"I've questioned your assertion that Scotland's low life expectancy is due to its being part of the UK (something which appears to have no bearing on life expectancy in Wales and Northern Ireland)."
So let me get what you are asserting straight. You're saying that the fact that Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland ALL have lower life expectancies than England has NOTHING to do with the way they are governed from London?
"When people pointed out that it was due to life expectancy being lower in Scotland you made a trite remark (several times - it wasn't funny the first time) about it being a dividend from the union."
It wasn't intended to be 'funny" - it was an entirely serious point. The fact that Fluffy even flagged my comments as "trolling" just demonstrate the extent to which you PB Tories inhabit a different planet. I'm afraid the record of the union will be on trial in this referendum, whether you like it or not. I can hardly think of a better reason to abandon London rule than the appalling effect it has had on Scottish life expectancy.
You're the one making the extraordinary claim here, Charles. If you seriously think that the way Scotland is governed from London has no effect on people's life chances and health outcomes, please explain to me where the line of causation mysteriously ended.
"I've questioned your assertion that Scotland's low life expectancy is due to its being part of the UK (something which appears to have no bearing on life expectancy in Wales and Northern Ireland)."
So let me get what you are asserting straight. You're saying that the fact that Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland ALL have lower life expectancies than England has NOTHING to do with the way they are governed from London?
Any medical literature to support that one?
I'm not asserting anything.
I'd just like to know what you think there is, about our current constitutional framework, that leads to Scotland having worse health outcomes than the rest of the UK?
"I'd just like to know what you think there is, about our current constitutional framework, that leads to Scotland having worse health outcomes than the rest of the UK?"
If you need me to spell out the bleedin' obvious, governance that is only in the interests of one part of the UK.
You're the one making the extraordinary claim here, Charles. If you seriously think that the way Scotland is governed from London has no effect on people's life chances and health outcomes, please explain to me where the line of causation mysteriously ended.
Isn't it more a case of "how" rather than "because"? There does not seem to have been a problem before the 1950s, then something began to happen and got more intense in the 1980s.
Perhaps it is a case of the NHS being a better proposition for England, Wales and NI than it has been for Scotland; with the failure to deal with deindustrialisation in the 1980s exacerbating the problem. If that is so, you probably have a point; and the Scottish government - whether devolved or independent - should be looking to create an alternative to the present NHS.
"Brocklebank-Fowler? Even I have absolutely no recollection of him."
You should - he was one of the few in history to have literally 'crossed the floor' in the middle of a debate. He joined the Liberal Democrats after the merger, but I think he eventually ended up moving to Labour.
"If that is so, you probably have a point; and the Scottish government - whether devolved or independent - should be looking to create an alternative to the present NHS."
They've certainly created a radical alternative to the debased Tory/New Labour NHS model that is currently operating in England.
You're the one making the extraordinary claim here, Charles. If you seriously think that the way Scotland is governed from London has no effect on people's life chances and health outcomes, please explain to me where the line of causation mysteriously ended.
Isn't it more a case of "how" rather than "because"? There does not seem to have been a problem before the 1950s, then something began to happen and got more intense in the 1980s.
Perhaps it is a case of the NHS being a better proposition for England, Wales and NI than it has been for Scotland; with the failure to deal with deindustrialisation in the 1980s exacerbating the problem. If that is so, you probably have a point; and the Scottish government - whether devolved or independent - should be looking to create an alternative to the present NHS.
That may be correct, although it would need some research.
As far as I can tell, Scottish GDP per head exceeds that of Wales, Northern Ireland, and all English regions except the South East, and Greater London, so it's hard to attribute low life expectancy to economic fortunes.
Britain under Gordon Brown is a more unequal country than at any time since modern records began in the early 1960s, after the incomes of the poor fell and those of the rich rose in the three years after the 2005 general election.
Deprivation and inequality in the UK rose for a third successive year in 2007-08, according to data from the Department for Work and Pensions that prompted strong criticism from campaign groups for the government's backsliding on its anti-poverty goals.
In a further blow, the government failed to make a dent in the number of children or pensioners living in poverty after big increases the previous year. Almost 17,000 more children in England are on free school meals this year compared with last, according to government data also published yesterday.
About 15% of pupils in state schools are now entitled to free school meals because their parents receive welfare payments or earn below £15,575 a year, the figures show. Last year, 14.5% of pupils were eligible.
Even before the onset of the UK's deepest recession in a generation, official figures showed that only the better-off families were spared from a squeeze on living standards that saw median income virtually unchanged and fresh cuts in real pay for those on the lowest salaries.
Since Tony Blair's third election victory, the poorest 10% of households have seen weekly incomes fall by £9 a week to £147 once inflation is accounted for, while those in the richest 10% of homes have enjoyed a £45 a week increase to £1,033.
The data shows that the second poorest 10% of households has also had to make do with less since 2005. Overall, the poorest 20% saw real income fall by 2.6% in the three years to 2007-08, while those in the top fifth of the income distribution enjoyed a rise of 3.3%. As a result, income inequality at the end of Labour's 11th year in power was higher than at any time during Margaret Thatcher's premiership.
"I'd just like to know what you think there is, about our current constitutional framework, that leads to Scotland having worse health outcomes than the rest of the UK?"
If you need me to spell out the bleedin' obvious, governance that is only in the interests of one part of the UK.
James, I obviously have no knowledge on the subject, or have seen any evidence to prove or disprove your argument, but to say that Westminster governance is responsible for your nation's appalling general standard of health is quite a claim. I say this as a supporter of the right of independence.
"When people pointed out that it was due to life expectancy being lower in Scotland you made a trite remark (several times - it wasn't funny the first time) about it being a dividend from the union."
It wasn't intended to be 'funny" - it was an entirely serious point. The fact that Fluffy even flagged my comments as "trolling" just demonstrate the extent to which you PB Tories inhabit a different planet. I'm afraid the record of the union will be on trial in this referendum, whether you like it or not. I can hardly think of a better reason to abandon London rule than the appalling effect it has had on Scottish life expectancy.
Please demonstrate the line of causation.
The majority of people living in Scotland over the age of 16 drink alcohol, 93 percent of men and 87 percent of women. They drink nearly 25 percent more than the English and Welsh. A strong link between alcohol abuse and poverty persists in Scotland. Men who lived in deprived areas are seven times more likely to die of alcohol-related causes.
All exacerbated by binge drinking, separatism and underaged alcohol abuse.
"James, I obviously have no knowledge on the subject, or have seen any evidence to prove or disprove your argument, but to say that Westminster governance is responsible for your nation's appalling general standard of health is quite a claim."
I'm astonished. Are you another person who seriously thinks that a country's health has nothing to do with the way that it is governed? The unionist trance is certainly weaving its magic, at least on this site.
"If that is so, you probably have a point; and the Scottish government - whether devolved or independent - should be looking to create an alternative to the present NHS."
They've certainly created a radical alternative to the debased Tory/New Labour NHS model that is currently operating in England.
So decreased Scottish life expectancy is due to the "radical alternative" created in Scotland by the devolved government? (Which as I understand it is responsible for health in Scotland).
You are right, the problem seems to be the Union, in that we have devolved responsibility for their own health to the Scots... we should have kept it centralised.
In any case, exactly how would you expect Scots to change their lifestyle on gaining independence? They would magically give up fags, booze and haggis suppers, and all take up parkrun every Saturday morning in celebration?
Germany, Austria and Italy are stood together in the middle of the pub, when Serbia bumps into Austria, and spills Austria’s pint.
Austria demands Serbia buy it a complete new suit, because there are splashes on its trouser leg.
Germany expresses its support for Austria’s point of view.
Britain recommends that everyone calm down a bit.
Serbia points out that it can’t afford a whole suit, but offers to pay for cleaning Austria’s trousers.
Russia and Serbia look at Austria.
Austria asks Serbia who it’s looking at.
Russia suggests that Austria should leave its little brother alone.
Austria inquires as to whose army will assist Russia in compelling it to do so.
Germany appeals to Britain that France has been looking at it, and that this is sufficiently out of order that Britain should not intervene.
Britain replies that France can look at who it wants to, that Britain is looking at Germany too, and what is Germany going to do about it?
Germany tells Russia to stop looking at Austria, or Germany will render Russia incapable of such action.
Britain and France ask Germany whether it’s looking at Belgium.
Turkey and Germany go off into a corner and whisper. When they come back, Turkey makes a show of not looking at anyone.
Germany rolls up its sleeves, looks at France, and punches Belgium.
France and Britain punch Germany. Austria punches Russia. Germany punches Britain and France with one hand and Russia with the other.
Russia throws a punch at Germany, but misses and nearly falls over. Japan calls over from the other side of the room that it’s on Britain’s side, but stays there. Italy surprises everyone by punching Austria.
Australia punches Turkey, and gets punched back. There are no hard feelings, because Britain made Australia do it.
France gets thrown through a plate glass window, but gets back up and carries on fighting. Russia gets thrown through another one, gets knocked out, suffers brain damage, and wakes up with a complete personality change.
