Mr. JEO, but Englishness is bad, you see. It's why so many want to carve England up into pathetic little regional assemblies.
Wales was kept whole, Scotland was kept whole, but some (including some on the right) want to cut England into pieces.
Mr Dancer, many of those pieces correspond to the historic Anglo-Saxon Heptarchy. Also most of those pieces are more populous than either Scotland or Wales.
The heptarchy existed in a period where settlement and transport networks were very different. It does not make much sense to divide regions along the Thames today, for example.
Very true, but I might be open to recreating the old Kingdom* of Sussex.
*Yes I know it wasn't a proper Kingdom as we now understand them, but there were independent tribes that could declare war on Kent, which is the important thing.
Avast, Mr Llama! Why was Sussex "partitioned"?
Aaaaargh, Cap'n Comrade Doc,
If you mean the partition into East and West Sussex, then for the same reason so many other places were partitioned by HMG - incompetence.
Richard Seymour mocking the disability of a disabled servicemen is a disgusting example of the nastiness. I hope he is sacked by the LSE and the Guardian, unless they want to associate with his views.
Not suprised to see he is doing his PHD in sociology which is a non-degree.
I think we need a cross-party constitutional convention that leads to a settlement endorsed (or not) by referendum in all four countries. That may not work, but it is the only chance left.
Well, I think that your suggestion is a good one, and congratulations for being back on form.
If it worked, then I would be happy. (Speaking as a Unionist).
But if the Scots are determined to leave (and it is their right to self determination) then it would hardly be correct, or "fair", to blame your "constitutional convention" for the failure to keep them in the UK.
Mr. JEO, but Englishness is bad, you see. It's why so many want to carve England up into pathetic little regional assemblies.
Wales was kept whole, Scotland was kept whole, but some (including some on the right) want to cut England into pieces.
Mr Dancer, many of those pieces correspond to the historic Anglo-Saxon Heptarchy. Also most of those pieces are more populous than either Scotland or Wales.
The heptarchy existed in a period where settlement and transport networks were very different. It does not make much sense to divide regions along the Thames today, for example.
Very true, but I might be open to recreating the old Kingdom* of Sussex.
*Yes I know it wasn't a proper Kingdom as we now understand them, but there were independent tribes that could declare war on Kent, which is the important thing.
Sussex declaring war on Kent would be an Aelle of a thing to do.
It's inevitable at some point. Not enough unqualified support for the Union, too much desire for independence among too many and too many others who could be swayed to back those.
Indyref? Our Scottish National friends who were terribly interested in the real world the other day have been a bit quiet. Brent crude back below $50 http://www.oil-price.net/
Funnily enough, for Game of Thrones fans, there are more than seven entities in the Seven Kingdoms as well, just like the Heptarchy (it's more a general starting point I think).
Presumably this is the effects of migration, as the privately employable desperately flee south of the border to the safe haven of Cameron's England.
That could possibly happen, though to what extent I'm not sure. My parents visited an English relative who lives in Edinburgh earlier this year and she said it wasn't the nicest atmosphere during the referendum campaign.
Our friends in Glasgow and their circle of friends (all NOers it must be said) witnessed real aggression early on when daring to voice their views. So much so that they stopped voicing their views unless they were with friends. Scotland is now a very divided country.
"I don't see why the UK would end if Scotland left. It was originally formed between a union of Great Britain and Ireland, yet it survived most of Ireland leaving. It can also survive a small chunk of Great Britain leaving. We can go on as the UK with a slight name change after the "of". "
Impeccable logic I grant you-but leading eventually to the United Kingdom of Watford and London (not sure about London, of course).
Only one poll since the SNP landslide have had Yes ahead the others have all had No on front so it could have been a lot worse. It does emphasise the importance of getting the Scotland Bill passed sooner rather than later though and will increase pressure on the SNP to include indyref2 in next year's manifesto
SO.. Under present circumstances and Scottish attitudes, quite a lot of people would be patting the the PM on his back..and then shaking his hand.. Let the whinging bastards go..and be done with them..
LOL, how you can talk about whingers is unbelievable you cretinous halfwit.
I don't see why the UK would end if Scotland left. It was originally formed between a union of Great Britain and Ireland, yet it survived most of Ireland leaving. It can also survive a small chunk of Great Britain leaving. We can go on as the UK with a slight name change after the "of".
Given it is two kingdoms , hard for the one left to be united unless it is with itself.
