are in the final couple of years of life, so the costs are still mostly borne by the UK taxpayer.
If British pensioners were means tested to ensure that they had the wherewithal to support themselves, and insurance to cover emergencies, before they could have permanent residence, it would seem very reasonable to me.
As the OECD report shows, because of the age profile of those moving here and those leaving we are net beneficiaries financially from immigration.
To what end do you want to change that? Why would you want British pensioners means tested by foreign governments, what is it about all this which is so terrible that you are determined to cost the country so much money and limit the freedom to retire to the EU,or go and work there?
To many people, a sense of belonging and being part of a community are more important than money
You mean those British retirees who choose to group together in the south of Spain? The ones Farage is determined to cage in Lewisham or Leatherhead whether they want it or not? It's a disgrace what he wants to do to them, forcing them through means tests by Spanish officials, stopping them from achieving what they have dreamed of,saved for.
For one Farage has said nothing of the sort as far as I am aware... any evidence for your claim?
Secondly, the kind of OAPs that can afford to retire in Spain are a million miles away from the type that rely on state pensions to sustain them in towns (like Lewisham) where they now feel like strangers thanks to your immigration policies.
People have always left Lewisham to retire Sam. There's three or four thirtysomethings for each over 70 year old, there was twelve years ago too.
But the cruelty of Farage's position,to put their dreams of retiring further afield than Margate at risk is just cruel.
Not only that you stop young immigrants coming in and British pensioners have to work longer to cover the fiscal gap left by Farage's cruel policies.
Why oh why does he want to take away their dreams?
Stopping pensioners of retiring further afield than margate,They can always move to Bradford to retire.
Why do you want to stop British unskilled workers or retirees moving to other countries in the EU?
I don't, though there perhaps might be a quota for unskilled workers.
Indeed, if Spain said 'right, no more UK pensioners', that might concentrate the minds of a few UKIP voters who consider it their inalienable right to retire there, whilst at the same time blocking some EU citizens from coming here.
I have no problems with other EU countries controlling their borders in a similar manner.
If they want to keep out criminal Brits, I cannot see how we could object!
British retirees receive British pensions in the Costas, and tend to return to the UK when they get frail. As I pointed out most health care and social care costs are in the final couple of years of life, so the costs are still mostly borne by the UK taxpayer.
If British pensioners were means tested to ensure that they had the wherewithal to support themselves, and insurance to cover emergencies, before they could have permanent residence, it would seem very reasonable to me.
As the OECD report shows, because of the age profile of those moving here and those leaving we are net beneficiaries financially from immigration.
To what end do you want to change that? Why would you want British pensioners means tested by foreign governments, what is it about all this which is so terrible that you are determined to cost the country so much money and limit the freedom to retire to the EU,or go and work there?
To many people, a sense of belonging and being part of a community are more important than money
You mean those British retirees who choose to group together in the south of Spain? The ones Farage is determined to cage in Lewisham or Leatherhead whether they want it or not? It's a disgrace what he wants to do to them, forcing them through means tests by Spanish officials, stopping them from achieving what they have dreamed of,saved for.
For one Farage has said nothing of the sort as far as I am aware... any evidence for your claim?
Secondly, the kind of OAPs that can afford to retire in Spain are a million miles away from the type that rely on state pensions to sustain them in towns (like Lewisham) where they now feel like strangers thanks to your immigration policies.
People have always left Lewisham to retire Sam. There's three or four thirtysomethings for each over 70 year old, there was twelve years ago too.
But the cruelty of Farage's position,to put their dreams of retiring further afield than Margate at risk is just cruel.
Not only that you stop young immigrants coming in and British pensioners have to work longer to cover the fiscal gap left by Farage's cruel policies.
Why oh why does he want to take away their dreams?
He doesn't
You're making yourself look silly now.
Only rich pensioners can afford to retire abroad, while those that cant are left in areas they used to call home, but in which they now feel like immigrants; alienated, thanks to the policies you desire.
But they're only coffin dodgers I suppose, who cares?
Farage should stand up, be honest with the British people and tell them, 4p on income tax if you don't want a Spaniard or a Pole next door to you. And of course we'll need to build a lot more care homes and hospitals once the retirees can't move around Europe, add that on too. Bedroom tax apply to retirees forced to stay here in houses larger than they need will it? Big outgoings just because Nige wants to stop young Poles and Spaniards coming here.