Italy throws a punch at Austria and misses, but Austria falls over anyway. Italy raises both fists in the air and runs round the room chanting.
America waits till Germany is about to fall over from sustained punching from Britain and France, then walks over and smashes it with a barstool, then pretends it won the fight all by itself.
By now all the chairs are broken, and the big mirror over the bar is shattered. Britain, France and America agree that Germany threw the first punch, so the whole thing is Germany’s fault . While Germany is still unconscious, they go through its pockets, steal its wallet, and buy drinks for all their friends.
And when Germany wakes up, it goes out to its car, gets the gun out of the glovebox and heads back inside...
"So decreased Scottish life expectancy is due to the "radical alternative" created in Scotland by the devolved government?"
Nice try. But as SO has pointed out, the gap in life expectancy started in the 1950s, so we can look to the likes of Macmillan, Thatcher and Major as the culprits. It takes time to repair that damage - devolution has only been in operation for fourteen years, and for the first eight of those the Scottish government was run by London Labour poodles.
"James, I obviously have no knowledge on the subject, or have seen any evidence to prove or disprove your argument, but to say that Westminster governance is responsible for your nation's appalling general standard of health is quite a claim."
I'm astonished. Are you another person who seriously thinks that a country's health has nothing to do with the way that it is governed? The unionist trance is certainly weaving its magic, at least on this site.
I agree that governance obviously has a major impact, but I just didn't know that Scotland had majorly different healthcare options, or that Scottish lifestyle was dominated by dictats from London.
"When people pointed out that it was due to life expectancy being lower in Scotland you made a trite remark (several times - it wasn't funny the first time) about it being a dividend from the union."
It wasn't intended to be 'funny" - it was an entirely serious point. The fact that Fluffy even flagged my comments as "trolling" just demonstrate the extent to which you PB Tories inhabit a different planet. I'm afraid the record of the union will be on trial in this referendum, whether you like it or not. I can hardly think of a better reason to abandon London rule than the appalling effect it has had on Scottish life expectancy.
Please demonstrate the line of causation.
The majority of people living in Scotland over the age of 16 drink alcohol, 93 percent of men and 87 percent of women. They drink nearly 25 percent more than the English and Welsh. A strong link between alcohol abuse and poverty persists in Scotland. Men who lived in deprived areas are seven times more likely to die of alcohol-related causes.
All exacerbated by binge drinking, separatism and underaged alcohol abuse.
Health policy in Scotland has been the responsibility of the Scottish parliament for over a decade. The per capita spend on health in the NHS is higher.
Life expectancy has little to do with health spending though when you look around the world. It has much more to do with diet, lack of vegetables in the diet in particular, lack of exercise, smoking and alcohol consumption. Man cannot live on Buckie and Irn-bru alone!
It will be a great campaigning slogan. "vote SNP to ban your chips and beer, live in free Scotland on salad and carrot juice!"
You're the one making the extraordinary claim here, Charles. If you seriously think that the way Scotland is governed from London has no effect on people's life chances and health outcomes, please explain to me where the line of causation mysteriously ended.
Isn't it more a case of "how" rather than "because"? There does not seem to have been a problem before the 1950s, then something began to happen and got more intense in the 1980s.
Perhaps it is a case of the NHS being a better proposition for England, Wales and NI than it has been for Scotland; with the failure to deal with deindustrialisation in the 1980s exacerbating the problem. If that is so, you probably have a point; and the Scottish government - whether devolved or independent - should be looking to create an alternative to the present NHS.
That may be correct, although it would need some research.
As far as I can tell, Scottish GDP per head exceeds that of Wales, Northern Ireland, and all English regions except the South East, and Greater London, so it's hard to attribute low life expectancy to economic fortunes.
In the end this is all about economics - deprived, urban areas of the UK, wherever they are, have much lower life expectancy rates than reasonably wealthy ones. People tend to smoke more, drink more and lead more inactive lives in places where housing is poor and employment is relatively low. That's why in London you see such disparities in longevity rates. It is not a huge stretch to claim that a Scottish government is better placed to deal specifically with what is happening in Scotland than a UK government. My concern is with the claim that in and of itself the Union has caused Scots to have lower life expectancy rates. As there was no discernible differences in rates before the 50s that cannot be the case. But the way that Scotland has been governed clearly can have had an effect and perhaps a major one/.
Nice try. But as SO has pointed out, the gap in life expectancy started in the 1950s, so we can look to the likes of Macmillan, Thatcher and Major as the culprits. It takes time to repair that damage - devolution has only been in operation for fourteen years, and for the first eight of those the Scottish government was run by London Labour poodles.
I don't have the figures to hand for changes to Scottish life expectancy over the last 8 years. I am sure you will if they support your argument.
You're the one making the extraordinary claim here, Charles. If you seriously think that the way Scotland is governed from London has no effect on people's life chances and health outcomes, please explain to me where the line of causation mysteriously ended.
Isn't it more a case of "how" rather than "because"? There does not seem to have been a problem before the 1950s, then something began to happen and got more intense in the 1980s.
Perhaps it is a case of the NHS being a better proposition for England, Wales and NI than it has been for Scotland; with the failure to deal with deindustrialisation in the 1980s exacerbating the problem. If that is so, you probably have a point; and the Scottish government - whether devolved or independent - should be looking to create an alternative to the present NHS.
That may be correct, although it would need some research.
As far as I can tell, Scottish GDP per head exceeds that of Wales, Northern Ireland, and all English regions except the South East, and Greater London, so it's hard to attribute low life expectancy to economic fortunes.
In the end this is all about economics - deprived, urban areas of the UK, wherever they are, have much lower life expectancy rates than reasonably wealthy ones. People tend to smoke more, drink more and lead more inactive lives in places where housing is poor and employment is relatively low. That's why in London you see such disparities in longevity rates. It is not a huge stretch to claim that a Scottish government is better placed to deal specifically with what is happening in Scotland than a UK government. My concern is with the claim that in and of itself the Union has caused Scots to have lower life expectancy rates. As there was no discernible differences in rates before the 50s that cannot be the case. But the way that Scotland has been governed clearly can have had an effect and perhaps a major one/.
Yes, economics is very significant. It's just that Scotland - as a whole - is better off economically than Wales, Northern Ireland, and England, apart from Greater London and the South East. Yet, health outcomes are worse.
You may very well be correct in your supposition that the creation of the NHS was much more beneficial to the inhabitants of England, Wales, and Northern Ireland than it was to the inhabitants of Scotland. But, it would be interesting to know what the NHS got right in the first three countries that it didn't get right in Scotland.
"My concern is with the claim that in and of itself the Union has caused Scots to have lower life expectancy rates. As there was no discernible differences in rates before the 50s that cannot be the case."
Salmond was born in 1954.
" By the pricking of my thumbs something wicked this way comes "
You're the one making the extraordinary claim here, Charles. If you seriously think that the way Scotland is governed from London has no effect on people's life chances and health outcomes, please explain to me where the line of causation mysteriously ended.
Actually, no, you made the original assertion. But I was bored, so googled a bit:
Dr. Gerry McCartney, who agrees with you, states: "It is increasingly recognized that it is insufficient to try to explain health trends by simply looking at the proximal causes such as smoking or alcohol," said Dr Gerry McCartney who is also a member of the Scottish Socialist Party. "Income inequality, welfare policy and unemployment do not occur by accident, but as a product of the politics pursued by the government of the day.
However, if you take this position, especially since health is a devolved topic, how do you explain the following facts from Dr. Harry Burns (Chief Medical officer for Scotland) annual report (article was Nov 2010, so I assume it was the 2009/10 annual report but it doesn't say):
Since devolution started in 1999, the average life expectancy among males in the poorest areas of Scotland has increased 1.4 years compared to 2.1 years for the rest of the country. For women the figures are 1.2 years and 1.6 years respectively. Scottish males now live on average to just over 75, while females die at about 80.
Alternatively we could just go to the Audit Scotland report on the issue
Overall health has improved over the last 50 years but health inequalities remain a significant and long-standing problem in Scotland. Deprivation is a major factor in health inequalities, with people in more affluent areas living longer and having significantly better health. Health inequalities are highly localised and vary widely within individual NHS board and council areas. Children in deprived areas have significantly worse health than those in more affluent areas.
You're the one making the extraordinary claim here, Charles. If you seriously think that the way Scotland is governed from London has no effect on people's life chances and health outcomes, please explain to me where the line of causation mysteriously ended.
Isn't it more a case of "how" rather than "because"? There does not seem to have been a problem before the 1950s, then something began to happen and got more intense in the 1980s.
Perhaps it is a case of the NHS being a better proposition for England, Wales and NI than it has been for Scotland; with the failure to deal with deindustrialisation in the 1980s exacerbating the problem. If that is so, you probably have a point; and the Scottish government - whether devolved or independent - should be looking to create an alternative to the present NHS.
That may be correct, although it would need some research.