The question now on this dreadful migrant-refugee crisis must be that the very existence of the European Union is under threat. With Germany, France and Italy demanding new rules on asylum and other Nations resisting, Germany threatening the UK, and absolutely no prospect of any agreement there is a real danger of break up. Indeed any change on borders or free movement of peoples will require the re-opening of the Treaties. Very dangerous times ahead
Mercia has already been reinvented, as in West Mercia police. Northumbria also. East Anglia is familiar to most people. Essex, Kent and (East and West) Sussex still exist.
Therefore all we have to do is shove Cornwall out into the Celtic fringe, draw a line around the rest of England and call it Wessex. Sorted.
Makes more sense than most of the posts on pb today.
If I slap you in the face with an enormo-haddock and you (very sadly) pass away some time later after slipping into a coma, do you hold the doctors responsible?
Labour designed a demented, lopsided, unfair devolution to try and get itself a couple of Celtic fiefdoms forever and ever. It buggered up horrendously.
It depends on when I slip into the coma. Scotland voted to stay in the UK last year. If it then votes to leave it would imply something has changed. Given Labour's absence from government, it would be hard to pin responsibility for that change on Labour.
WRT independence. Labour provided the how, the Tories provided and continue to provide the why.
And the Scots provided the NO.
And Cameron rejected it.
I think your memory is about as addled as Corbynomics.
The Coalition government sanctioned the "once in a generation" referendum and has fully accepted the result.
But by pushing EVEL within hours of the result for primarily partisan reasons reignited the cause. He could have been inclusive.
The timing of the EVEL announcement was ill advised but the general principle of some form of federal UK structure is sound.
In the final analysis the Scots decided to remain "inclusive" and being so does not require Cameron or other Unionists to pander to the SNP.
The question now on this dreadful migrant-refugee crisis must be that the very existence of the European Union is under threat. With Germany, France and Italy demanding new rules on asylum and other Nations resisting, Germany threatening the UK, and absolutely no prospect of any agreement there is a real danger of break up. Indeed any change on borders or free movement of peoples will require the re-opening of the Treaties. Very dangerous times ahead
I wonder how many EU countries are presently reconsidering their position on Schengen…
I don't see why the UK would end if Scotland left. It was originally formed between a union of Great Britain and Ireland, yet it survived most of Ireland leaving. It can also survive a small chunk of Great Britain leaving. We can go on as the UK with a slight name change after the "of".
Given it is two kingdoms , hard for the one left to be united unless it is with itself.
Manchester, Leeds and Dundee are all united. Perfectly possible to be a United Kingdom after Scotland leaves. Indeed Scotland would cease to have any say in the matter at all...
The question now on this dreadful migrant-refugee crisis must be that the very existence of the European Union is under threat. With Germany, France and Italy demanding new rules on asylum and other Nations resisting, Germany threatening the UK, and absolutely no prospect of any agreement there is a real danger of break up. Indeed any change on borders or free movement of peoples will require the re-opening of the Treaties. Very dangerous times ahead
Agreed tough times though I suspect they'll muddle through with lots of fudge.
It does illustrate the glaring gap between European enthusiasts daft idealism on Schengen and the Euro and the reality of no real integration of institutions and policy. Thus we have the farce of the Greeks thinking the Germans would pick their bills up for them and now the Germans trying to tell everyone else to follow the German line on the migrants when they've had no say in Germany's decision on this.
I don't see why the UK would end if Scotland left. It was originally formed between a union of Great Britain and Ireland, yet it survived most of Ireland leaving. It can also survive a small chunk of Great Britain leaving. We can go on as the UK with a slight name change after the "of".
Given it is two kingdoms , hard for the one left to be united unless it is with itself.
Manchester, Leeds and Dundee are all united. Perfectly possible to be a United Kingdom after Scotland leaves. Indeed Scotland would cease to have any say in the matter at all...
Can you explain your logic. Given Scotland would be independent any idiot would know it would not be part of the rump. The point was how could it be UK when one of the two kingdoms had gone.
I don't see why the UK would end if Scotland left. It was originally formed between a union of Great Britain and Ireland, yet it survived most of Ireland leaving. It can also survive a small chunk of Great Britain leaving. We can go on as the UK with a slight name change after the "of".
Given it is two kingdoms , hard for the one left to be united unless it is with itself.