So hopefully UKIP will be honest. 5p on income tax sounds a little low,but a start down the road to honesty.
Dear oh dear, I think you were better when they let you call people names on here!
Now you are inventing policies for other parties so you can argue against them!!!
Comments
I can't wait for Neil Oliver's next tourism advert. Although thinking about it, one of the ads fits: "Scotland might surprise you. Whether you’re after dramatic scenery.... or dramatic scenes..."
I do wonder whether Galloway will still be supporting Assad following Griffin's visit to Syria at Assad's intervention. Will he find it easier to say something nice about Griffin than something critical about Assad?
The problems with the excessive immigration that we have seen over the last 15 years are not primarily economic, but social. The shortage of housing is the most obvious. Big increases in HB (an economic factor?), weakening of the green belt and over-development of our towns and countryside are all linked to the huge growth in population caused solely by nett immigration.
UKIP want a moratorium on immigration for 5 years, to allow the country to assimilate fully all the recent arrivals.
The opportunity to control immigration is less important than the other economic benefits of quitting the EU.
I'm sorry, but what is your problem with people "haranguing" Farage? It seems to be you who has the issue with free speech. The young should shut up in the presence of their superiors?
http://order-order.com/2013/06/13/watch-labour-to-abstain-on-eu-referendum-vote/
"Guido Fawkes @GuidoFawkes 54m
CCHQ sources: "We are literally punching the air. Ed Miliband is weak."
To quote Divvie: Put your frillies back on
I'm sorry, but you really can't have it both ways. Either you respect their right to protest and have their voices heard, or you don't.
The Parliamentary seat also includes parts of Tewkesbury district council, but UKIP didn't do so well there in the locals. While UKIP beat the Tories by just under 1,000 votes in the Forest of Dean, in Tewkesbury the Tories crushed them by more than 8,000 votes.
At the moment it looks likely that the Tewkesbury parts of the Forest of Dean seat will keep it Tory, but there appears to be a strong Labour vote in the Forest and a strong Lib Dem vote in Tewkesbury, so it might become a four-way marginal.
Thanks Andy for all your hard work with this spreadsheet. It looks like a great resource.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/formula1/22894591
Good news. Red Bull sadly seem likely to take the titles again, the last thing they need is a helping hand in the one area they aren't top dog.
I've got no problems with them protesting and having their voices heard. But it went too far when it stopped someone else from being able to speak.
As I said, idiots.
1. Norwich: 26.99%
2. Oxford: 19.99%
3. Stroud: 18.00%
4. Mid Suffolk: 15.60%
5. Bristol: 13.76%
6. Lancaster: 13.73%
7. South Hams: 12.89%
8. Nuneaton & Bedworth: 12.30%
9. Waveney: 12.26%
10.Worcester: 11.80%
11.Weymouth & Portland: 11.73%
12.Reigate & Banstead: 11.17%
13.Babergh: 11.15%
14.Warwick & Leamington: 10.87%
15.Rochford: 8.87%
16.Cambridge: 8.79%
17.Shepway: 8.65%
18.Maldon: 8.44%
19.Maidstone: 8.43%
20.Malvern Hills: 8.42%
21.Braintree: 8.13%
22.West Dorset: 8.05%
23.New Forest: 7.96%
24.North Hertfordshire: 7.85%
25.West Oxfordshire: 7.77%
26.Ipswich: 7.68%
27.Watford: 7.57%
Presumably you don't include a moratorium on inter-corporate transfers. So, Thomson Reuters can move the CFO of its media division from New York to London. A large number of those coming to the UK to work are not planning on staying. Is the plan to distinguish between temporary workers (in fruit picking for example) who don't plan to be around for long, and permanent immigrants?
And membership of the EEA requires you sign up to freedom of movement (although, as Richard Tyndall has pointed out, you can impose lots of 'soft' conditions to discourage migrants - or at least, unemployed ones). Is the policy to leave the EEA? Or to stay?
For example by using a trivial incident a few weeks ago as a feeble excuse for the silencing of the Scottish Green Party, and for pro-independence voices being outnumbered by four to one?
Pat Kane @thoughtland 36m
#bbcqt line-up 2nite is outrageous. Agree with every word of @patrickharvie's complaint http://ow.ly/m04Mn UK deep state utterly at it
The country is facing a problem with an aging population---each person of working age is having to support a growing number of pensioners. It may be politically more attractive to import young workers than to raise the age when a pension can be taken. But it is not more sensible.