As far as I can tell, Scottish GDP per head exceeds that of Wales, Northern Ireland, and all English regions except the South East, and Greater London, so it's hard to attribute low life expectancy to economic fortunes.
In the end this is all about economics - deprived, urban areas of the UK, wherever they are, have much lower life expectancy rates than reasonably wealthy ones. People tend to smoke more, drink more and lead more inactive lives in places where housing is poor and employment is relatively low. That's why in London you see such disparities in longevity rates. It is not a huge stretch to claim that a Scottish government is better placed to deal specifically with what is happening in Scotland than a UK government. My concern is with the claim that in and of itself the Union has caused Scots to have lower life expectancy rates. As there was no discernible differences in rates before the 50s that cannot be the case. But the way that Scotland has been governed clearly can have had an effect and perhaps a major one/.
Yes, economics is very significant. It's just that Scotland - as a whole - is better off economically than Wales, Northern Ireland, and England, apart from Greater London and the South East. Yet, health outcomes are worse.
You may very well be correct in your supposition that the creation of the NHS was much more beneficial to the inhabitants of England, Wales, and Northern Ireland than it was to the inhabitants of Scotland. But, it would be interesting to know what the NHS got right in the first three countries that it didn't get right in Scotland.
In Northern Ireland heart disease etc. runs pretty similar to Scotland. Same genes, same shit diet and exercise, same outcome - they all blame the English.
You're the one making the extraordinary claim here, Charles. If you seriously think that the way Scotland is governed from London has no effect on people's life chances and health outcomes, please explain to me where the line of causation mysteriously ended.
Isn't it more a case of "how" rather than "because"? There does not seem to have been a problem before the 1950s, then something began to happen and got more intense in the 1980s.
Perhaps it is a case of the NHS being a better proposition for England, Wales and NI than it has been for Scotland; with the failure to deal with deindustrialisation in the 1980s exacerbating the problem. If that is so, you probably have a point; and the Scottish government - whether devolved or independent - should be looking to create an alternative to the present NHS.
That may be correct, although it would need some research.
As far as I can tell, Scottish GDP per head exceeds that of Wales, Northern Ireland, and all English regions except the South East, and Greater London, so it's hard to attribute low life expectancy to economic fortunes.
In the end this is all about economics - deprived, urban areas of the UK, wherever they are, have much lower life expectancy rates than reasonably wealthy ones. People tend to smoke more, drink more and lead more inactive lives in places where housing is poor and employment is relatively low. That's why in London you see such disparities in longevity rates. It is not a huge stretch to claim that a Scottish government is better placed to deal specifically with what is happening in Scotland than a UK government. My concern is with the claim that in and of itself the Union has caused Scots to have lower life expectancy rates. As there was no discernible differences in rates before the 50s that cannot be the case. But the way that Scotland has been governed clearly can have had an effect and perhaps a major one/.
There must be a similar pattern of life expectancy differences between the wealthy and poor parts of Scotland as the whole of the UK mustn't there?
"If that is so, you probably have a point; and the Scottish government - whether devolved or independent - should be looking to create an alternative to the present NHS."
They've certainly created a radical alternative to the debased Tory/New Labour NHS model that is currently operating in England.
So decreased Scottish life expectancy is due to the "radical alternative" created in Scotland by the devolved government? (Which as I understand it is responsible for health in Scotland).
You are right, the problem seems to be the Union, in that we have devolved responsibility for their own health to the Scots... we should have kept it centralised.
In any case, exactly how would you expect Scots to change their lifestyle on gaining independence? They would magically give up fags, booze and haggis suppers, and all take up parkrun every Saturday morning in celebration?
Do you think James realises that the gap has widened since 1999, when health was devolved in Scotland?
" By the pricking of my thumbs something wicked this way comes "
Italy court finds Berlusconi guilty on sex charges
(Reuters) - A Milan court sentenced Italian former prime minister Silvio Berlusconi on Monday to seven years in prison after convicting him of paying for sex with a minor but he will not have to serve any jail time before he has exhausted appeals.
"However, if you take this position, especially since health is a devolved topic, how do you explain the following facts from Dr. Harry Burns (Chief Medical officer for Scotland) annual report (article was Nov 2010, so I assume it was the 2009/10 annual report but it doesn't say):"
As I've already pointed out, devolved control over health can only repair part of the damage (and by 2009/10 the improvements brought in the by the first genuinely autonomous Scottish government in 2007 had barely had a chance to make themselves felt). For example, I doubt if we're going to be able to resolve the suicide crisis in young Scottish men for as long as we remain part of the United Kingdom
You're the one making the extraordinary claim here, Charles. If you seriously think that the way Scotland is governed from London has no effect on people's life chances and health outcomes, please explain to me where the line of causation mysteriously ended.
Isn't it more a case of "how" rather than "because"? There does not seem to have been a problem before the 1950s, then something began to happen and got more intense in the 1980s.
Perhaps it is a case of the NHS being a better proposition for England, Wales and NI than it has been for Scotland; with the failure to deal with deindustrialisation in the 1980s exacerbating the problem. If that is so, you probably have a point; and the Scottish government - whether devolved or independent - should be looking to create an alternative to the present NHS.
That may be correct, although it would need some research.
As far as I can tell, Scottish GDP per head exceeds that of Wales, Northern Ireland, and all English regions except the South East, and Greater London, so it's hard to attribute low life expectancy to economic fortunes.
In the end this is all about economics - deprived, urban areas of the UK, wherever they are, have much lower life expectancy rates than reasonably wealthy ones. People tend to smoke more, drink more and lead more inactive lives in places where housing is poor and employment is relatively low. That's why in London you see such disparities in longevity rates. It is not a huge stretch to claim that a Scottish government is better placed to deal specifically with what is happening in Scotland than a UK government. My concern is with the claim that in and of itself the Union has caused Scots to have lower life expectancy rates. As there was no discernible differences in rates before the 50s that cannot be the case. But the way that Scotland has been governed clearly can have had an effect and perhaps a major one/.
Spot on. The point is it is the political choices not the constitutional system.
James screwed up - it could have been a mistake - but he dug his heels in.
Germany, Austria and Italy are stood together in the middle of the pub, when Serbia bumps into Austria, and spills Austria’s pint.
Austria demands Serbia buy it a complete new suit, because there are splashes on its trouser leg.
Germany expresses its support for Austria’s point of view.
Britain recommends that everyone calm down a bit.
Serbia points out that it can’t afford a whole suit, but offers to pay for cleaning Austria’s trousers.
Russia and Serbia look at Austria.
Austria asks Serbia who it’s looking at.
Russia suggests that Austria should leave its little brother alone.
Austria inquires as to whose army will assist Russia in compelling it to do so.
Germany appeals to Britain that France has been looking at it, and that this is sufficiently out of order that Britain should not intervene.
Britain replies that France can look at who it wants to, that Britain is looking at Germany too, and what is Germany going to do about it?
Germany tells Russia to stop looking at Austria, or Germany will render Russia incapable of such action.
Britain and France ask Germany whether it’s looking at Belgium.
Turkey and Germany go off into a corner and whisper. When they come back, Turkey makes a show of not looking at anyone.
Germany rolls up its sleeves, looks at France, and punches Belgium.
France and Britain punch Germany. Austria punches Russia. Germany punches Britain and France with one hand and Russia with the other.
Russia throws a punch at Germany, but misses and nearly falls over. Japan calls over from the other side of the room that it’s on Britain’s side, but stays there. Italy surprises everyone by punching Austria.
Australia punches Turkey, and gets punched back. There are no hard feelings, because Britain made Australia do it.
France gets thrown through a plate glass window, but gets back up and carries on fighting. Russia gets thrown through another one, gets knocked out, suffers brain damage, and wakes up with a complete personality change.
Italy throws a punch at Austria and misses, but Austria falls over anyway. Italy raises both fists in the air and runs round the room chanting.
America waits till Germany is about to fall over from sustained punching from Britain and France, then walks over and smashes it with a barstool, then pretends it won the fight all by itself.
By now all the chairs are broken, and the big mirror over the bar is shattered. Britain, France and America agree that Germany threw the first punch, so the whole thing is Germany’s fault . While Germany is still unconscious, they go through its pockets, steal its wallet, and buy drinks for all their friends.
And when Germany wakes up, it goes out to its car, gets the gun out of the glovebox and heads back inside...
"However, if you take this position, especially since health is a devolved topic, how do you explain the following facts from Dr. Harry Burns (Chief Medical officer for Scotland) annual report (article was Nov 2010, so I assume it was the 2009/10 annual report but it doesn't say):"
As I've already pointed out, devolved control over health can only repair part of the damage (and by 2009/10 the improvements brought in the by the first genuinely autonomous Scottish government in 2007 had barely had a chance to make themselves felt). For example, I doubt if we're going to be able to resolve the suicide crisis in young Scottish men for as long as we remain part of the United Kingdom
So: a Scotland that elects a Labour government isn't autonomous.