Manchester, Leeds and Dundee are all united. Perfectly possible to be a United Kingdom after Scotland leaves. Indeed Scotland would cease to have any say in the matter at all...
Can you explain your logic. Given Scotland would be independent any idiot would know it would not be part of the rump. The point was how could it be UK when one of the two kingdoms had gone.
Just like the Football Clubs: Dundee United, Manchester United and Leeds United. Or do you think that Man City should have a say over what Man United is called?
The question now on this dreadful migrant-refugee crisis must be that the very existence of the European Union is under threat. With Germany, France and Italy demanding new rules on asylum and other Nations resisting, Germany threatening the UK, and absolutely no prospect of any agreement there is a real danger of break up. Indeed any change on borders or free movement of peoples will require the re-opening of the Treaties. Very dangerous times ahead
Agreed tough times though I suspect they'll muddle through with lots of fudge.
It does illustrate the glaring gap between European enthusiasts daft idealism on Schengen and the Euro and the reality of no real integration of institutions and policy. Thus we have the farce of the Greeks thinking the Germans would pick their bills up for them and now the Germans trying to tell everyone else to follow the German line on the migrants when they've had no say in Germany's decision on this.
Absolutely spot on except I think there is so much anger between the EU leaders that even a fudge may not happen this time - just a complete fall out
Any wholesale admittance of refugees will simply generate more refugees.
The first Polish plumber to enter the UK was undoubtedly the starting point for an exponential curve. That curve has now flattened off sharply due to the very strong factor that you can only need so much plumbing done. (I have nothing against Polish plumbers by the way)
If the refugees were (and clearly in fact this only applies to some) planning on being supported by the state then the constraint in the exponential curve will only be when the state can't support people any more.
Doing the apparently right thing is not necessarily always wise.
Anecdote (sorry): I was approached by a girl on a rainy night outside Tesco's asking if I had any change. I said 'no' as I pretty much always do (partly for the reasons above). Anyway after I'd shopped I emerge and am asked again by the girl. It was rainy, she looked quite needy, but I didn't have any loose change at all (never do). Anyway I'd had a good day, clearly she hadn't, and so I fished 20 quid out and gave it to her. She thanked me a bit, but then just moved on to the next passer by to ask 'can you spare any change'. I've sort of rather vowed never to give to people that ask, but nonetheless if I can find people that need, but don't ask, then I'll see what I can do.
No point creating a federal structure until Scotland has left the UK. Scottish departure is inevitable anyway.
If you try to create it BEFORE Scotland leaves then you have to include Scottish input into the process - which is unwise since you don't want the influence of a member who is going to leave anyway. Plus it will need rework after "Screxit".
If you create it AFTER Scotland leaves then you can just set it up for the interests of the remaining member nations.
Listening to David Cameron tonight it takes a lot of courage to stand firm on the numbers coming in to the UK and is a clear example of leadership that is so sadly missing from the labour leader candidates who just want to be seen drifting to the tune of the Jeremy Corbyn playbook
MG .. This cretinous halfwit and a lot more like me are fed up to the back teeth of dimwit Scots like you forever whinging..please have your pathetic ref and piss off...
Listening to David Cameron tonight it takes a lot of courage to stand firm on the numbers coming in to the UK and is a clear example of leadership that is so sadly missing from the labour leader candidates who just want to be seen drifting to the tune of the Jeremy Corbyn playbook
No point creating a federal structure until Scotland has left the UK. Scottish departure is inevitable anyway.
If you try to create it BEFORE Scotland leaves then you have to include Scottish input into the process - which is unwise since you don't want the influence of a member who is going to leave anyway. Plus it will need rework after "Screxit".
If you create it AFTER Scotland leaves then you can just set it up for the interests of the remaining member nations.
Scottish departure is inevitable. Yes, I think so. I am therefore more than a bit miffed that George Bloody Osborne was up there the other day promising a huge investment in port facilities. Why do that when within a decade or so the port facilities at Plymouth will need to be upgraded when the Astutes come back south (to avoid Mr. FlightPath flying off the handle again I said, Astutes and have made no comment about the SSBNs). Wouldn't it be a much better idea to scrap the rebasing plan and start pumping money into Devonport now?
As they say hereabouts the gemmes a bogey for the union.
The detail of the poll is devastating for Westminster parties and the usual gang of Pol Betting unionist misogynists not to mention the antediluvian deadwood Scottish press. Sturgeon is light years ahead of the rest. The SNP are light years ahead and heading for another majority. The clear majority want another referendum within five years and the overwhelming majoirty within ten years. All of the unionist parties whinging and their pathetic platform for Holyrood is undone in one single poll.
Cameron is simply putting his head in the sand thinking this immigration crisis will go away one day. It won't. It's a tad hypocritical for this country to act like this crisis isn't our problem, given the meddling both we and the US have done in Middle Eastern affairs in the last decade or so. At least Germany is doing something.
It probably shouldn't be like this 70 years on, but a German leader making political demands of a UK leader - which they expect to be bowed to - isn't going to end well.
If the UK PM did agree, he'd be finished. And it will bring out the Spirit of 1940 in a large chunk of the population - even if it wasn't deeply irritating being lectured by a foreign power as it is, which it is.
Do we have a similar maverick waiting in the wings to ride to the rescue?
They might say that they would vote for Scexit but when they face economic reality they will pull back just like they did last time. When you consider how less favourable those economic considerations are now to when they voted no last time I think that is a certainty. Would that it were not so - I would be eternally glad to see the back of them.
Comments
If you mean the partition into East and West Sussex, then for the same reason so many other places were partitioned by HMG - incompetence.
Belike, else.
If it worked, then I would be happy. (Speaking as a Unionist).
But if the Scots are determined to leave (and it is their right to self determination) then it would hardly be correct, or "fair", to blame your "constitutional convention" for the failure to keep them in the UK.
I'll get me coat....
"Open the next referendum up to the whole UK. The Scots will be gone in a heartbeat."
An opinion unsupported by even so much as a single opinion poll of voters in England.
"England" would hate to lose a third of its land mass just for starters.
> http://t.co/CoyPJm68pP http://t.co/KiwIsIHKSv
"I don't see why the UK would end if Scotland left. It was originally formed between a union of Great Britain and Ireland, yet it survived most of Ireland leaving. It can also survive a small chunk of Great Britain leaving. We can go on as the UK with a slight name change after the "of". "
Impeccable logic I grant you-but leading eventually to the United Kingdom of Watford and London (not sure about London, of course).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_independence#Post-referendum_polling
Therefore all we have to do is shove Cornwall out into the Celtic fringe, draw a line around the rest of England and call it Wessex. Sorted.
Makes more sense than most of the posts on pb today.
It does illustrate the glaring gap between European enthusiasts daft idealism on Schengen and the Euro and the reality of no real integration of institutions and policy. Thus we have the farce of the Greeks thinking the Germans would pick their bills up for them and now the Germans trying to tell everyone else to follow the German line on the migrants when they've had no say in Germany's decision on this.
The first Polish plumber to enter the UK was undoubtedly the starting point for an exponential curve. That curve has now flattened off sharply due to the very strong factor that you can only need so much plumbing done. (I have nothing against Polish plumbers by the way)
If the refugees were (and clearly in fact this only applies to some) planning on being supported by the state then the constraint in the exponential curve will only be when the state can't support people any more.
Doing the apparently right thing is not necessarily always wise.
Anecdote (sorry): I was approached by a girl on a rainy night outside Tesco's asking if I had any change. I said 'no' as I pretty much always do (partly for the reasons above). Anyway after I'd shopped I emerge and am asked again by the girl. It was rainy, she looked quite needy, but I didn't have any loose change at all (never do). Anyway I'd had a good day, clearly she hadn't, and so I fished 20 quid out and gave it to her. She thanked me a bit, but then just moved on to the next passer by to ask 'can you spare any change'. I've sort of rather vowed never to give to people that ask, but nonetheless if I can find people that need, but don't ask, then I'll see what I can do.
Scottish departure is inevitable anyway.
If you try to create it BEFORE Scotland leaves then you have to include Scottish input into the process - which is unwise since you don't want the influence of a member who is going to leave anyway. Plus it will need rework after "Screxit".
If you create it AFTER Scotland leaves then you can just set it up for the interests of the remaining member nations.
The detail of the poll is devastating for Westminster parties and the usual gang of Pol Betting unionist misogynists not to mention the antediluvian deadwood Scottish press. Sturgeon is light years ahead of the rest. The SNP are light years ahead and heading for another majority. The clear majority want another referendum within five years and the overwhelming majoirty within ten years. All of the unionist parties whinging and their pathetic platform for Holyrood is undone in one single poll.
A grand day!.