Hue and Cry , crap music , crap politics. Shut and Up , Mr McAlpine.
Nah, there's no way of making it "interesting to a non-Scottish audience". For what it's worth, I was a bit nervous at the start, but the campaign has gone very smoothly for the SNP, so I think they'll win very comfortably.
I beg to differ. Exhibit A -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1X7t_4Au4E
Is that Jackie Ashley?
Conservative 43.0% -15.8
UKIP 20.5% +17.0
Labour 17.4% +4.4
Lib Dem 11.3% -8.1
Green 7.8% +3.7
Only UKIP can beat Cameron in Witney...
[Thanks to Andy again for his great work on the spreadsheet]
How many of the recent Polish immigrants have been 'inter-corporate tranfers'? How many Bulgarians, or Roumanians?
Save us Exhibit B.
It also sucks if you - let us say - go off to the US to study at CalTech, meet a girl, marry her... and, oh no, she can't move to the UK now. That's OK. Because now you, a CalTech graduate, will choose to stay in the US.
Since you asked -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1RkCBxmJvE
Quite. Trouble is, people are wondering why we can't get the smooth of mass immigration without, not to put too fine a point on it, the rough.
If its really impossible, or even undesirable, to have one without the other, then politicians should maybe have the courage to tell us.
Thanks for your appreciation. I'm not looking for any sympathy when I say this, but if anyone thinks it was just a simple case of copying and pasting to compile these spreadsheets, nothing could be further from the truth.
The majority of councils present their results in a way they believe is helpful but which in fact makes it impossible to copy the results into a spreadsheet, which means you have to type each and every individual result in yourself, which takes ages.
Ironically, about 10 years ago when councils first started putting their results online, they would just offer a downloadable spreadsheet, which made things a lot easier but most don't do that now.
Has he actually said that?
What NIge is promising is a distillation of immigration, not a ban on it.
He proposes to take back powers to let in the 10-year old malt Australia engineers, whilst allowing the rough spirit of Romanian gangsters to evaporate.
I don't know if he can do that. I have my doubts. But that is what he is promising, isn't it?
Lib Dem MPs expected to be told they can stay away from Commons for Tory #EU referendum Bill "stunt" on July 5. Just like Labour.
No doubt the slave trade was good for the economy of the country they were sold to, and no doubt the people who used them crowed about the economic benefits then as well
The "demographic timebomb" is vastly overstated. Decrepitude is mostly in the very last few years of life, and where health and social care costs are concentrated. The young elderly are generally very fit, and as most modern work is less physically demanding than historically, plenty of suitable jobs. Checkout operators and MacDonalds staff are quite elderly in some parts of the world, and often give much better customer service than surly teenagers. At Mount St Bernards Monastry in Charnwood, the gift shop is run by a delightful 94 year old, who has certainly the gift of the gab!
Phil Mullan has an interesting book on the phenomenon, to quote a review:
http://www.politicalreviewnet.com/polrev/reviews/POQU/R_0032_3179_011_20501.asp
"Mullan draws attention to the way in which the concept of ‘retirement’ has been created in the course of the twentieth century. Bismarck in 1889 introduced state pensions for those retiring at age 70, when life expectancy was about 50—so that the cost to the public purse was minimal. In Britain, the male pensionable age was reduced to 65 in 1925 to encourage people to stop working earlier and help bring about a reduction in the then high rate of unemployment. At the same time, pension entitlement was tied to retirement from work, so that old age became identified with moving to a new stage in life without remunerated employment. Before the introduction of pensions, two-thirds of men aged 65 and over were in full-time work.
So the phenomenon of ‘retirement’ is recent, and is a creation of the welfare state. The subsequent advent of occupational pensions has allowed retirement commonly to take place well before the formal age of pension entitlement. As we live longer and healthier lives, we find, paradoxically, that work runs out earlier. One likely response to the economic and financial anxieties associated with population ageing is to take advantage of this new reserve army of labour. The challenge is to develop institutional arrangements to make this possible."
Can't stop involuntarily snorting with laughter every time I look at this picture. #indyref http://pic.twitter.com/ojJBHpPvgN
Boston*: 41.02%
Thanet*: 38.32%
Adur*: 37.07%
Great Yarmouth*: 36.35%
Forest Heath: 35.61%
Arun*: 35.44%
South Holland: 35.33%
Breckland: 34.81%
East Dorset: 34.72%
Christchurch: 34.60%
Swale*: 34.32%
Huntingdonshire: 33.95%
Castle Point*: 33.70%
Torridge: 33.57%
Eastleigh: 33.14%
Shepway: 32.25%
Basildon*: 32.09%
Redditch: 31.10%
Rushmoor: 30.87%
Worthing: 30.29%
Tunbridge Wells: 30.03%
(UKIP carried Forest of Dean with 28.33%).