You're the one making the extraordinary claim here, Charles. If you seriously think that the way Scotland is governed from London has no effect on people's life chances and health outcomes, please explain to me where the line of causation mysteriously ended.
Isn't it more a case of "how" rather than "because"? There does not seem to have been a problem before the 1950s, then something began to happen and got more intense in the 1980s.
Perhaps it is a case of the NHS being a better proposition for England, Wales and NI than it has been for Scotland; with the failure to deal with deindustrialisation in the 1980s exacerbating the problem. If that is so, you probably have a point; and the Scottish government - whether devolved or independent - should be looking to create an alternative to the present NHS.
That may be correct, although it would need some research.
As far as I can tell, Scottish GDP per head exceeds that of Wales, Northern Ireland, and all English regions except the South East, and Greater London, so it's hard to attribute low life expectancy to economic fortunes.
In the end this is all about economics - deprived, urban areas of the UK, wherever they are, have much lower life expectancy rates than reasonably wealthy ones. People tend to smoke more, drink more and lead more inactive lives in places where housing is poor and employment is relatively low. That's why in London you see such disparities in longevity rates. It is not a huge stretch to claim that a Scottish government is better placed to deal specifically with what is happening in Scotland than a UK government. My concern is with the claim that in and of itself the Union has caused Scots to have lower life expectancy rates. As there was no discernible differences in rates before the 50s that cannot be the case. But the way that Scotland has been governed clearly can have had an effect and perhaps a major one/.
There must be a similar pattern of life expectancy differences between the wealthy and poor parts of Scotland as the whole of the UK mustn't there?
"France gets thrown through a plate glass window, but gets back up and carries on fighting. Russia gets thrown through another one, gets knocked out, suffers brain damage, and wakes up with a complete personality change. "
I doubt if we're going to be able to resolve the suicide crisis in young Scottish men for as long as we remain part of the United Kingdom
Vote Yes, or kill yourself?
I was wrong, there was dumber to come...
Indeed. Minus one million credibility points for the Nats. A lot of very strange and un-Kelly-like shrieking and floundering going on (there's a compliment in there if you look very, very hard).
You're the one making the extraordinary claim here, Charles. If you seriously think that the way Scotland is governed from London has no effect on people's life chances and health outcomes, please explain to me where the line of causation mysteriously ended.
Isn't it more a case of "how" rather than "because"? There does not seem to have been a problem before the 1950s, then something began to happen and got more intense in the 1980s.
Perhaps it is a case of the NHS being a better proposition for England, Wales and NI than it has been for Scotland; with the failure to deal with deindustrialisation in the 1980s exacerbating the problem. If that is so, you probably have a point; and the Scottish government - whether devolved or independent - should be looking to create an alternative to the present NHS.
That may be correct, although it would need some research.
As far as I can tell, Scottish GDP per head exceeds that of Wales, Northern Ireland, and all English regions except the South East, and Greater London, so it's hard to attribute low life expectancy to economic fortunes.
In the end this is all about economics - deprived, urban areas of the UK, wherever they are, have much lower life expectancy rates than reasonably wealthy ones. People tend to smoke more, drink more and lead more inactive lives in places where housing is poor and employment is relatively low. That's why in London you see such disparities in longevity rates. It is not a huge stretch to claim that a Scottish government is better placed to deal specifically with what is happening in Scotland than a UK government. My concern is with the claim that in and of itself the Union has caused Scots to have lower life expectancy rates. As there was no discernible differences in rates before the 50s that cannot be the case. But the way that Scotland has been governed clearly can have had an effect and perhaps a major one/.
There must be a similar pattern of life expectancy differences between the wealthy and poor parts of Scotland as the whole of the UK mustn't there?
The comparative UK figures are interesting. England, Wales and NI are pretty close to each other. There is a big gap between Scotland and the rest.
"The UK average is 78.1 years for males and 82.1 years for females and the gap between UK and Scottish life expectancy is now wider than in 1997-1999, by 0.2 years for males and by 0.3 years for females."
For anyone who missed this - it always makes me laugh
Washington - (AP) BUSH DEPLOYS VOWELS TO BOSNIA
Cities of Sjlbvdnzv, Grzny to Be First Recipients.
Before an emergency joint session of Congress yesterday, President Bush announced US plans to deploy over 75,000 vowels to the war-torn region of Bosnia. The deployment, the largest of its kind in American history, will provide the region with the critically needed letters A,E,I,O and U, and is hoped to render countless Bosnian names more pronounceable.
"For six years, we have stood by while names like Ygrjvslhv and Tzlynhr and Glrm have been horribly butchered by millions around the world," Bush said. "Today, the United States must finally stand up and say `Enough.' It is time the people of Bosnia finally had some vowels in their incomprehensible words. The US is proud to lead the crusade in this noble endeavour."
The deployment, dubbed Operation Vowel Movement by the State Department, is set for early next week, with the Adriatic port cities of Sjlbvdnzv and Grzny slated to be the first recipients. Two C-130 transport planes, each carrying over 500 24-count boxes of "E's," will fly from Andrews Air Force Base across the Atlantic and airdrop the letters over the cities.
Citizens of Grzny and Sjlbvdnzv eagerly await the arrival of the vowels.
"I do not think we can last another day," Trszg Grzdnjkln, 44, said. "I have six children and none of them has a name that is understandable to me or to anyone else. Mr. Bush, please send my poor, wretched family just one 'E' Please."
Said Sjlbvdnzv resident Grg Hmphrs, 67: "With just a few key letters, I could be George Humphries. This is my dream."
The airdrop represents the largest deployment of any letter to a foreign country since 1984. During the summer of that year, the US shipped 92,000 consonants to Ethiopia, providing cities like Ouaouoaua, Eaoiiuae, and Aao with vital, life-giving supplies of L's, S's and T's.
"My concern is with the claim that in and of itself the Union has caused Scots to have lower life expectancy rates. As there was no discernible differences in rates before the 50s that cannot be the case."
Salmond was born in 1954.
" By the pricking of my thumbs something wicked this way comes "
Shakespeare knew the life-expectancy odds and even projected them back to the 11th century of Mac Bethad mac Findlaích.
MACDUFF Stands Scotland where it did?
ROSS Alas, poor country! Almost afraid to know itself. It cannot Be call'd our mother, but our grave; where nothing, But who knows nothing, is once seen to smile; Where sighs and groans and shrieks that rend the air Are made, not mark'd; where violent sorrow seems A modern ecstasy; the dead man's knell Is there scarce ask'd for who; and good men's lives Expire before the flowers in their caps, Dying or ere they sicken.
Shakespeare argued in Macbeth that Scotland's low life expectancy was due to the high homicide rates associated with devolved tyranny. His solution was clear: benign liberal intervention from an English monarch and army.
You're the one making the extraordinary claim here, Charles. If you seriously think that the way Scotland is governed from London has no effect on people's life chances and health outcomes, please explain to me where the line of causation mysteriously ended.
Isn't it more a case of "how" rather than "because"? There does not seem to have been a problem before the 1950s, then something began to happen and got more intense in the 1980s.
Perhaps it is a case of the NHS being a better proposition for England, Wales and NI than it has been for Scotland; with the failure to deal with deindustrialisation in the 1980s exacerbating the problem. If that is so, you probably have a point; and the Scottish government - whether devolved or independent - should be looking to create an alternative to the present NHS.
That may be correct, although it would need some research.
As far as I can tell, Scottish GDP per head exceeds that of Wales, Northern Ireland, and all English regions except the South East, and Greater London, so it's hard to attribute low life expectancy to economic fortunes.
In the end this is all about economics - deprived, urban areas of the UK, wherever they are, have much lower life expectancy rates than reasonably wealthy ones. People tend to smoke more, drink more and lead more inactive lives in places where housing is poor and employment is relatively low. That's why in London you see such disparities in longevity rates. It is not a huge stretch to claim that a Scottish government is better placed to deal specifically with what is happening in Scotland than a UK government. My concern is with the claim that in and of itself the Union has caused Scots to have lower life expectancy rates. As there was no discernible differences in rates before the 50s that cannot be the case. But the way that Scotland has been governed clearly can have had an effect and perhaps a major one/.
Yes, economics is very significant. It's just that Scotland - as a whole - is better off economically than Wales, Northern Ireland, and England, apart from Greater London and the South East. Yet, health outcomes are worse.
You may very well be correct in your supposition that the creation of the NHS was much more beneficial to the inhabitants of England, Wales, and Northern Ireland than it was to the inhabitants of Scotland. But, it would be interesting to know what the NHS got right in the first three countries that it didn't get right in Scotland.
I wonder if it was a case of the Scottish system before 1948 actually being better than in the rest of the UK and that the NHS allowed the other countries to improve beyond Scotland because they did not have to contend with the other factors Scotland does (at least to the same degree) - it's colder and darker for much of the year, for example.
His solution was clear: benign liberal intervention from an English monarch and army.
Indeed.
It is unarguable that Westminster rule has been hugely beneficial for Scottish health outcomes over Home Rule, but that doesn't fit the separatists' increasingly hysterical narrative.
