On topic this is the usual problem of too many Yougovs creating a lot of statistical noise which obscures as much as it illuminates. The general trend for the Labour lead has been down but whether that is continuing or has stabilised at this lower level (approximately 7) is not clear yet.
I continue to have reservations about Yougov generally and these online polls from what must be a seriously exhausted bank of respondents who may by that process alone be becoming atypical of the population (who simply do not think about politics as often as these people are being asked). We seriously need some new information from reputable traditional pollsters to even give a clear sense of direction.
According to Yougov Labour's vote is holding up remarkably well in the face of a huge retreat on economic policy and civil war with the unions. If that is true then their vote is not as soft as some (including me) suggested. The tory vote is surprisingly high for this stage in a Parliament too, especially as the economic news has only turned better relatively recently.
On topic this is the usual problem of too many Yougovs creating a lot of statistical noise which obscures as much as it illuminates. The general trend for the Labour lead has been down but whether that is continuing or has stabilised at this lower level (approximately 7) is not clear yet.
I continue to have reservations about Yougov generally and these online polls from what must be a seriously exhausted bank of respondents who may by that process alone be becoming atypical of the population (who simply do not think about politics as often as these people are being asked). We seriously need some new information from reputable traditional pollsters to even give a clear sense of direction.
According to Yougov Labour's vote is holding up remarkably well in the face of a huge retreat on economic policy and civil war with the unions. If that is true then their vote is not as soft as some (including me) suggested. The tory vote is surprisingly high for this stage in a Parliament too, especially as the economic news has only turned better relatively recently.
@DavidL You raise a good point - what frequency of polls is required to show a trend?
Also if a monthly poll shows a very significant difference to their last poll - is it an outlier or a real change? We may not know until the next month. Types of MAT graphs are useful here.
You say, "We seriously need some new information from reputable traditional pollsters to even give a clear sense of direction. " Somehow Peter Kellner of YouGov may not agree with your sentiment. Did you omit the word "other" before "reputable"?
I believe that the YouGov panel is far, far larger than you may think.
I am not really having a go at Yougov or Peter Kellner. What would we have to talk about if we didn't get this almost daily feed?
I accept they have a large panel but getting 5K responses a week cannot be easy. My concern is that whilst many might be willing to do that occasionally for their few pennies eventually you are going to have a hard core of respondents who are more politically motivated than the population at large. This means they might react differently to political stories that we get excited about on here and the vast majority never even notice.
If you get hard core committed supporters your results might also suggest a greater degree of stability in the parties' standings than you would in the population at large. We have seen that stability for both of the major parties for a considerable time with only the lib dems and UKIP flying up and down. It is a possible explanation.
If the 'No' campaign would work as a team then they might have a better chance of success. As time marches on, their disunity is only going to get worse.
Get worse than this?
LABOUR should abandon the cross-party Better Together campaign, former first minister Henry McLeish has said as he accused the unionist group of using “fear and scare tactics” to defeat the SNP.
Mr McLeish said the anti-independence campaign was “treating Scots like idiots” as he claimed Better Together was working alongside Westminster in attempting to frighten voters about independence.
The comments from the former Scottish Labour leader came after the UK government made a series of claims about the consequences of independence such as the end of Scottish banknotes and more expensive mobile phone calls for Scots visiting the rest of the UK.
Mr McLeish said there was “too much venom and hatred aimed at the SNP” in Better Together, which is an alliance of Labour, Tories and the Lib Dems.
He called on the Labour leadership in Scotland to leave the group and “forge a new campaign” with Lib Dem supporters of greater devolution.
The Better Together campaign is led by former Labour chancellor Alistair Darling, but the leadership of the group includes senior Scottish Tories such as David McLetchie, who is a director of the campaign.
Mr McLeish said that the anti-independence campaign was “tied to the utterings of David Cameron and the Scottish Tories” as he called for a new Unionist Labour-Lib Dem campaign.
He also said that Better Together was involved in a “constant haranguing of Scots” in a campaign he claimed is dominated by Westminster and London-based politicians.
Mr McLeish said: “There are fear and scare stories such as that we’ll have passport controls at the Border and won’t have access to blood transfusion supplies. Next they’ll be saying there will be seven years of famine in an independent Scotland and that aliens will land here.
“By leaving Better Together, Labour can start to reinforce its identity.”
The former first minister’s attack on his party’s decision to support Better Together came as it emerged that senior figures within Scottish Labour had refused to join the cross-party campaign because of Tory involvement.
Party figures staying away from Better Together include MP Katy Clark, MSP Elaine Smith and senior trade union officials – Richard Leonard, Scotland organiser for the GMB union, and Dave Watson, head of campaigns at Unison.
Mr McLeish warned: “Scots don’t like to be talked to like idiots and there has been a constant haranguing of Scots by Westminster in terms of the type of campaign being run.
“This could creates a backlash as Scots want to know what vision of Scotland within the Union the Unionists are campaigning for. If there’s another year of this people will start to rebel.”
United With Labour – the party’s campaign against independence – was launched by Gordon Brown this spring.
Mr McLeish insisted that a bigger cross-party group, but without any Tory involvement, was needed to deliver a No vote in the referendum on 18 September 2014.
He said: “The Tories bring nothing to the table, so Labour and progressive Lib Dems have to put forward their own campaign.
“It’s not just the referendum, we have a general election in 2015 and then a Holyrood election in 2016.”
They created IPSA (as toothless and inept as it is) and then run about like headless chickens when it does what they told it to do.
Why are politicians so crap, it's very depressing!
I'm trying hard to recall but I don't think every politician at westminster thought the IPSA 'solution' was a great idea. I don't mean the inevitable idiots and whiners who undermined it at every turn because they thought anyone daring to question their expenses was unacceptable. I mean the ones who warned that it was a temporary band-aid at best since the underlying problems were being fudged and passed on to another body to try and take the flak. With the results we now see.
Gary Slapper @garyslapper SAY WHEN. How many lawyers do you want? Japan has 1 for 4,000 citizens. The UK has 1: 450 citizens. Brazil has 1:320; US has 1: 260 citizens
Gary Slapper @garyslapper SAY WHEN. How many lawyers do you want? Japan has 1 for 4,000 citizens. The UK has 1: 450 citizens. Brazil has 1:320; US has 1: 260 citizens
Gary Slapper @garyslapper SAY WHEN. How many lawyers do you want? Japan has 1 for 4,000 citizens. The UK has 1: 450 citizens. Brazil has 1:320; US has 1: 260 citizens
I'm hurt Plato. Where would PB be without its lawyers?
In all the opinion poll analysis and Labours prospects little attention has been given to their position in Scotland. An opinion poll on Westminster voting published by Lord Ashton in November had SNP 0n 39%,Labour on 33% Con 16 and Lib Dem 6%.A poll taking account of Scottish sub samples from December and January gave a similar picture with SNP on 36% ,Labour 33% Con 17& Lib Dems 7%.
on the basis of these polls the SNP would make considerable gains from labour. The other implication of an increased SNP presence in in Westminster would be an increased chance of a coalition in which the SNP hold the balance of power.