However if it is to be an independence special as you claim, then the Greens and other parties should probably be there. But I also question the timing of such a show just before a by-election.
Actually, going to the BBC website shows that there may be a connection: "David Dimbleby presents Question Time from Edinburgh, with an audience of 16 and 17-year-olds. The 2014 referendum on Scottish independence will be the first time anyone under 18 has had a vote in the UK."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b02xch54
If it is to be an independence special, then it is very poor timing by the BBC. We'll have to see what the questions asked are.
Well absolutely, but the way various governments have flailed around with immigration, it seems this apparently straightforward task is actually inordinately difficult.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-11/traders-said-to-rig-currency-rates-to-profit-off-clients.html
The FX market is the biggest financial market there is. This is effectively stealing money off millions of people for the benefit of a few powerful institutions and their traders.
Has anyone been arrested for the LIBOR fixing yet? Why the hell does our media not have this stuff on the front page of every website? Why are MPs not demanding answers in parliament? The whole system is corrupt, and the people supposed to be informing the public aren't doing their jobs.
Thanks for pointing that out about Witney / West Oxfordshire because I'd forgotten to put it in bold originally.
It wasn't synthetic. The Economist cover was an embarrassment to journalism. I can only raise a smile every time someone here trots out the "rue the day" comment as if that's a reminder of some kind of misstep by Alex Salmond - in reality he captured the mood of the nation perfectly.
If Farage can't take people disagreeing with him volubly, he's in the wrong trade. There seems to be an increasing intolerance of dissent south of the border which I must say I find slightly disturbing.
What partitionist mob? Did the Orange Order turn up later?
Forest of Dean council comprises 95% of the electorate of the constituency so the Tewkesbury element is pretty insignificant in the shape of the Highnam with Haw Bridge ward. UKIP didn't put up a candidate in the Highnam county council division.
Well, as we're on the subject of 80s pop music, perhaps this is the moment to gently point out to you that the only place I say these things is in your dreams -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IivGqwQvdCI
As for your other point: it wasn't a case of Farage not being able to take people disagreeing with him voluably; he was not allowed to speak. It wasn't a debate; it was a bunch of idiots shouting him down and creating such a nuisance he had to leave.
Using free speech to prevent free speech is not free speech.
I don't, though there perhaps might be a quota for unskilled workers.
Indeed, if Spain said 'right, no more UK pensioners', that might concentrate the minds of a few UKIP voters who consider it their inalienable right to retire there, whilst at the same time blocking some EU citizens from coming here.
Salmond's comment WAS the dissent from the usual London establishment sneering about a Scotland that is "too wee, too poor, too stupid" to govern itself.
Tonight's panel update (now 6/6 on Twitter) @RuthDavidsonMSP, @AnasSarwar, @MorayMP, @georgegalloway, @LesleyRiddoch & @Nigel_Farage #bbcqt
The Electoral Reform Society in Scotland seeks to inform and improve Scotland's democracy. With that in mind, we have being undertaking an inquiry into what a good Scottish democracy looks like.
A major theme that has emerged from this year long, citizen led inquiry, is the importance of the media to instruct, publicise and inform the debate. There has been support for a publicly funded media provider, but a strong sense that that body should be impartial and should seek to provide balanced and informed coverage of politics. Clearly this is of particular concern in the run up to the 2014 referendum.
We were concerned therefore to see the line-up for the BBC Question Time programme to be held in Edinburgh this evening (Thursday 13th June). Not only does the selection of panellists fail to represent the make-up of Scottish politics, but it also seems to be aimed more at pantomime than serious debate.
That this should be the case when the audience is, very pleasingly, to be made up of 16 and 17 year olds in recognition of the extension of the franchise to that group for the referendum is worrying.