So nothing to do with idiot westminster chancellors like Brown, Darling and Osbrowne then?
Glad that's been cleared up.
Two of those were Scottish? But obviously not Andy Murray "Scottish"
Liam Fox was born in East Kilbride, Iain Duncan Smith was born in Edinburgh, care to explain how that makes Defence or Welfare any more or less non-devolved areas of policy than the economy?
Or are you pretending to be a kipper again today Sunny?
I lived in Edinburgh for 4 years. I can attest from close personal observation that Scottish death rates are higher and life expectancies lower because they eat shit. A diet of bridie suppers, chips wi' salt n sauce, depp fried this and lardy that ain't good for ya! Add relatively cheap and good beer into the mix and you have a recipe for a Rab C Nesbitt approach to personal health.
You're the one making the extraordinary claim here, Charles. If you seriously think that the way Scotland is governed from London has no effect on people's life chances and health outcomes, please explain to me where the line of causation mysteriously ended.
Isn't it more a case of "how" rather than "because"? There does not seem to have been a problem before the 1950s, then something began to happen and got more intense in the 1980s.
Perhaps it is a case of the NHS being a better proposition for England, Wales and NI than it has been for Scotland; with the failure to deal with deindustrialisation in the 1980s exacerbating the problem. If that is so, you probably have a point; and the Scottish government - whether devolved or independent - should be looking to create an alternative to the present NHS.
That may be correct, although it would need some research.
As far as I can tell, Scottish GDP per head exceeds that of Wales, Northern Ireland, and all English regions except the South East, and Greater London, so it's hard to attribute low life expectancy to economic fortunes.
In the end this is all about economics - deprived, urban areas of the UK, wherever they are, have much lower life expectancy rates than reasonably wealthy ones. People tend to smoke more, drink more and lead more inactive lives in places where housing is poor and employment is relatively low. That's why in London you see such disparities in longevity rates. It is not a huge stretch to claim that a Scottish government is better placed to deal specifically with what is happening in Scotland than a UK government. My concern is with the claim that in and of itself the Union has caused Scots to have lower life expectancy rates. As there was no discernible differences in rates before the 50s that cannot be the case. But the way that Scotland has been governed clearly can have had an effect and perhaps a major one/.
Yes, economics is very significant. It's just that Scotland - as a whole - is better off economically than Wales, Northern Ireland, and England, apart from Greater London and the South East. Yet, health outcomes are worse.
You may very well be correct in your supposition that the creation of the NHS was much more beneficial to the inhabitants of England, Wales, and Northern Ireland than it was to the inhabitants of Scotland. But, it would be interesting to know what the NHS got right in the first three countries that it didn't get right in Scotland.
I wonder if it was a case of the Scottish system before 1948 actually being better than in the rest of the UK and that the NHS allowed the other countries to improve beyond Scotland because they did not have to contend with the other factors Scotland does (at least to the same degree) - it's colder and darker for much of the year, for example.
Of course back then the Scottish NHS was run by Dr Finlay and Janet, everyone ate healthy porridge and no-one went near Westminster.........
Dear god, the tea party tories think railing against those limited areas of Devolution is somehow going to help them. Laughably out of touch as usual. They never learn.
For anyone who missed this - it always makes me laugh
Washington - (AP) BUSH DEPLOYS VOWELS TO BOSNIA
Cities of Sjlbvdnzv, Grzny to Be First Recipients.
Before an emergency joint session of Congress yesterday, President Bush announced US plans to deploy over 75,000 vowels to the war-torn region of Bosnia. The deployment, the largest of its kind in American history, will provide the region with the critically needed letters A,E,I,O and U, and is hoped to render countless Bosnian names more pronounceable.
"For six years, we have stood by while names like Ygrjvslhv and Tzlynhr and Glrm have been horribly butchered by millions around the world," Bush said. "Today, the United States must finally stand up and say `Enough.' It is time the people of Bosnia finally had some vowels in their incomprehensible words. The US is proud to lead the crusade in this noble endeavour."
The deployment, dubbed Operation Vowel Movement by the State Department, is set for early next week, with the Adriatic port cities of Sjlbvdnzv and Grzny slated to be the first recipients. Two C-130 transport planes, each carrying over 500 24-count boxes of "E's," will fly from Andrews Air Force Base across the Atlantic and airdrop the letters over the cities.
Citizens of Grzny and Sjlbvdnzv eagerly await the arrival of the vowels.
"I do not think we can last another day," Trszg Grzdnjkln, 44, said. "I have six children and none of them has a name that is understandable to me or to anyone else. Mr. Bush, please send my poor, wretched family just one 'E' Please."
Said Sjlbvdnzv resident Grg Hmphrs, 67: "With just a few key letters, I could be George Humphries. This is my dream."
The airdrop represents the largest deployment of any letter to a foreign country since 1984. During the summer of that year, the US shipped 92,000 consonants to Ethiopia, providing cities like Ouaouoaua, Eaoiiuae, and Aao with vital, life-giving supplies of L's, S's and T's.
???????????????
But all the major flashpoints in Bosnia had vowels!
viz.:
Sarajevo Srebrenica Bihac Mostar Gorni Vakuf Tuzla Banja Luka Pale Zenica
You're the one making the extraordinary claim here, Charles. If you seriously think that the way Scotland is governed from London has no effect on people's life chances and health outcomes, please explain to me where the line of causation mysteriously ended.
Isn't it more a case of "how" rather than "because"? There does not seem to have been a problem before the 1950s, then something began to happen and got more intense in the 1980s.
Perhaps it is a case of the NHS being a better proposition for England, Wales and NI than it has been for Scotland; with the failure to deal with deindustrialisation in the 1980s exacerbating the problem. If that is so, you probably have a point; and the Scottish government - whether devolved or independent - should be looking to create an alternative to the present NHS.
That may be correct, although it would need some research.
As far as I can tell, Scottish GDP per head exceeds that of Wales, Northern Ireland, and all English regions except the South East, and Greater London, so it's hard to attribute low life expectancy to economic fortunes.
In the end this is all about economics - deprived, urban areas of the UK, wherever they are, have much lower life expectancy rates than reasonably wealthy ones. People tend to smoke more, drink more and lead more inactive lives in places where housing is poor and employment is relatively low. That's why in London you see such disparities in longevity rates. It is not a huge stretch to claim that a Scottish government is better placed to deal specifically with what is happening in Scotland than a UK government. My concern is with the claim that in and of itself the Union has caused Scots to have lower life expectancy rates. As there was no discernible differences in rates before the 50s that cannot be the case. But the way that Scotland has been governed clearly can have had an effect and perhaps a major one/.
Yes, economics is very significant. It's just that Scotland - as a whole - is better off economically than Wales, Northern Ireland, and England, apart from Greater London and the South East. Yet, health outcomes are worse.
You may very well be correct in your supposition that the creation of the NHS was much more beneficial to the inhabitants of England, Wales, and Northern Ireland than it was to the inhabitants of Scotland. But, it would be interesting to know what the NHS got right in the first three countries that it didn't get right in Scotland.
I wonder if it was a case of the Scottish system before 1948 actually being better than in the rest of the UK and that the NHS allowed the other countries to improve beyond Scotland because they did not have to contend with the other factors Scotland does (at least to the same degree) - it's colder and darker for much of the year, for example.
Of course back then the Scottish NHS was run by Dr Finlay and Janet, everyone ate healthy porridge and no-one went near Westminster.........
It turns out that the Highlands and Islands got a quasi-NHS 35 years or so before the rest of the UK.
For anyone who missed this - it always makes me laugh
Washington - (AP) BUSH DEPLOYS VOWELS TO BOSNIA
Cities of Sjlbvdnzv, Grzny to Be First Recipients.
Before an emergency joint session of Congress yesterday, President Bush announced US plans to deploy over 75,000 vowels to the war-torn region of Bosnia. The deployment, the largest of its kind in American history, will provide the region with the critically needed letters A,E,I,O and U, and is hoped to render countless Bosnian names more pronounceable.
"For six years, we have stood by while names like Ygrjvslhv and Tzlynhr and Glrm have been horribly butchered by millions around the world," Bush said. "Today, the United States must finally stand up and say `Enough.' It is time the people of Bosnia finally had some vowels in their incomprehensible words. The US is proud to lead the crusade in this noble endeavour."
The deployment, dubbed Operation Vowel Movement by the State Department, is set for early next week, with the Adriatic port cities of Sjlbvdnzv and Grzny slated to be the first recipients. Two C-130 transport planes, each carrying over 500 24-count boxes of "E's," will fly from Andrews Air Force Base across the Atlantic and airdrop the letters over the cities.
Citizens of Grzny and Sjlbvdnzv eagerly await the arrival of the vowels.
"I do not think we can last another day," Trszg Grzdnjkln, 44, said. "I have six children and none of them has a name that is understandable to me or to anyone else. Mr. Bush, please send my poor, wretched family just one 'E' Please."