Of course the Scots could vote for independence ahead of that and the party that would b rubbing its hands most at the prospect of no Scottish MP's in the 2015 GE would be the Tories.
Labour on 37% - oh no ! Crisis ! Basically the voters (That matter in GE terms) in this country are now, whether one likes it or not essentially Labour (Labour even outperformed expectations with James Gordon Brown at 2010 GE). Sure the conservatives can ALMOST win when a perfect storm of Gordon Brown and the country going down the toilet presents itself, but so long as David Cameron is in charge and Ed Miliband has his blank sheet of paper - well the public is going to opt for the blank paper and the blank minds.
They'll all wonder what the hell they were doing come 2017, but they are going to vote Labour in 2015 come what may. I have no idea if it'll be a LAB maj or NOM, but Labour will get most seats and Ed Miliband will be PM.
If this is wrong please feel free to quote it back at me post GE.
Slightly surprised by the sovereign territory idea. However, if Scotland votes for separation and there's no sovereign territory deal over Faslane then the costs of relocation should be part of separation negotiations. Hopefully it won't come to that.
MD, its your crap dumped there by Westminster so they can pay for it , we never asked for it to be dumped on us. Must be getting squeaky bum time at Westminster as they start to realise they are going to have a lot more to worry about than putting barbed wire up at Carlisle and increasing our mobile phone charges.
Gary Slapper @garyslapper SAY WHEN. How many lawyers do you want? Japan has 1 for 4,000 citizens. The UK has 1: 450 citizens. Brazil has 1:320; US has 1: 260 citizens
Gary Slapper @garyslapper SAY WHEN. How many lawyers do you want? Japan has 1 for 4,000 citizens. The UK has 1: 450 citizens. Brazil has 1:320; US has 1: 260 citizens
I'm hurt Plato. Where would PB be without its lawyers?
Slightly surprised by the sovereign territory idea. However, if Scotland votes for separation and there's no sovereign territory deal over Faslane then the costs of relocation should be part of separation negotiations. Hopefully it won't come to that.
Personally I think it;s a daft idea, the kind of thing pushed by accountants. If the UK chooses to keeps nukes it should keep them on its own territory
Technically speaking, if they go down tis route, then Faslane would be rUK territory...
(But I agree with you. The cost should be part of the overall settlement though)
LOL, you idiots do not get it at all, as if we would stand for you numpties just deciding that part of Scotland belonged to you, what century do you live in.
Gary Slapper @garyslapper SAY WHEN. How many lawyers do you want? Japan has 1 for 4,000 citizens. The UK has 1: 450 citizens. Brazil has 1:320; US has 1: 260 citizens
Gary Slapper @garyslapper SAY WHEN. How many lawyers do you want? Japan has 1 for 4,000 citizens. The UK has 1: 450 citizens. Brazil has 1:320; US has 1: 260 citizens
I'm hurt Plato. Where would PB be without its lawyers?
Does replying in duplicate incur twice the charge?
I feel confident that the area around Barrow, where the submarines are built will welcome the 14,000 jobs that go with Trident, maybe even the West coast of Wales would be interested , given that we need access to the Atlantic
In all the opinion poll analysis and Labours prospects little attention has been given to their position in Scotland. An opinion poll on Westminster voting published by Lord Ashton in November had SNP 0n 39%,Labour on 33% Con 16 and Lib Dem 6%.A poll taking account of Scottish sub samples from December and January gave a similar picture with SNP on 36% ,Labour 33% Con 17& Lib Dems 7%.
on the basis of these polls the SNP would make considerable gains from labour. The other implication of an increased SNP presence in in Westminster would be an increased chance of a coalition in which the SNP hold the balance of power.
Of course the Scots could vote for independence ahead of that and the party that would b rubbing its hands most at the prospect of no Scottish MP's in the 2015 GE would be the Tories.
It is July. the fact that you are cherry-picking polls no later than January says it all.
On topic = with Labour touching the edge of low-single figures as a lead, and its a trend that lasted at least a fortnight - its worth noting that within the YouGov polling base, something is going on.
IIRC, several pollsters have said it takes about 2 weeks for issues to generally feed through - heard it on the telly, saw it in the paper, heard it from friends and family etc/discussed it at work....
If that is holding true - then is this trend linked to More EdM in the media/news stories negative to Labour, more DKs or better for someone else. If there is a 2 week lag, will it decline further after all the union stories or has that already soaked in?
Kippers seem to also have lost ground recently. Has anyone looked at the various trend lines to see if anyone in particular is gaining share?
Slightly surprised by the sovereign territory idea. However, if Scotland votes for separation and there's no sovereign territory deal over Faslane then the costs of relocation should be part of separation negotiations. Hopefully it won't come to that.
Personally I think it;s a daft idea, the kind of thing pushed by accountants. If the UK chooses to keeps nukes it should keep them on its own territory
Technically speaking, if they go down tis route, then Faslane would be rUK territory...
(But I agree with you. The cost should be part of the overall settlement though)
LOL, you idiots do not get it at all, as if we would stand for you numpties just deciding that part of Scotland belonged to you, what century do you live in.
As I've said before, I think it's a silly idea. However, the reality is that everything would be up for negotiation - if you are going your separate ways then it makes sense to have a reasonable settlement that both sides are equally unhappy with. I would imagine a time-limited lease on Faslane would be part of that negotiation.
(And, btw, unilateral changes in borders do have precedent - think about the 6 county solution in Ulster)
I feel confident that the area around Barrow, where the submarines are built will welcome the 14,000 jobs that go with Trident, maybe even the West coast of Wales would be interested , given that we need access to the Atlantic
I've heard Portsmouth suggested, IIRC. Geography is probably the single most important factor in siting the base
In all the opinion poll analysis and Labours prospects little attention has been given to their position in Scotland. An opinion poll on Westminster voting published by Lord Ashton in November had SNP 0n 39%,Labour on 33% Con 16 and Lib Dem 6%.A poll taking account of Scottish sub samples from December and January gave a similar picture with SNP on 36% ,Labour 33% Con 17& Lib Dems 7%.
on the basis of these polls the SNP would make considerable gains from labour. The other implication of an increased SNP presence in in Westminster would be an increased chance of a coalition in which the SNP hold the balance of power.
Of course the Scots could vote for independence ahead of that and the party that would b rubbing its hands most at the prospect of no Scottish MP's in the 2015 GE would be the Tories.
FWIW the average poll figures from the last 10 Yougov Scottish subsamples are
Slightly surprised by the sovereign territory idea. However, if Scotland votes for separation and there's no sovereign territory deal over Faslane then the costs of relocation should be part of separation negotiations. Hopefully it won't come to that.
Personally I think it;s a daft idea, the kind of thing pushed by accountants. If the UK chooses to keeps nukes it should keep them on its own territory
Technically speaking, if they go down tis route, then Faslane would be rUK territory...
(But I agree with you. The cost should be part of the overall settlement though)
Sorry Charles effing stupid idea, the same thing was tried in Ireland post 1922 ( Berehaven, Queenstown and Lough Swilly ) and then the eejits in HMG handed the bases over just in time for them to be of no use in WW2 and the battle of the Atlantic. Much better to have a defence policy based on home territory and face the reality of where we are.
As I said, I agree with you. Guantanamo isn't doing the US any favours right now either
What is this I hear? Division within the Unionist ranks?
C'mon chaps, stiff upper lip and all that. Can't show the Jocks that we are irresolute.
Don't be silly. I've study enough Irish history to know when the tories get it wrong, they get it spectacularly wrong (grew up as a liberal unionist).
My preference would be keep the Union but in a radically different form (effectively home rule for the 4 nations, and potentially consider spliting London out as well).
If the Scots want to go off on their own, it's be a shame, but go with our blessing.
Just as long as we know our place and you select bits you want to keep first.
BBC's Norman Smith tweets: "No 10 on Faslane nuclear base remaining in UK " No such ideas .PM would not support them if they did. It's not a credible or sensible idea"
Looks like someone in the MOD got ahead of themselves...
Slightly surprised by the sovereign territory idea. However, if Scotland votes for separation and there's no sovereign territory deal over Faslane then the costs of relocation should be part of separation negotiations. Hopefully it won't come to that.
Personally I think it;s a daft idea, the kind of thing pushed by accountants. If the UK chooses to keeps nukes it should keep them on its own territory
Technically speaking, if they go down tis route, then Faslane would be rUK territory...
(But I agree with you. The cost should be part of the overall settlement though)
Sorry Charles effing stupid idea, the same thing was tried in Ireland post 1922 ( Berehaven, Queenstown and Lough Swilly ) and then the eejits in HMG handed the bases over just in time for them to be of no use in WW2 and the battle of the Atlantic. Much better to have a defence policy based on home territory and face the reality of where we are.
As I said, I agree with you. Guantanamo isn't doing the US any favours right now either
What is this I hear? Division within the Unionist ranks?
C'mon chaps, stiff upper lip and all that. Can't show the Jocks that we are irresolute.
Don't be silly. I've study enough Irish history to know when the tories get it wrong, they get it spectacularly wrong (grew up as a liberal unionist).
My preference would be keep the Union but in a radically different form (effectively home rule for the 4 nations, and potentially consider spliting London out as well).
If the Scots want to go off on their own, it's be a shame, but go with our blessing.
Just as long as we know our place and you select bits you want to keep first.
I didn't say that, but I guess you have a chip on your shoulder about something
R5 phone-in on the NHS and what should be culled/rationed/paid for is pretty unsympathetic to those who are advocating that the NHS is a sacred cow and nothing can be cut or its not given enough funding.
Lots of examples that aren't tattoo removal being cited. A contributor who tried to play the political card got bashed by callers who simply aren't interested.
Quite a big shift in attitudes from the last few times they've covered this. Most notable one was 'its not free - it costs a fortune'.
I feel confident that the area around Barrow, where the submarines are built will welcome the 14,000 jobs that go with Trident, maybe even the West coast of Wales would be interested , given that we need access to the Atlantic
Richard, if that's the best the union can come up with, you better just stop there.
I feel confident that the area around Barrow, where the submarines are built will welcome the 14,000 jobs that go with Trident, maybe even the West coast of Wales would be interested , given that we need access to the Atlantic
I've heard Portsmouth suggested, IIRC. Geography is probably the single most important factor in siting the base
Which is why Faslane/Coulport (where the warheads are stored) is ideal. But if the Scots vote for Independence it will have to move....as the PMOS has made clear - oh well, it was amusing cranking up the Nats blood pressure while it lasted - tho they must be gutted that "the Unionists" on here denounced it as a daft idea too....
The old joke about how many MPs it takes to change a lightbulb (Answer: “Change?!?”) comes to mind on hearing the news that John Bercow wants to alter the layout of the Commons cloakroom.
At present MPs each have a peg and a red tag (on which to hang their swords, naturally) allotted alphabetically by name. Now, like a bored student reordering his music collection, the Speaker has decided to arrange them by constituency.
“Dreadful idea,” harrumphs one Labour backbencher. “Some of the older Members have little idea of the names of their constituencies since they keep changing. Why must Bercow dehumanise us?”
Slightly surprised by the sovereign territory idea. However, if Scotland votes for separation and there's no sovereign territory deal over Faslane then the costs of relocation should be part of separation negotiations. Hopefully it won't come to that.
Personally I think it;s a daft idea, the kind of thing pushed by accountants. If the UK chooses to keeps nukes it should keep them on its own territory
Technically speaking, if they go down tis route, then Faslane would be rUK territory...
(But I agree with you. The cost should be part of the overall settlement though)
LOL, you idiots do not get it at all, as if we would stand for you numpties just deciding that part of Scotland belonged to you, what century do you live in.
As I've said before, I think it's a silly idea. However, the reality is that everything would be up for negotiation - if you are going your separate ways then it makes sense to have a reasonable settlement that both sides are equally unhappy with. I would imagine a time-limited lease on Faslane would be part of that negotiation.
(And, btw, unilateral changes in borders do have precedent - think about the 6 county solution in Ulster)
Charles ,. A lease is just a bit different to your suggestion that they just make the whole area UK soil. As ever unionists do not think through their arrogant suggestions and just believe they can do as they wish as if it is their god given right. It is that sort of attitude that has ensured we are where we are and the sooner we vote YES the better.
I feel confident that the area around Barrow, where the submarines are built will welcome the 14,000 jobs that go with Trident, maybe even the West coast of Wales would be interested , given that we need access to the Atlantic
LOL, Richard back to that old chestnut, some arithmetic lessons needed.
Alternatives to Faslane, from a not altogether objective source....
"The study, by John Ainslie of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, concludes that there are no viable alternatives. Possible sites including Devonport, Barrow (where the submarines are built), Portland, Falmouth and Milford Haven were all discounted in a secret study by the Ministry of Defence in 1963 when the government was searching for sites to base its Polaris nuclear fleet, Trident's predecessor, the study shows. They are even less viable now for environmental, cost and other pragmatic reasons, Ainslie says."
Slightly surprised by the sovereign territory idea. However, if Scotland votes for separation and there's no sovereign territory deal over Faslane then the costs of relocation should be part of separation negotiations. Hopefully it won't come to that.
Personally I think it;s a daft idea, the kind of thing pushed by accountants. If the UK chooses to keeps nukes it should keep them on its own territory
Technically speaking, if they go down tis route, then Faslane would be rUK territory...
(But I agree with you. The cost should be part of the overall settlement though)
LOL, you idiots do not get it at all, as if we would stand for you numpties just deciding that part of Scotland belonged to you, what century do you live in.
As I've said before, I think it's a silly idea. However, the reality is that everything would be up for negotiation - if you are going your separate ways then it makes sense to have a reasonable settlement that both sides are equally unhappy with. I would imagine a time-limited lease on Faslane would be part of that negotiation.
(And, btw, unilateral changes in borders do have precedent - think about the 6 county solution in Ulster)
Charles ,. A lease is just a bit different to your suggestion that they just make the whole area UK soil. As ever unionists do not think through their arrogant suggestions and just believe they can do as they wish as if it is their god given right. It is that sort of attitude that has ensured we are where we are and the sooner we vote YES the better.
It was never my suggestion - I don't think that any of the Unionists on here have supported the idea & it certainly isn't official policy.
But if you want to feel grumpy and self-righteous about this then go ahead. It'll save us figuring out something else you can be grumpy and self-righteous about.
I think the piece itself makes the point rather well:
"Mr Littlewood is not surprised that his friend has turned out to be, as Chief Secretary, a deputy capable of working in harmony with the Chancellor: “Danny Alexander is the best number two human being the human race has ever created. He was a brilliant number two when he worked for the European Movement, he was a brilliant number two to Nick Clegg and now he is a brilliant number two to George Osborne.”
I don't really see him as a number 1. He seems to lack the charisma and arrogance required for that. Still, if I was to pick out the LD stars of this government I would pick him and Steven Webb.
With the exception of being referred to as a Number Two - I think Danny Alexander has been a star. He's rarely put a foot wrong, doesn't play silly buggers and knows how to play the team game whilst still sticking to his principles.
If ever there was an MP that's really stepped up to the role - its him.
I think the piece itself makes the point rather well:
"Mr Littlewood is not surprised that his friend has turned out to be, as Chief Secretary, a deputy capable of working in harmony with the Chancellor: “Danny Alexander is the best number two human being the human race has ever created. He was a brilliant number two when he worked for the European Movement, he was a brilliant number two to Nick Clegg and now he is a brilliant number two to George Osborne.”
I don't really see him as a number 1. He seems to lack the charisma and arrogance required for that. Still, if I was to pick out the LD stars of this government I would pick him and Steven Webb.
Not sure if I'd want 'a bit of a number 2' as my political epitaph.
Fire Stopper..MalcolmG . The idea of moving Trident to the areas I have suggested are entirely my suggestions . I do not claim to speak for the Union.. MG The figures I quoted were published and discussed many times on here, even the SNP admitted to 6000 in its denial of the published figure of 14000. Have you been down to Helensburgh yet to see how excited the locals are about being fired. Nah I didn't think so.
@Plato. Not sure. The skill set is different and there is little evidence he has those additional skills. Having said that the job of the Lib Dem leader is to appear as the reasonable everyman somewhere between the extremes of the major parties expressing a "common sense" point of view. I suppose he could do that.
Not quite sure that he has the proper level of obsession with pointless constitutional changes though. That is an essential element with the base.
I very much hope that he holds his seat. I think it will be close. His best bet will be if Labour and SNP split fairly evenly which is possible.
TUD No I can't but it was discussed on here at length pre changeover..someone will have them somewhere..I believe thay may have originated in a local, Faslane area, newspaper
I think the piece itself makes the point rather well:
"Mr Littlewood is not surprised that his friend has turned out to be, as Chief Secretary, a deputy capable of working in harmony with the Chancellor: “Danny Alexander is the best number two human being the human race has ever created. He was a brilliant number two when he worked for the European Movement, he was a brilliant number two to Nick Clegg and now he is a brilliant number two to George Osborne.”
I don't really see him as a number 1. He seems to lack the charisma and arrogance required for that. Still, if I was to pick out the LD stars of this government I would pick him and Steven Webb.
I'm not sure "Vote for Osborne's number two" is the most helpful slogan.
Oh I don't know. I can see it being very helpful indeed in 2015. Just not for wee Danny or the lib dems.
Can anyone understand why moving from Faslane would cost 10bn?
This seems to me a public sector 10,000 quid for a hammer kind of cost estimate.
There is a lot of infrastructure there - in particular hardened bunkers for the warheads at Coulport which have been built up over half a century since the days of Polaris - so moving it will not be cheap - but perhaps now the MOD has had it's "sovereign territory" kite shot down it will do some serious contingency planning.
The MOD have, however, added to the gaiety of the nation by letting Sturgeon claim Scotland was being bullied and the Nats on here being outflanked by the Unionists in describing the idea as silly - to their evident frustration.....
Can anyone understand why moving from Faslane would cost 10bn?
This seems to me a public sector 10,000 quid for a hammer kind of cost estimate.
HMNB Coulport. Have a look at "The Rock of Gibraltar" and then think bigger. It is the' James Bond-eque' facilities required to store warheads and missiles that make The Clyde expensive.
Ofcourse, come independence, the relative costs should fall. At present monies spent in Scotland accrue to HMRC; come independence that money will be sunk [sic] funding....
TUD the BBC are quoting a figure of 6000 employed, I think the article I refer to was quoting the knock on effect in the area, families, businesses etc..It is sill a massive number to be shoved onto the dole.
The MOD have, however, added to the gaiety of the nation by letting Sturgeon claim Scotland was being bullied and the Nats on here being outflanked by the Unionists in describing the idea as silly - to their evident frustration.....
What a self-dramatizing view you have of your part in an independence debate. Over compensating for insignificance I guess.
I feel confident that the area around Barrow, where the submarines are built will welcome the 14,000 jobs that go with Trident, maybe even the West coast of Wales would be interested , given that we need access to the Atlantic
I've heard Portsmouth suggested, IIRC. Geography is probably the single most important factor in siting the base
Which is why Faslane/Coulport (where the warheads are stored) is ideal. But if the Scots vote for Independence it will have to move....as the PMOS has made clear - oh well, it was amusing cranking up the Nats blood pressure while it lasted - tho they must be gutted that "the Unionists" on here denounced it as a daft idea too....
Carlotta, there had to be some sensible unionists about who could see this was just a joke
TUD the BBC are quoting a figure of 6000 employed, I think the article I refer to was quoting the knock on effect in the area, families, businesses etc..It is sill a massive number to be shoved onto the dole.
Richard, as you well know the jobs will remain but will be based on sensible defense activity and not WMD's. Only the sailors will move so no big loss.
I think the piece itself makes the point rather well:
"Mr Littlewood is not surprised that his friend has turned out to be, as Chief Secretary, a deputy capable of working in harmony with the Chancellor: “Danny Alexander is the best number two human being the human race has ever created. He was a brilliant number two when he worked for the European Movement, he was a brilliant number two to Nick Clegg and now he is a brilliant number two to George Osborne.”
I don't really see him as a number 1. He seems to lack the charisma and arrogance required for that. Still, if I was to pick out the LD stars of this government I would pick him and Steven Webb.
Not sure if I'd want 'a bit of a number 2' as my political epitaph.
But that's the problem with modern politics. Do you go in to make a real difference, or for personal aggrandisement?
We have too many people wanting to be the Chief nowadays - and the media mooting stories of anyone making a difference as being a next leader - but a shortage of good-quality, hard-working people behind the scenes who will do the leg-work.
We could do with a few more good number 2's, 3's and 4's ... politics in this country would then be a lot better off for it.
In the Private Sector nobody would ever mock a number 2 as not being successful. Any good person will be better with good support.
"Ipsa has today managed to achieve something remarkable: all the public scorn that comes with a £6,500 pay rise for politicians, without the extra pay – at least not until after 2015.
So how should MPs respond?
Ipsa has, unwittingly, given us a clear choice; take the pay rise after 2015 and accept the Ipsa system. Or veto the Ipsa pay hike, and in so doing make it clear we have no confidence in doing things this way.
Faced with a choice between taking a pay hike, or taking the axe to Ipsa, I would vote to scrap Ipsa every time.
So let's say no to Ipsa's pay hike in return for scrapping Ipsa.
The alternative? First, link any future MPs rise to that of the civil service. Second, give MPs a straightforward, taxable per diem payment to meet the cost of being away from home, and reimburse legitimate travel costs. Let's just do it.
I feel confident that the area around Barrow, where the submarines are built will welcome the 14,000 jobs that go with Trident, maybe even the West coast of Wales would be interested , given that we need access to the Atlantic
I've heard Portsmouth suggested, IIRC. Geography is probably the single most important factor in siting the base
Which is why Faslane/Coulport (where the warheads are stored) is ideal. But if the Scots vote for Independence it will have to move....as the PMOS has made clear - oh well, it was amusing cranking up the Nats blood pressure while it lasted - tho they must be gutted that "the Unionists" on here denounced it as a daft idea too....
Carlotta, there had to be some sensible unionists about who could see this was just a joke
That would be "all of" the ones who posted in the topic.....
Fire Stopper..MalcolmG . The idea of moving Trident to the areas I have suggested are entirely my suggestions . I do not claim to speak for the Union.. MG The figures I quoted were published and discussed many times on here, even the SNP admitted to 6000 in its denial of the published figure of 14000. Have you been down to Helensburgh yet to see how excited the locals are about being fired. Nah I didn't think so.
Richard , As SNP have already said that the base would be the HQ of any Scottish Naval force and also said they would maintain the jobs it is not seen as a big deal.
Alistair Darling keeping his 79 viewers waiting on the Bettertogether website. TBF that would be at the high end for the average BT meeting. I wonder what fresh, inclusive, positive message he'll be bringing to the debate.
Yes, why would Tom Harris and his chums want to axe IPSA?
MPs' expenses: Tom Harris, the fees office and the battle of the bottle steriliser
Tom Harris, the Labour MP for Glasgow South, became embroiled in a row with the Commons fees office when his claims for a baby cot and bottle steriliser were rejected
“MPs by necessity have to own two of almost everything — two sets of furniture, two TV sets, two DVD players, two electric shavers, etc.
Fire Stopper..MalcolmG . The idea of moving Trident to the areas I have suggested are entirely my suggestions . I do not claim to speak for the Union.. MG The figures I quoted were published and discussed many times on here, even the SNP admitted to 6000 in its denial of the published figure of 14000. Have you been down to Helensburgh yet to see how excited the locals are about being fired. Nah I didn't think so.
Richard , As SNP have already said that the base would be the HQ of any Scottish Naval force and also said they would maintain the jobs it is not seen as a big deal.
Malcolm , shouldn't the Scottish naval force be berthed on the East Coast so as to enforce Salmond's total blockade of the North Sea ;
Fire Stopper..MalcolmG . The idea of moving Trident to the areas I have suggested are entirely my suggestions . I do not claim to speak for the Union.. MG The figures I quoted were published and discussed many times on here, even the SNP admitted to 6000 in its denial of the published figure of 14000. Have you been down to Helensburgh yet to see how excited the locals are about being fired. Nah I didn't think so.
Richard , As SNP have already said that the base would be the HQ of any Scottish Naval force and also said they would maintain the jobs it is not seen as a big deal.
A vote for an independent Scotland is a vote to come out of the defence game for all practical purposes. Our military manouvres would be restricted to the Tattoo. A case can be made that this is a sensible way to live in a quiet part of north west Europe in the 22nd century but claiming that there are not major employment implications for those currently involved in those games is, well not entirely truthful.
Debt undoubtedly remains a major problem and inhibitor for growth but that article seriously overstates the case. Firstly, I believe that the unprecedented period where wages have been falling in real terms will gradually draw to an end and we should be back to real wage increases by the middle or late next year.
Secondly, much of this debt is already non-recoverable. We have introduced a series of measures which allow people to write off and compromise debt with minimal pain. Whatever the morality of this, this is the way we have chosen to live with all of us paying the costs of higher lending charges as a result.
Thirdly, the vast bulk of our private debt is connected to house purchase. If house prices start to recover the 25% reduction in real terms they have suffered since 2007 (again completely unprecedented) then their asset/debt ratios will improve making refinancing etc feasible.
It is not a good situation but I think we are probably at or even past the worst point in private debt.
This recession or downturn is not like others as the low interest rates have saved hundreds of pounds per month / year for many households, allowing them to cope with the squeeze on incomes and living standards. When normal services resumes there will be a big problem, unless incomes rise at a speed that compensates for the interest rate rises, which will push interest rates up higher... and so we go on.
I can remember the likes of @RichardNabaviet al arguing that the so-called "referendum lock" was watertight, and that if the government intended to transfer any new powers to Brussels, then there would be a referendum. So my question is why is the government not proposing to hold a referendum on giving the European Commission and Court of Justice of the European Union criminal jurisdiction in the United Kingdom for the first time, a move that not even the last Labour government dared to concede? Perhaps the watertight "referendum lock" was in fact entirely permeable.
Richard, as you well know the jobs will remain but will be based on sensible defense activity and not WMD's. Only the sailors will move so no big loss.
Unckie Malc,
Why? Seriously; why...?
From Wiki:
Faslane was first constructed and used as a base in World War II....
Faslane itself was chosen as the base at the height of the Cold War because of its geographic position, which forms a bastion on the relatively secluded but deep and easily navigable Gare Loch and Firth of Clyde on the west coast of Scotland. This position provides for rapid and stealthy access through the North Channel to the submarine patrolling areas in the North Atlantic, through the GIUK gap to the Norwegian Sea....
So why maintain a submarine base when the SDF will be outwith submarines? As mentioned by others an East-coast [Rosyth?] location would be more suitable. I can see no strategic reason for an independent Scots Defence Force using such an expensive facility for such a small navy. *
* Lossiemouth or Leuchars would be much better locations for an SDF HQ....
Per the Crown Prosecution Service: Malcolm McHaffie, Deputy Head of the CPS Special Crime Division, today announced that proceedings have been instituted against Denis MacShane, former Member of Parliament for Rotherham, and he is required to appear at Westminster Magistrates' Court on 30 July 2013 to face a single charge in relation to claims he made for parliamentary expenses.
Mr McHaffie said:
“Having thoroughly reviewed the evidence gathered by the police, I have decided there is sufficient evidence and it is in the public interest to bring a criminal charge against Denis MacShane. This charge relates to fraudulent claims with a total value of £12,900.
“The charge is of false accounting, contrary to the Theft Act 1968. It is alleged that Denis Macshane claimed expenses for research and translation services carried out by a company that did not carry out that work."
Mr McHaffie added:
“Denis MacShane now stands charged with a criminal offence and has the right to a fair trial. It is extremely important that nothing should be reported which could prejudice his trial.”
Disabled people cutting back on food and medication as bedroom tax wreaks havoc Same old nasty party.
Thank goodness the SNP brought in free prescriptions. Any word on the current SLAB policy on this matter? Their demands for 'real' action to help people hit by the bedroom tax are endless, so I'm sure they must be in favour of continuing free prescriptions.
'The Scottish Defence Force"..says it all really. now MG, go and sell that down Helensburgh way, oh and you may have to supply some details..Tough one.
I can remember the likes of @RichardNabaviet al arguing that the so-called "referendum lock" was watertight, and that if the government intended to transfer any new powers to Brussels, then there would be a referendum. So my question is why is the government not proposing to hold a referendum on giving the European Commission and Court of Justice of the European Union criminal jurisdiction in the United Kingdom for the first time, a move that not even the last Labour government dared to concede? Perhaps the watertight "referendum lock" was in fact entirely permeable.
Not for the first time, you are misquoting me.
I said it was 100% clear, in particular the circumstances in which it triggers are laid out in Schedule 1 of the European Union Act 2011:
Disabled people cutting back on food and medication as bedroom tax wreaks havoc Same old nasty party.
Thank goodness the SNP brought in free prescriptions. Any word on the current SLAB policy on this matter? Their demands for 'real' action to help people hit by the bedroom tax are endless, so I'm sure they must be in favour of continuing free prescriptions.
Well we know Darling is in favour of getting lots of cash from an NHS Privatisation Company but Lamont still seems to be in favour of hiding until everyone forgets about Falkirk.
I'm not a lawyer, but if there are any provisions you don't understand, I'll do my best to help.
In other words, the "referendum lock" is so weak that it isn't triggered by a major transfer of power to Brussels. I wonder why.
When you look through it the basic concept seems to be to stop somebody passing things that were in the Lisbon Treaty, only changing them so they have less unanimity and more QMV etc. This isn't much of a practical break on the actual next steps in European integration because if the member states were going to do those things, they'd have included them in the Lisbon Treaty.
Lamont still seems to be in favour of hiding until everyone forgets about Falkirk.
Oh, I think it'll be longer than that. The strategic geniuses at Bath Street have realised that JoLa will carry on having positive ratings as long as half the electorate have no idea who she is.
Lamont still seems to be in favour of hiding until everyone forgets about Falkirk.
Oh, I think it'll be longer than that. The strategic geniuses at Bath Street have realised that JoLa will carry on having positive ratings as long as half the electorate have no idea who she is.
Ah yes, the Iain Gray strategy. So that's why he was brought back.
Can anyone understand why moving from Faslane would cost 10bn?
This seems to me a public sector 10,000 quid for a hammer kind of cost estimate.
There is a lot of infrastructure there - in particular hardened bunkers for the warheads at Coulport which have been built up over half a century since the days of Polaris - so moving it will not be cheap - but perhaps now the MOD has had it's "sovereign territory" kite shot down it will do some serious contingency planning.
The MOD have, however, added to the gaiety of the nation by letting Sturgeon claim Scotland was being bullied and the Nats on here being outflanked by the Unionists in describing the idea as silly - to their evident frustration.....
I'm not a defence expert but the obvious way to handle the logistics would be to move the base to the existing facilities at King's Bay. Since they're using a lot of US technology, and it's very unlikely they'd be used without US agreement, that would be a more sensible place to get them maintained. For additional savings to Her Majesty's Treasury, they should also be built, manned, operated and paid for by the US, who would also be able to reduce the running costs by not building submarines that duplicate their existing capabilities.
When you look through it the basic concept seems to be to stop somebody passing things that were in the Lisbon Treaty, only changing them so they have less unanimity and more QMV etc. This isn't much of a practical break on the actual next steps in European integration because if the member states were going to do those things, they'd have included them in the Lisbon Treaty.
In the sense that the idiots who were in power from 1997 to 2010 had thrown away the protections which any sane government would have kept, yes, you are right.
But we started from where we were in May 2010. It's hardly the coalition's fault that that was such a bad position. Blame Brown and Blair.
In the sense that the idiots who were in power from 1997 to 2010 had thrown away the protections which any sane government would have kept, yes, you are right.
Giving small countries like Luxembourg and primarily crazy-person-administered countries like Hungary a veto over all kinds of EU decisions would not have been sane.
Personally I don't think these narrower Labour leads with YouGov have got much if anything to do with Red's UNITE problem.
It's been obvious to me that swingback has been occurring since around February/March. The UKIP surge masked it quite a bit, but now thats leveled off it's becoming increasingly apparant what's happening and I would say it's mainly down to the economy recovering and also partly the cycle of politics.
What I find really odd though (and this has been the case throughout the past three years really) is why there isn't far more media and political pressure on Ed Miliband?
Even when Labour had it's biggest leads last year we were barely talking low teens - Historically extremely medicore to say the least - Now we find swingback already taking place with just under two years left... The Ed's are in serious trouble.
Michael Deacon @MichaelPDeacon Charles Walker, Tory MP: "People want honest politicians. I'm going to take the [massive pay rise] and spend it on my children"
I'm not a defence expert but... it's very unlikely they'd be used without US agreement....
An at-sea boat has a protocol. Rumour has it that the release can be undetaken based upon the status of R4's "Today" broadcast....
Edited-to-add:
For additional savings to Her Majesty's Treasury, they should also be built, manned, operated and paid for by the US, who would also be able to reduce the running costs by not building submarines that duplicate their existing capabilities.
Stop digging: Drum-beat, accrued taxes, sovereignty (see-above). You no doubt expect your home-and-contents insurance to be funded by your preferred insurance company.
:troll-alert:
Further-point: All subs tend to replicate other subs functions. Why do nations bother building them, not least Nippon; hey Gaijin...?
Giving small countries like Luxembourg and primarily crazy-person-administered countries like Hungary a veto over all kinds of EU decisions would not have been sane.
Quite possibly, but by the same argument giving them the right to grab possibly-innocent UK citizens from their homes in the UK , with zero protection from UK courts, certainly wasn't.
When you look through it the basic concept seems to be to stop somebody passing things that were in the Lisbon Treaty, only changing them so they have less unanimity and more QMV etc. This isn't much of a practical break on the actual next steps in European integration because if the member states were going to do those things, they'd have included them in the Lisbon Treaty.
In the sense that the idiots who were in power from 1997 to 2010 had thrown away the protections which any sane government would have kept, yes, you are right.
But we started from where we were in May 2010. It's hardly the coalition's fault that that was such a bad position. Blame Brown and Blair.
I am a lawyer although no expert on EU law. As I have said before I think the government has a serious problem here. Section 6(3) provides: "A Minister of the Crown may not give a notification under Article 4 of Protocol (No. 21) on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice annexed to TEU and TFEU which relates to participation by the United Kingdom in a European Public Prosecutor's Office or an extension of the powers of that Office unless—. (a)the notification has been approved by Act of Parliament, and. (b)the referendum condition is met.."
If we had been able to stay in these provisions nothing would have happened but if the view is taken (as I understand it) that we need to opt out of all of the provisions and then opt back in to those that we like then that opting in will in my view trigger these provisions and require a referendum. I am not really seeing how they get around this unless they don't actually withdraw from the provisions in the first place.
I think the slightly better Con polling in the last couple of weeks may be partly the result of the gay marriage furore fading. A lot of supporters were very dischuffed by Cameron's position on that.
Giving small countries like Luxembourg and primarily crazy-person-administered countries like Hungary a veto over all kinds of EU decisions would not have been sane.
Quite possibly, but by the same argument giving them the right to grab possibly-innocent UK citizens from their homes in the UK , with zero protection from UK courts, certainly wasn't.
And who is proposing giving the kangaroo CJEU jurisdiction over extradition? That would be the current Secretary of State for the Home Department.
If you are right, or even if there is just the possibility that you might be right, then I'd have thought someone is bound to launch a judicial review. Could get interesting...
Comments
I accept they have a large panel but getting 5K responses a week cannot be easy. My concern is that whilst many might be willing to do that occasionally for their few pennies eventually you are going to have a hard core of respondents who are more politically motivated than the population at large. This means they might react differently to political stories that we get excited about on here and the vast majority never even notice.
If you get hard core committed supporters your results might also suggest a greater degree of stability in the parties' standings than you would in the population at large. We have seen that stability for both of the major parties for a considerable time with only the lib dems and UKIP flying up and down. It is a possible explanation.
They created IPSA (as toothless and inept as it is) and then run about like headless chickens when it does what they told it to do.
Why are politicians so crap, it's very depressing!
http://iceclimb.savethearctic.org/
I'm trying hard to recall but I don't think every politician at westminster thought the IPSA 'solution' was a great idea. I don't mean the inevitable idiots and whiners who undermined it at every turn because they thought anyone daring to question their expenses was unacceptable. I mean the ones who warned that it was a temporary band-aid at best since the underlying problems were being fudged and passed on to another body to try and take the flak. With the results we now see.
By the way you are either a supporter or "not now thanks". What if your response is "when hell freezes over"?
Gary Slapper @garyslapper
SAY WHEN. How many lawyers do you want? Japan has 1 for 4,000 citizens. The UK has 1: 450 citizens. Brazil has 1:320; US has 1: 260 citizens
An opinion poll on Westminster voting published by Lord Ashton in November had SNP 0n 39%,Labour on 33% Con 16 and Lib Dem 6%.A poll taking account of Scottish sub samples from December and January gave a similar picture with SNP on 36% ,Labour 33% Con 17& Lib Dems 7%.
on the basis of these polls the SNP would make considerable gains from labour. The other implication of an increased SNP presence in in Westminster would be an increased chance of a coalition in which the SNP hold the balance of power.
Of course the Scots could vote for independence ahead of that and the party that would b rubbing its hands most at the prospect of no Scottish MP's in the 2015 GE would be the Tories.
Basically the voters (That matter in GE terms) in this country are now, whether one likes it or not essentially Labour (Labour even outperformed expectations with James Gordon Brown at 2010 GE). Sure the conservatives can ALMOST win when a perfect storm of Gordon Brown and the country going down the toilet presents itself, but so long as David Cameron is in charge and Ed Miliband has his blank sheet of paper - well the public is going to opt for the blank paper and the blank minds.
They'll all wonder what the hell they were doing come 2017, but they are going to vote Labour in 2015 come what may. I have no idea if it'll be a LAB maj or NOM, but Labour will get most seats and Ed Miliband will be PM.
If this is wrong please feel free to quote it back at me post GE.
IIRC, several pollsters have said it takes about 2 weeks for issues to generally feed through - heard it on the telly, saw it in the paper, heard it from friends and family etc/discussed it at work....
If that is holding true - then is this trend linked to More EdM in the media/news stories negative to Labour, more DKs or better for someone else. If there is a 2 week lag, will it decline further after all the union stories or has that already soaked in?
Kippers seem to also have lost ground recently. Has anyone looked at the various trend lines to see if anyone in particular is gaining share?
(And, btw, unilateral changes in borders do have precedent - think about the 6 county solution in Ulster)
Lab 41 SNP 24 Con 21 LD 7 UKIP 4 Others 3
Looks like someone in the MOD got ahead of themselves...
Lots of examples that aren't tattoo removal being cited. A contributor who tried to play the political card got bashed by callers who simply aren't interested.
Quite a big shift in attitudes from the last few times they've covered this. Most notable one was 'its not free - it costs a fortune'.
The old joke about how many MPs it takes to change a lightbulb (Answer: “Change?!?”) comes to mind on hearing the news that John Bercow wants to alter the layout of the Commons cloakroom.
At present MPs each have a peg and a red tag (on which to hang their swords, naturally) allotted alphabetically by name. Now, like a bored student reordering his music collection, the Speaker has decided to arrange them by constituency.
“Dreadful idea,” harrumphs one Labour backbencher. “Some of the older Members have little idea of the names of their constituencies since they keep changing. Why must Bercow dehumanise us?”
"The study, by John Ainslie of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, concludes that there are no viable alternatives. Possible sites including Devonport, Barrow (where the submarines are built), Portland, Falmouth and Milford Haven were all discounted in a secret study by the Ministry of Defence in 1963 when the government was searching for sites to base its Polaris nuclear fleet, Trident's predecessor, the study shows. They are even less viable now for environmental, cost and other pragmatic reasons, Ainslie says."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jan/29/trident-nuclear-deterrent-scotland-independence
I'll have you know Fitalass rates him very highly. Future greatness is all but assured. ;^ )
But if you want to feel grumpy and self-righteous about this then go ahead. It'll save us figuring out something else you can be grumpy and self-righteous about.
"Mr Littlewood is not surprised that his friend has turned out to be, as Chief Secretary, a deputy capable of working in harmony with the Chancellor: “Danny Alexander is the best number two human being the human race has ever created. He was a brilliant number two when he worked for the European Movement, he was a brilliant number two to Nick Clegg and now he is a brilliant number two to George Osborne.”
I don't really see him as a number 1. He seems to lack the charisma and arrogance required for that. Still, if I was to pick out the LD stars of this government I would pick him and Steven Webb.
"he is a convinced pro-European and Liberal Democrat. But these are intellectual rather than moral defects."
Brilliant!
With the exception of being referred to as a Number Two - I think Danny Alexander has been a star. He's rarely put a foot wrong, doesn't play silly buggers and knows how to play the team game whilst still sticking to his principles.
If ever there was an MP that's really stepped up to the role - its him.
MG The figures I quoted were published and discussed many times on here, even the SNP admitted to 6000 in its denial of the published figure of 14000.
Have you been down to Helensburgh yet to see how excited the locals are about being fired. Nah I didn't think so.
This seems to me a public sector 10,000 quid for a hammer kind of cost estimate.
Yes I got a good laugh at that line too.
@Plato. Not sure. The skill set is different and there is little evidence he has those additional skills. Having said that the job of the Lib Dem leader is to appear as the reasonable everyman somewhere between the extremes of the major parties expressing a "common sense" point of view. I suppose he could do that.
Not quite sure that he has the proper level of obsession with pointless constitutional changes though. That is an essential element with the base.
I very much hope that he holds his seat. I think it will be close. His best bet will be if Labour and SNP split fairly evenly which is possible.
The MOD have, however, added to the gaiety of the nation by letting Sturgeon claim Scotland was being bullied and the Nats on here being outflanked by the Unionists in describing the idea as silly - to their evident frustration.....
Ofcourse, come independence, the relative costs should fall. At present monies spent in Scotland accrue to HMRC; come independence that money will be sunk [sic] funding....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#2013
Admittedly, it was a proposed English devolution, but the point stands.
Speaking of a referendum, anyone know how the Catalonian one is going (or not)?
We have too many people wanting to be the Chief nowadays - and the media mooting stories of anyone making a difference as being a next leader - but a shortage of good-quality, hard-working people behind the scenes who will do the leg-work.
We could do with a few more good number 2's, 3's and 4's ... politics in this country would then be a lot better off for it.
In the Private Sector nobody would ever mock a number 2 as not being successful. Any good person will be better with good support.
"Ipsa has today managed to achieve something remarkable: all the public scorn that comes with a £6,500 pay rise for politicians, without the extra pay – at least not until after 2015.
So how should MPs respond?
Ipsa has, unwittingly, given us a clear choice; take the pay rise after 2015 and accept the Ipsa system. Or veto the Ipsa pay hike, and in so doing make it clear we have no confidence in doing things this way.
Faced with a choice between taking a pay hike, or taking the axe to Ipsa, I would vote to scrap Ipsa every time.
IPSA has, as Labour's Tom Harris has rather brilliantly described http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10152505/Ipsa-was-a-colossal-mistake-MPs-should-take-back-control-of-our-pay.html , created a monstrously complex system of compliance. For an organisation that oversees the arrangements of mere 650 people, it is inordinately expensive.
So let's say no to Ipsa's pay hike in return for scrapping Ipsa.
The alternative? First, link any future MPs rise to that of the civil service. Second, give MPs a straightforward, taxable per diem payment to meet the cost of being away from home, and reimburse legitimate travel costs. Let's just do it.
http://tinyurl.com/nqjt2nm
Edit: Fcknhll, great technology, barely decipherable sound and no vision. Says it all.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/snp-in-threat-to-block-foreign-fishing-boats-from-north-sea.21443529
I don't think the proposed naval vessels really require nuclear bunkers: http://www.canalscape.net/Dont Call it a Barge/Cruiser Diversity/LR Pedello.jpg
A vote for an independent Scotland is a vote to come out of the defence game for all practical purposes. Our military manouvres would be restricted to the Tattoo. A case can be made that this is a sensible way to live in a quiet part of north west Europe in the 22nd century but claiming that there are not major employment implications for those currently involved in those games is, well not entirely truthful.
somewhat depressing view of the state of UK households and the debt burden still holding back the UK economy.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/borrowing/10172791/A-modest-rise-in-interest-rates-could-cause-a-million-households-to-collapse.html
Secondly, much of this debt is already non-recoverable. We have introduced a series of measures which allow people to write off and compromise debt with minimal pain. Whatever the morality of this, this is the way we have chosen to live with all of us paying the costs of higher lending charges as a result.
Thirdly, the vast bulk of our private debt is connected to house purchase. If house prices start to recover the 25% reduction in real terms they have suffered since 2007 (again completely unprecedented) then their asset/debt ratios will improve making refinancing etc feasible.
It is not a good situation but I think we are probably at or even past the worst point in private debt.
This recession or downturn is not like others as the low interest rates have saved hundreds of pounds per month / year for many households, allowing them to cope with the squeeze on incomes and living standards. When normal services resumes there will be a big problem, unless incomes rise at a speed that compensates for the interest rate rises, which will push interest rates up higher... and so we go on.
Why? Seriously; why...?
From Wiki: Src.: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faslane
So why maintain a submarine base when the SDF will be outwith submarines? As mentioned by others an East-coast [Rosyth?] location would be more suitable. I can see no strategic reason for an independent Scots Defence Force using such an expensive facility for such a small navy. *
* Lossiemouth or Leuchars would be much better locations for an SDF HQ....
Malcolm McHaffie, Deputy Head of the CPS Special Crime Division, today announced that proceedings have been instituted against Denis MacShane, former Member of Parliament for Rotherham, and he is required to appear at Westminster Magistrates' Court on 30 July 2013 to face a single charge in relation to claims he made for parliamentary expenses.
Mr McHaffie said:
“Having thoroughly reviewed the evidence gathered by the police, I have decided there is sufficient evidence and it is in the public interest to bring a criminal charge against Denis MacShane. This charge relates to fraudulent claims with a total value of £12,900.
“The charge is of false accounting, contrary to the Theft Act 1968. It is alleged that Denis Macshane claimed expenses for research and translation services carried out by a company that did not carry out that work."
Mr McHaffie added:
“Denis MacShane now stands charged with a criminal offence and has the right to a fair trial. It is extremely important that nothing should be reported which could prejudice his trial.”
now MG, go and sell that down Helensburgh way, oh and you may have to supply some details..Tough one.
I said it was 100% clear, in particular the circumstances in which it triggers are laid out in Schedule 1 of the European Union Act 2011:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/12/contents
I'm not a lawyer, but if there are any provisions you don't understand, I'll do my best to help.
Ah yes, the Iain Gray strategy. So that's why he was brought back.
But we started from where we were in May 2010. It's hardly the coalition's fault that that was such a bad position. Blame Brown and Blair.
It's been obvious to me that swingback has been occurring since around February/March. The UKIP surge masked it quite a bit, but now thats leveled off it's becoming increasingly apparant what's happening and I would say it's mainly down to the economy recovering and also partly the cycle of politics.
What I find really odd though (and this has been the case throughout the past three years really) is why there isn't far more media and political pressure on Ed Miliband?
Even when Labour had it's biggest leads last year we were barely talking low teens - Historically extremely medicore to say the least - Now we find swingback already taking place with just under two years left... The Ed's are in serious trouble.
Charles Walker, Tory MP: "People want honest politicians. I'm going to take the [massive pay rise] and spend it on my children"
Edited-to-add: Stop digging: Drum-beat, accrued taxes, sovereignty (see-above). You no doubt expect your home-and-contents insurance to be funded by your preferred insurance company.
:troll-alert:
Further-point: All subs tend to replicate other subs functions. Why do nations bother building them, not least Nippon; hey Gaijin...?
Averages 17 :OOO here.
"A Minister of the Crown may not give a notification under Article 4 of Protocol (No. 21) on the position of the United Kingdom and Ireland in respect of the area of freedom, security and justice annexed to TEU and TFEU which relates to participation by the United Kingdom in a European Public Prosecutor's Office or an extension of the powers of that Office unless—.
(a)the notification has been approved by Act of Parliament, and.
(b)the referendum condition is met.."
If we had been able to stay in these provisions nothing would have happened but if the view is taken (as I understand it) that we need to opt out of all of the provisions and then opt back in to those that we like then that opting in will in my view trigger these provisions and require a referendum. I am not really seeing how they get around this unless they don't actually withdraw from the provisions in the first place.
Dominic Grieve, Attorney General, decides to refer the sentence of Stuart Hall to the Court of Appeal for review.
If you are right, or even if there is just the possibility that you might be right, then I'd have thought someone is bound to launch a judicial review. Could get interesting...