It seems to show a lack of respect for these young audience members - implying that they do not deserve serious political debate. It also fails to allow them to hear from their elected representatives in this public debate forum which receives the widest of political attention. Two of the parties which will be competing for their vote in 2014 are un-represented and the Yes and Better Together campaigns are needlessly unequally represented. Were this not bad enough, available spaces on the platform are taken instead by George Galloway MP and Nigel Farage MEP, two individuals and parties who are not represented in Scotland.
https://www.facebook.com/notes/electoral-reform-society-scotland/ers-scotland-complaint-to-the-bbc-re-newsnight-130613/10151517047943165
The fact that this was almost the uniform response on PB is the surest indication that people interested in politics south of the border very often just don't "get" Scotland.
http://www.mountsaintbernard.org/index.html
The youngest of the monks is in his sixties, it is a beautiful and inspiring place to visit.
My predictions about Scottish affairs over the past year have been uniformly right ,yours uniformly wrong. I'm afraid your enthusiasm has turned you into a crank and fanatic.
What's worse, the shoplifting or the lack of ambition...? -> MT @HuffPostUK: Ukip councillor resigns after shoplifting from Poundstretcher
LOL
You mean the Scottish Tory contingent? There don't seem to be any other types of non-SNP Scots around (for which you can blame the anti-left wing culture on this site).
I'm also rather amused by your ability to know the views of the whole of Scotland, especially as the polls currently seem to rather go against your view. I have travelled rather extensively in Scotland, perhaps more than many Scots, and know the land well. The view of someone in the Borders on most subjects tends to be rather different from those of Kintyre or Buchan.
Anyway, we're not going to agree on any of this, and the conversation has drifted rather spectacularly away from QT.
I know. Thank Christ we have Ruth Davidson as First Minister at last.
If they want to keep out criminal Brits, I cannot see how we could object!
British retirees receive British pensions in the Costas, and tend to return to the UK when they get frail. As I pointed out most health care and social care costs are in the final couple of years of life, so the costs are still mostly borne by the UK taxpayer.
If British pensioners were means tested to ensure that they had the wherewithal to support themselves, and insurance to cover emergencies, before they could have permanent residence, it would seem very reasonable to me.
Hardly. If you think Fitalass is representative of Scottish opinion, then...well perhaps you do think that. I rest my case.
I agree we shouldn't. We shouldn;t at all.
But the plain fact is that in terms of immigration, some countries are more equal than others. Pulling up the drawbridge to Romania or Pakistan is not the same as pulling up the drawbridge to Spain or France.
If you're saying that all immigration involves taking the rough with the smooth ie if you want Tinker Taylor then you've got to accept some beggar man thief, then fine I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you.
Many people seem to think we can and should have one without the other, though.
Are you serious? Have you seen the latest Holyrood polls? The SNP are defying gravity by maintaining a lead deep in mid-term (an utterly enormous lead in the most recent poll).
.@bbcquestiontime Given his permanent slot on the show, perhaps you can save time and just make @Nigel_Farage the host. #bbcqt
But would we notice the difference?
Why dont Brits retire to Bulgaria or Romania?
According to the latest poll, neither the pro-independence nor anti-independence positions represent majority opinion in Scotland. Both are below 50% support, with don't knows making up the balance.
It sounds immensely arrogant that you assume the SNP to be the One True Voice of Scotland, and those who disagree to somehow not count or matter.
Hopefully the Scottish people will prove less in love with the idea of separation come 2014, but either way the matter will be settled then.
It would, if I did assume that. It sounds immensely comical that you can't seem to distinguish between pointing out that diehard Scottish Tories are on the fringe of Scottish public opinion, and a suggestion that nobody from outside the SNP can speak for Scotland.
Which claim? How does it show it to be untrue? I literally have no idea what you're talking about.
Secondly, the kind of OAPs that can afford to retire in Spain are a million miles away from the type that rely on state pensions to sustain them in towns (like Lewisham) where they now feel like strangers thanks to your immigration policies.
Expect more immigration under labour.
He doesn't
You're making yourself look silly now.
Only rich pensioners can afford to retire abroad, while those that cant are left in areas they used to call home, but in which they now feel like immigrants; alienated, thanks to the policies you desire.
But they're only coffin dodgers I suppose, who cares?
Not pertaining to what you were discussing, but if its "start down the road to honesty", you should look in the mirror first.
Dear oh dear, I think you were better when they let you call people names on here!
Now you are inventing policies for other parties so you can argue against them!!!
Get yourself a hobby! Take up golf!
That you moved from a multi-racial part of Birmingham to a 99.9 % whitey area of Liverpool.
Is it true,because one thing I can't stand is the lefts say one thing every one should do and found out they don't do it them selfs.