Said Sjlbvdnzv resident Grg Hmphrs, 67: "With just a few key letters, I could be George Humphries. This is my dream."
The airdrop represents the largest deployment of any letter to a foreign country since 1984. During the summer of that year, the US shipped 92,000 consonants to Ethiopia, providing cities like Ouaouoaua, Eaoiiuae, and Aao with vital, life-giving supplies of L's, S's and T's.
???????????????
But all the major flashpoints in Bosnia had vowels!
viz.:
Sarajevo Srebrenica Bihac Mostar Gorni Vakuf Tuzla Banja Luka Pale Zenica
So nothing to do with idiot westminster chancellors like Brown, Darling and Osbrowne then?
Glad that's been cleared up.
Two of those were Scottish? But obviously not Andy Murray "Scottish"
Liam Fox was born in East Kilbride, Iain Duncan Smith was born in Edinburgh, care to explain how that makes Defence or Welfare any more or less non-devolved areas of policy than the economy?
Or are you pretending to be a kipper again today Sunny?
I thought you were talking about Chancellors, Micky Mouse
Stephen Lawrence's father calls for a judge-led inquiry into claims undercover officers were told to "smear" his family.
Lawrence 'Smear Plot': Father Calls For Inquiry
Stephen Lawrence's father calls for a judge-led inquiry into claims undercover officers were told to "smear" his family.
The father of Stephen Lawrence dismissed an announcement by the Home Secretary that she will extend inquiries into allegations undercover officers were told to "smear" his family.
Neville Lawrence said that nothing short of a judge-led inquiry into the claims would be sufficient and that the fresh allegations had taken away the faith he had begun to build in the police.
From his home in Jamaica, a statement said he was "dismayed" over the new claims.
It said: "I've always felt that my family was under greater investigation than those guilty of killing my beloved Stephen.
"It is unthinkable that in the extremely dark days and months after my son's murder that my family were subject to such scrutiny.
"I am convinced that nothing short of a judge-led public inquiry will suffice and I have no confidence that the measures announced today will get to the bottom of this matter."
It comes after the Home Secretary told the House of Commons that Scotland Yard has asked the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) to supervise its handling of allegations that police tried to "smear" the Lawrence family.
The claims emerged in an interview with a former undercover police officer, Peter Francis.
Theresa May MP said further allegations were likely to emerge before a report on alleged deliberate incompetence and corruption during the investigation into Stephen's murder.
Dear god, the tea party tories think railing against those limited areas of Devolution is somehow going to help them. Laughably out of touch as usual. They never learn.
No one is railing against devolution.
Most people on this thread are arguing that economics and lifestyle choices are the main drivers of health outcomes. JamesKelly believes that constitutional structure causes Scots to die young (if they haven't killed themselves first).
So nothing to do with idiot westminster chancellors like Brown, Darling and Osbrowne then?
Glad that's been cleared up.
Two of those were Scottish? But obviously not Andy Murray "Scottish"
Liam Fox was born in East Kilbride, Iain Duncan Smith was born in Edinburgh, care to explain how that makes Defence or Welfare any more or less non-devolved areas of policy than the economy?
Or are you pretending to be a kipper again today Sunny?
I thought you were talking about Chancellors
I am Sunny and you still haven't answered why your fatuous 'point' makes a blind bit of difference to which areas of policy are devolved and which are not.
Come on Sunny, put some thought into it for a change.
Dear god, the tea party tories think railing against those limited areas of Devolution is somehow going to help them. Laughably out of touch as usual. They never learn.
No one is railing against devolution.
Most people on this thread are arguing that economics and lifestyle choices are the main drivers of health outcomes. JamesKelly believes that constitutional structure causes Scots to die young (if they haven't killed themselves first).
I think that a further factor is that healthier Scots are more likely to migrate.
But dying young is not all bad. At least Scotland will be able to afford its pensions!
I would be interested to see if there is any groundwater pollution from the heavy industry that dominated the area, even if much of Glasgow gets some of its water from the Loch Lomond Water Supple Scheme (AKA a blooming big pipe). There are a bunch of chemicals that persist in the ground and are not routinely tested for in our water supplies.
Indeed, if water is obtained from aquifers and industrial sites have not been adequately cleaned (and they rarely are), then there will be groundwater pollution. The pollutants and their amounts are the big questions.
The NHS scandals and the Police embroiled in yet another case of looking out for themselves, rather than the public at large, make me glad I chose the Fire and Rescue Service as a career!
Stephen Lawrence's father calls for a judge-led inquiry into claims undercover officers were told to "smear" his family.
Lawrence 'Smear Plot': Father Calls For Inquiry
Stephen Lawrence's father calls for a judge-led inquiry into claims undercover officers were told to "smear" his family.
The father of Stephen Lawrence dismissed an announcement by the Home Secretary that she will extend inquiries into allegations undercover officers were told to "smear" his family.
Neville Lawrence said that nothing short of a judge-led inquiry into the claims would be sufficient and that the fresh allegations had taken away the faith he had begun to build in the police.
From his home in Jamaica, a statement said he was "dismayed" over the new claims.
It said: "I've always felt that my family was under greater investigation than those guilty of killing my beloved Stephen.
"It is unthinkable that in the extremely dark days and months after my son's murder that my family were subject to such scrutiny.
"I am convinced that nothing short of a judge-led public inquiry will suffice and I have no confidence that the measures announced today will get to the bottom of this matter."
It comes after the Home Secretary told the House of Commons that Scotland Yard has asked the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) to supervise its handling of allegations that police tried to "smear" the Lawrence family.
The claims emerged in an interview with a former undercover police officer, Peter Francis.
Theresa May MP said further allegations were likely to emerge before a report on alleged deliberate incompetence and corruption during the investigation into Stephen's murder.
So nothing to do with idiot westminster chancellors like Brown, Darling and Osbrowne then?
Glad that's been cleared up.
Two of those were Scottish? But obviously not Andy Murray "Scottish"
Liam Fox was born in East Kilbride, Iain Duncan Smith was born in Edinburgh, care to explain how that makes Defence or Welfare any more or less non-devolved areas of policy than the economy?
Or are you pretending to be a kipper again today Sunny?
I thought you were talking about Chancellors, Micky Mouse
I am Sunny and you still haven't answered why your fatuous 'point' makes a blind bit of difference to which areas of policy are devolved and which are not.
Come on Sunny, put some thought into it for a change.
Come on, Micky Mouse! You were trying to pass off two out of those three Chancellors as "westminster" when they were actually your fellow Scots
The NHS scandals and the Police embroiled in yet another case of looking out for themselves, rather than the public at large, make me glad I chose the Fire and Rescue Service as a career!
Stephen Lawrence's father calls for a judge-led inquiry into claims undercover officers were told to "smear" his family.
Lawrence 'Smear Plot': Father Calls For Inquiry
Stephen Lawrence's father calls for a judge-led inquiry into claims undercover officers were told to "smear" his family.
The father of Stephen Lawrence dismissed an announcement by the Home Secretary that she will extend inquiries into allegations undercover officers were told to "smear" his family.
Neville Lawrence said that nothing short of a judge-led inquiry into the claims would be sufficient and that the fresh allegations had taken away the faith he had begun to build in the police.
From his home in Jamaica, a statement said he was "dismayed" over the new claims.
It said: "I've always felt that my family was under greater investigation than those guilty of killing my beloved Stephen.
"It is unthinkable that in the extremely dark days and months after my son's murder that my family were subject to such scrutiny.
"I am convinced that nothing short of a judge-led public inquiry will suffice and I have no confidence that the measures announced today will get to the bottom of this matter."
It comes after the Home Secretary told the House of Commons that Scotland Yard has asked the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) to supervise its handling of allegations that police tried to "smear" the Lawrence family.
The claims emerged in an interview with a former undercover police officer, Peter Francis.
Theresa May MP said further allegations were likely to emerge before a report on alleged deliberate incompetence and corruption during the investigation into Stephen's murder.
Dear god, the tea party tories think railing against those limited areas of Devolution is somehow going to help them. Laughably out of touch as usual. They never learn.
No one is railing against devolution.
Most people on this thread are arguing that economics and lifestyle choices are the main drivers of health outcomes. JamesKelly believes that constitutional structure causes Scots to die young (if they haven't killed themselves first).
I think that a further factor is that healthier Scots are more likely to migrate.
But dying young is not all bad. At least Scotland will be able to afford its pensions!
Alex " Five bellies " Salmond will retire with six pensions ;
I welcome the SNP's introduction of minimum alcohol pricing, but they have just announced government grants to build new distilleries - seems self-defeating.
"We have also shown that suicide rates are dependent on changes in the availability and lethality of different methods. During the study period these changes included the detoxification of domestic gas, the replacement of barbiturates with the less toxic benzodiazepines, the compulsory fitting of catalytic converters in new petrol vehicles from 1993, the introduction of the legislation in 1998 on restricting the pack size of paracetamol and salicylates, and the withdrawal of co-proxamol in 2005. It is unlikely that these national changes alone can account for the diverging suicide trends, as they were implemented at the same time across Great Britain. One of the key changes in methods used during the study period, however, was the marked increase in suicide by hanging, particularly among young men in Scotland. This is of particular concern as hanging has high case fatality and is difficult to prevent, except within institutional settings. It has been proposed that population-based initiatives would be the most useful way to tackle the increase of suicide deaths by hanging, to counter the perception of hanging as a ‘clean, painless and rapid method that is easily implemented’.
James: you made a point that pensions were more affordable in Scotland.
When people pointed out that it was due to life expectancy being lower in Scotland you made a trite remark (several times - it wasn't funny the first time) about it being a dividend from the union.
It's completely unconnected to the unioon - probably diet, lifestyle, possibly genetics, possibly weather.
But either way it's pointless to debate with you if that's your approach to a discussion.
Given , the poverty, economy , etc is due to the Westminster policies I believe you can lay it directly at the door of Westminster. Considering it is only occurred in the last 50 years I think we can ignore genetics and the weather.
So nothing to do with idiot westminster chancellors like Brown, Darling and Osbrowne then?
Glad that's been cleared up.
Two of those were Scottish? But obviously not Andy Murray "Scottish"
Liam Fox was born in East Kilbride, Iain Duncan Smith was born in Edinburgh, care to explain how that makes Defence or Welfare any more or less non-devolved areas of policy than the economy?
Or are you pretending to be a kipper again today Sunny?
I thought you were talking about Chancellors, Micky Mouse
I am Sunny and you still haven't answered why your fatuous 'point' makes a blind bit of difference to which areas of policy are devolved and which are not.
Come on Sunny, put some thought into it for a change.
You were trying to pass off two out of those three Chancellors as "westminster"
If you don't even know that westminster refers to the body politic where those areas of undevolved power are decided, then I fear you should go back to your trainspotting, or "foaming" as it is also called.
Italian ex-PM Berlusconi sentenced in Ruby sex case
Italy's former PM Silvio Berlusconi has been sentenced to seven years in jail and banned from public office for having sex with an underage prostitute.
The Milan court ruling is not effective until several appeals have been heard.
Both the 76-year-old media tycoon and the Moroccan woman concerned, Karima El Mahroug, had denied the claims.
Mr Berlusconi is already embroiled in several other court cases. In October 2012 he was given a four-year sentence for tax fraud, also under appeal.
I would add another potential factor for consideration: pollution.
Most of Glasgow's water supply is from Katrine - so paranoid are they about water purity they control the type of engines used by boats on the loch. I doubt if any of Glasgow's groundwater is used for domestic purposes.
Comments
So let me get what you are asserting straight. You're saying that the fact that Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland ALL have lower life expectancies than England has NOTHING to do with the way they are governed from London?
Any medical literature to support that one?
You're the one making the extraordinary claim here, Charles. If you seriously think that the way Scotland is governed from London has no effect on people's life chances and health outcomes, please explain to me where the line of causation mysteriously ended.
I'd just like to know what you think there is, about our current constitutional framework, that leads to Scotland having worse health outcomes than the rest of the UK?
If you need me to spell out the bleedin' obvious, governance that is only in the interests of one part of the UK.
I know the Nats have some really, really, really stupid ideas, but "vote for separation or die" has to be the dumbest thing you have ever posted
"Vote Yes. Lose 10 pounds!"
Danger of ending up with as mixed a message as Labour
"Borrowing is too high. We will borrow more"
And would it be more or less "dumb" than the following?
IF YOU VOTE ‘YES’ TO INDEPENDENCE:
- YOU’LL PROBABLY DIE OF CANCER
- SCOTLAND WILL BE BOMBED BY ENGLAND
- YOUR CHILDREN WILL BE KIDNAPPED
- OUR ECONOMY WILL BE DESTROYED
- WE’LL ALL BE MURDERED BY TERRORISTS
- THE EDINBURGH ZOO PANDAS WILL BE CONFISCATED
- ENGLAND WILL BUILD A NEW HADRIAN’S WALL
- YOU’LL NEED A PASSPORT TO GO TO GARELOCHHEAD
- ORKNEY AND SHETLAND WILL FORM A BREAKAWAY COUNTRY
- RANGERS FANS WILL BE UNHAPPY
- YOU WON’T BE ABLE TO WATCH ‘STRICTLY COME DANCING’
- WESTMINSTER WILL BAR SCOTLAND FROM JOINING THE EU
- WE’LL HAVE TO PAY THE EU A FORTUNE AS WE’LL BE TOO RICH
- THERE WON’T BE ANY HOLIDAYS EVER
- YOUR PENSION WILL BE SLASHED
- WE’LL GET NUKED AND NOBODY WILL CARE
- WE’LL HAVE NO BLOOD
http://wingsoverscotland.com/reasons-to-be-fearful/
Brocklebank-Fowler? Even I have absolutely no recollection of him. Was he a One-Nation Heathite zealot or just an opportunist?
Perhaps it is a case of the NHS being a better proposition for England, Wales and NI than it has been for Scotland; with the failure to deal with deindustrialisation in the 1980s exacerbating the problem. If that is so, you probably have a point; and the Scottish government - whether devolved or independent - should be looking to create an alternative to the present NHS.
You should - he was one of the few in history to have literally 'crossed the floor' in the middle of a debate. He joined the Liberal Democrats after the merger, but I think he eventually ended up moving to Labour.
OMG!!
They've certainly created a radical alternative to the debased Tory/New Labour NHS model that is currently operating in England.
As far as I can tell, Scottish GDP per head exceeds that of Wales, Northern Ireland, and all English regions except the South East, and Greater London, so it's hard to attribute low life expectancy to economic fortunes.
All exacerbated by binge drinking, separatism and underaged alcohol abuse.
See: http://alcoholrehab.com/alcohol-rehab/alcohol-abuse-in-scotland/
I'm astonished. Are you another person who seriously thinks that a country's health has nothing to do with the way that it is governed? The unionist trance is certainly weaving its magic, at least on this site.
You are right, the problem seems to be the Union, in that we have devolved responsibility for their own health to the Scots... we should have kept it centralised.
In any case, exactly how would you expect Scots to change their lifestyle on gaining independence? They would magically give up fags, booze and haggis suppers, and all take up parkrun every Saturday morning in celebration?
The First World War for beginners:
If World War 1 was a bar fight
Germany, Austria and Italy are stood together in the middle of the pub, when Serbia bumps into Austria, and spills Austria’s pint.
Austria demands Serbia buy it a complete new suit, because there are splashes on its trouser leg.
Germany expresses its support for Austria’s point of view.
Britain recommends that everyone calm down a bit.
Serbia points out that it can’t afford a whole suit, but offers to pay for cleaning Austria’s trousers.
Russia and Serbia look at Austria.
Austria asks Serbia who it’s looking at.
Russia suggests that Austria should leave its little brother alone.
Austria inquires as to whose army will assist Russia in compelling it to do so.
Germany appeals to Britain that France has been looking at it, and that this is sufficiently out of order that Britain should not intervene.
Britain replies that France can look at who it wants to, that Britain is looking at Germany too, and what is Germany going to do about it?
Germany tells Russia to stop looking at Austria, or Germany will render Russia incapable of such action.
Britain and France ask Germany whether it’s looking at Belgium.
Turkey and Germany go off into a corner and whisper. When they come back, Turkey makes a show of not looking at anyone.
Germany rolls up its sleeves, looks at France, and punches Belgium.
France and Britain punch Germany. Austria punches Russia. Germany punches Britain and France with one hand and Russia with the other.
Russia throws a punch at Germany, but misses and nearly falls over. Japan calls over from the other side of the room that it’s on Britain’s side, but stays there. Italy surprises everyone by punching Austria.
Australia punches Turkey, and gets punched back. There are no hard feelings, because Britain made Australia do it.
France gets thrown through a plate glass window, but gets back up and carries on fighting. Russia gets thrown through another one, gets knocked out, suffers brain damage, and wakes up with a complete personality change.
Italy throws a punch at Austria and misses, but Austria falls over anyway. Italy raises both fists in the air and runs round the room chanting.
America waits till Germany is about to fall over from sustained punching from Britain and France, then walks over and smashes it with a barstool, then pretends it won the fight all by itself.
By now all the chairs are broken, and the big mirror over the bar is shattered. Britain, France and America agree that Germany threw the first punch, so the whole thing is Germany’s fault . While Germany is still unconscious, they go through its pockets, steal its wallet, and buy drinks for all their friends.
And when Germany wakes up, it goes out to its car, gets the gun out of the glovebox and heads back inside...
Nice try. But as SO has pointed out, the gap in life expectancy started in the 1950s, so we can look to the likes of Macmillan, Thatcher and Major as the culprits. It takes time to repair that damage - devolution has only been in operation for fourteen years, and for the first eight of those the Scottish government was run by London Labour poodles.
More whistleblowing...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/jun/23/stephen-lawrence-undercover-police-smears
Life expectancy has little to do with health spending though when you look around the world. It has much more to do with diet, lack of vegetables in the diet in particular, lack of exercise, smoking and alcohol consumption. Man cannot live on Buckie and Irn-bru alone!
It will be a great campaigning slogan. "vote SNP to ban your chips and beer, live in free Scotland on salad and carrot juice!"
Why the last eight in particular? In what sense was 2005 a turning point?
You may very well be correct in your supposition that the creation of the NHS was much more beneficial to the inhabitants of England, Wales, and Northern Ireland than it was to the inhabitants of Scotland. But, it would be interesting to know what the NHS got right in the first three countries that it didn't get right in Scotland.
Salmond was born in 1954.
" By the pricking of my thumbs something wicked this way comes "
Dr. Gerry McCartney, who agrees with you, states: "It is increasingly recognized that it is insufficient to try to explain health trends by simply looking at the proximal causes such as smoking or alcohol," said Dr Gerry McCartney who is also a member of the Scottish Socialist Party. "Income inequality, welfare policy and unemployment do not occur by accident, but as a product of the politics pursued by the government of the day.
http://www.enn.com/health/article/44463/print
However, if you take this position, especially since health is a devolved topic, how do you explain the following facts from Dr. Harry Burns (Chief Medical officer for Scotland) annual report (article was Nov 2010, so I assume it was the 2009/10 annual report but it doesn't say):
Since devolution started in 1999, the average life expectancy among males in the poorest areas of Scotland has increased 1.4 years compared to 2.1 years for the rest of the country. For women the figures are 1.2 years and 1.6 years respectively. Scottish males now live on average to just over 75, while females die at about 80.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/8139581/Scots-to-have-Europes-lowest-life-expectancy.html
Alternatively we could just go to the Audit Scotland report on the issue
Overall health has improved over the last 50 years but health inequalities remain a significant and long-standing problem in Scotland. Deprivation is a major factor in health inequalities, with people in more affluent areas living longer and having significantly better health. Health inequalities are highly localised and vary widely within individual NHS board and council areas. Children in deprived areas have significantly worse health than those in more affluent areas.
http://www.audit-scotland.gov.uk/docs/health/2012/nr_121213_health_inequalities.pdf
Didn't bet myself.
Staggering to think Nadal won a Grand Slam and then left the next one in the first round.
As I've already pointed out, devolved control over health can only repair part of the damage (and by 2009/10 the improvements brought in the by the first genuinely autonomous Scottish government in 2007 had barely had a chance to make themselves felt). For example, I doubt if we're going to be able to resolve the suicide crisis in young Scottish men for as long as we remain part of the United Kingdom
James screwed up - it could have been a mistake - but he dug his heels in.
http://liberalconspiracy.org/2013/06/24/labours-plan-to-please-rightwingers-on-cuts-fails-at-first-attempt/
I was wrong, there was dumber to come...
British tennis hero Murray wins in straight sets against Becker!!!
Vote Independence for a One Party State!
http://www.gro-scotland.gov.uk/files2/stats/annual-review-2011/j21285206.htm
The comparative UK figures are interesting. England, Wales and NI are pretty close to each other. There is a big gap between Scotland and the rest.
Glad that's been cleared up.
"France gets thrown through a plate glass window, but gets back up and carries on fighting. Russia gets thrown through another one, gets knocked out, suffers brain damage, and wakes up with a complete personality change. "
Brilliant.
So the gap has widened since Devolution......
Washington - (AP) BUSH DEPLOYS VOWELS TO BOSNIA
Cities of Sjlbvdnzv, Grzny to Be First Recipients.
Before an emergency joint session of Congress yesterday, President Bush announced US plans to deploy over 75,000 vowels to the war-torn region of Bosnia. The deployment, the largest of its kind in American history, will provide the region with the critically needed letters A,E,I,O and U, and is hoped to render countless Bosnian names more pronounceable.
"For six years, we have stood by while names like Ygrjvslhv and Tzlynhr and Glrm have been horribly butchered by millions around the world," Bush said. "Today, the United States must finally stand up and say `Enough.' It is time the people of Bosnia finally had some vowels in their incomprehensible words. The US is proud to lead the crusade in this noble endeavour."
The deployment, dubbed Operation Vowel Movement by the State Department, is set for early next week, with the Adriatic port cities of Sjlbvdnzv and Grzny slated to be the first recipients. Two C-130 transport planes, each carrying over 500 24-count boxes of "E's," will fly from Andrews Air Force Base across the Atlantic and airdrop the letters over the cities.
Citizens of Grzny and Sjlbvdnzv eagerly await the arrival of the vowels.
"I do not think we can last another day," Trszg Grzdnjkln, 44, said. "I have six children and none of them has a name that is understandable to me or to anyone else. Mr. Bush, please send my poor, wretched family just one 'E' Please."
Said Sjlbvdnzv resident Grg Hmphrs, 67: "With just a few key letters, I could be George Humphries. This is my dream."
The airdrop represents the largest deployment of any letter to a foreign country since 1984. During the summer of that year, the US shipped 92,000 consonants to Ethiopia, providing cities like Ouaouoaua, Eaoiiuae, and Aao with vital, life-giving supplies of L's, S's and T's.
MACDUFF
Stands Scotland where it did?
ROSS
Alas, poor country!
Almost afraid to know itself. It cannot
Be call'd our mother, but our grave; where nothing,
But who knows nothing, is once seen to smile;
Where sighs and groans and shrieks that rend the air
Are made, not mark'd; where violent sorrow seems
A modern ecstasy; the dead man's knell
Is there scarce ask'd for who; and good men's lives
Expire before the flowers in their caps,
Dying or ere they sicken.
Shakespeare argued in Macbeth that Scotland's low life expectancy was due to the high homicide rates associated with devolved tyranny. His solution was clear: benign liberal intervention from an English monarch and army.
It is unarguable that Westminster rule has been hugely beneficial for Scottish health outcomes over Home Rule, but that doesn't fit the separatists' increasingly hysterical narrative.
Or are you pretending to be a kipper again today Sunny?
It's very unhealthy, but undoubtedly good for you (occasionally)
They never learn.
But all the major flashpoints in Bosnia had vowels!
viz.:
Sarajevo
Srebrenica
Bihac
Mostar
Gorni Vakuf
Tuzla
Banja Luka
Pale
Zenica
Need I go on?
(see upthread!)
"Devolution is great - it leads to lower life expectancy!
Imagine what Independence will do!"
Most people on this thread are arguing that economics and lifestyle choices are the main drivers of health outcomes. JamesKelly believes that constitutional structure causes Scots to die young (if they haven't killed themselves first).
Are there no ideas left?
Come on Sunny, put some thought into it for a change.
But dying young is not all bad. At least Scotland will be able to afford its pensions!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasgow_effect
I would add another potential factor for consideration: pollution.
http://road.cc/content/news/67317-glasgow-has-highest-level-toxic-pollution-uk
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/environment/pollution-threat-from-glasgow-subway.21118666
I would be interested to see if there is any groundwater pollution from the heavy industry that dominated the area, even if much of Glasgow gets some of its water from the Loch Lomond Water Supple Scheme (AKA a blooming big pipe). There are a bunch of chemicals that persist in the ground and are not routinely tested for in our water supplies.
Indeed, if water is obtained from aquifers and industrial sites have not been adequately cleaned (and they rarely are), then there will be groundwater pollution. The pollutants and their amounts are the big questions.
Don't they know that banging on about Europe and immigration is the master strategy that killed the kipper vote?
It's not as if Hogan-Howe wasn't in deep enough sh*t already. There's far more coming even after this. Be certain of that.
I remember one laughably inept tory spinner on PB touted Hogan-Howe as a great choice. Don't hear her saying that too much these days. ;^ )
edit: if it was the same.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/independence-critics-claim-snp-leader-1973778
Let's hope that Mother Nature is kind to the Scottish tax-payer's wallet.
"We have also shown that suicide rates are dependent on changes in the availability and lethality of different methods. During the study period these changes included the detoxification of domestic gas, the replacement of barbiturates with the less toxic benzodiazepines, the compulsory fitting of catalytic converters in new petrol vehicles from 1993, the introduction of the legislation in 1998 on restricting the pack size of paracetamol and salicylates, and the withdrawal of co-proxamol in 2005. It is unlikely that these national changes alone can account for the diverging suicide trends, as they were implemented at the same time across Great Britain. One of the key changes in methods used during the study period, however, was the marked increase in suicide by hanging, particularly among young men in Scotland. This is of particular concern as hanging has high case fatality and is difficult to prevent, except within institutional settings. It has been proposed that population-based initiatives would be the most useful way to tackle the increase of suicide deaths by hanging, to counter the perception of hanging as a ‘clean, painless and rapid method that is easily implemented’.
http://www.chooselife.net/uploads/documents/51-Mok et al Br J Psychiatry published online feb 2012.pdf
Sounds like a devolved health issue.....
Try not to get too excited over this one Sunny.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NqvwnxgxazY