A few months after he became Prime Minister, Gordon Brown pondered an early general election. This was briefed about by members of his inner political circle who were keen on the idea, and wanted to create a sense of momentum by getting the idea reported. Their efforts were a triumph in one sense at least. Brown’s musings became public. They weren’t denied, and thus gathered pace. That sense of momentum grew. It began to look unstoppable. And by the time it was stopped, the damage had been done. The man who had been marketed in his first months in office as “not flash, just Gordon” looked more like what his dithering had shown him up as: what Alex Salmond called “the big fearty from Fife”.
This tale from the past takes us to the present – and to Salmond’s successor, Nicola Sturgeon. This is because, in feeding speculation about a second referendum on Scottish independence, she is behaving eerily like Brown himself. The polls are not as benign for her now than they were for the former Prime Minister in the summer of 2007. They show no shift towards support for independence. Perhaps Sturgeon sniffs a change in the wind that others are missing. Maybe she is bowing to internal party pressure. But it looks more as though she cannot help but pursue the cause that has let her prosper – regardless of where public opinion in Scotland may be.
Humble pie, please waiter. A large portion. No, just one spoon — the lady will be dining alone. Under pressure on her dismal schools record, the First Minister went full Salmond, sneering, guffawing, gesticulating. Now, Ruth Davidson and Kezia Dugdale did cite facts about educational attainment under the SNP, which is just plain unsportsmanlike.
Miss Sturgeon became infuriated, snapping at Miss Davidson to ‘get behind this government’s reforms instead of continuing to come to this chamber and simply moan’. She really struggles with this concept of opposition. Heading up a party that welcomes dissent in the same way the mafia welcomes unpaid debts, Miss Sturgeon is unfamiliar with other points of view.
I got that Paddy Power totally missed the DUP problems. Wish I could have sold the 1/100 on people like Morrow. I think Richie transfers pull Lynch and Barton above him. Which will be a headline grabber. Morrow is DUP President.
A few months after he became Prime Minister, Gordon Brown pondered an early general election. This was briefed about by members of his inner political circle who were keen on the idea, and wanted to create a sense of momentum by getting the idea reported. Their efforts were a triumph in one sense at least. Brown’s musings became public. They weren’t denied, and thus gathered pace. That sense of momentum grew. It began to look unstoppable. And by the time it was stopped, the damage had been done. The man who had been marketed in his first months in office as “not flash, just Gordon” looked more like what his dithering had shown him up as: what Alex Salmond called “the big fearty from Fife”.
This tale from the past takes us to the present – and to Salmond’s successor, Nicola Sturgeon. This is because, in feeding speculation about a second referendum on Scottish independence, she is behaving eerily like Brown himself. The polls are not as benign for her now than they were for the former Prime Minister in the summer of 2007. They show no shift towards support for independence. Perhaps Sturgeon sniffs a change in the wind that others are missing. Maybe she is bowing to internal party pressure. But it looks more as though she cannot help but pursue the cause that has let her prosper – regardless of where public opinion in Scotland may be.
Humble pie, please waiter. A large portion. No, just one spoon — the lady will be dining alone. Under pressure on her dismal schools record, the First Minister went full Salmond, sneering, guffawing, gesticulating. Now, Ruth Davidson and Kezia Dugdale did cite facts about educational attainment under the SNP, which is just plain unsportsmanlike.
Miss Sturgeon became infuriated, snapping at Miss Davidson to ‘get behind this government’s reforms instead of continuing to come to this chamber and simply moan’. She really struggles with this concept of opposition. Heading up a party that welcomes dissent in the same way the mafia welcomes unpaid debts, Miss Sturgeon is unfamiliar with other points of view.
Ha Ha Ha , Daisley , says it all he is a turnip. You looked at the English rags lately , having to pay as you learn in England, education crap , NHS crap..................LOL , next you will be telling me dugdale and Davidson came up with an idea
A few months after he became Prime Minister, Gordon Brown pondered an early general election. This was briefed about by members of his inner political circle who were keen on the idea, and wanted to create a sense of momentum by getting the idea reported. Their efforts were a triumph in one sense at least. Brown’s musings became public. They weren’t denied, and thus gathered pace. That sense of momentum grew. It began to look unstoppable. And by the time it was stopped, the damage had been done. The man who had been marketed in his first months in office as “not flash, just Gordon” looked more like what his dithering had shown him up as: what Alex Salmond called “the big fearty from Fife”.
This tale from the past takes us to the present – and to Salmond’s successor, Nicola Sturgeon. This is because, in feeding speculation about a second referendum on Scottish independence, she is behaving eerily like Brown himself. The polls are not as benign for her now than they were for the former Prime Minister in the summer of 2007. They show no shift towards support for independence. Perhaps Sturgeon sniffs a change in the wind that others are missing. Maybe she is bowing to internal party pressure. But it looks more as though she cannot help but pursue the cause that has let her prosper – regardless of where public opinion in Scotland may be.
Humble pie, please waiter. A large portion. No, just one spoon — the lady will be dining alone. Under pressure on her dismal schools record, the First Minister went full Salmond, sneering, guffawing, gesticulating. Now, Ruth Davidson and Kezia Dugdale did cite facts about educational attainment under the SNP, which is just plain unsportsmanlike.
Miss Sturgeon became infuriated, snapping at Miss Davidson to ‘get behind this government’s reforms instead of continuing to come to this chamber and simply moan’. She really struggles with this concept of opposition. Heading up a party that welcomes dissent in the same way the mafia welcomes unpaid debts, Miss Sturgeon is unfamiliar with other points of view.
Mr. Glenn, surely Sarkozy isn't in the running? Or is Fillon just calling for advice?
It seems Baroin is Sarkozy's man now.
I don't know the details of the French system, but it seems that Juppe should be a little presumptuous in claiming he had the right as next in line. It may be that the party's rules state that he is.
Heaven forbid they should try to get right some of the decisions that are currently got wrong.
Oh, don't get me wrong, I moan about refs as much as the next fan (though I'd like to think I call it as I see it). The problem is, how do you stop and restart the game? If the linesman keeps his flag down and an offside goal is scored, then that can be corrected. But if the linesman calls offside incorrectly, what do you do?
Mmm perhaps, but there was an article in the FT this week which said that 3rd and 4th quarter trade and investment figs for the UK were distorted by Gold sales to China via Switzerland (not in EU).
Basically, we exported a lot of gold in 4th quarter to Non-EU which boosted "exports", but knocked down Fixed investments (as we had less assets).
In 3rd quarter the reverse was true.
So might be premature to hang out the Union Jack bunting.
"In the final three months of 2016, UK goods exports to Switzerland increased by 282 per cent to their highest level ever.
During the previous quarter these movements happened in the exact opposite direction as the UK became a net importer of gold."
Mrs M doesn't seem to understand the first objective of a nationalist party.
Not for the first time I am trying to work out Mrs May's strategy. More precisely who she is pitching her remarks at?' The Scottish Conservatives in the conference hall (know your enemy)? The people of the UK (no more nonsense will be tolerated) ? The people of Scotland( don't choose independence) ?
The first makes some sense. Maybe half of Scotland can't STAND the SNP. That even includes some that vote for them and only tolerate them because they share the goal of independence for Scotland. If it's the last however I fear.her intervention will be counterproductive.
Heaven forbid they should try to get right some of the decisions that are currently got wrong.
Oh, don't get me wrong, I moan about refs as much as the next fan (though I'd like to think I call it as I see it). The problem is, how do you stop and restart the game? If the linesman keeps his flag down and an offside goal is scored, then that can be corrected. But if the linesman calls offside incorrectly, what do you do?
I think the rule will be to continue playing until it can be reviewed.
The union looks pretty safe on that basis. I don't think a campaign would change many minds and it would be very ugly.
Nearly 30% of SNP voters do not support Scottish independence.
Nationalist parties often morph into pressure groups. See UKIP.
It's normally 10-15% of SNP who don't support independence (and contrariwise 85% of independence supporters intend to vote SNP). It's important to compare CURRENT voting intentions as support fot the SNP and independence fluctuates in lockstep.
Just looked at pictures of the resurgent Tory party conference in Scotland. Oh dear what idiot booked the SEC, they must have been listening to the Klaxon. Empty does not begin to describe the hall, unbelievably embarrassing.
The ticket booking website crashed due to demand.
Everyone was eager to hear May make the case against a smaller country detaching itself from a larger entity.
Mrs M doesn't seem to understand the first objective of a nationalist party.
Not for the first time I am trying to work out Mrs May's strategy. More precisely who she is pitching her remarks at?' The Scottish Conservatives in the conference hall (know your enemy)? The people of the UK (no more nonsense will be tolerated) ? The people of Scotland( don't choose independence) ?
The first makes some sense. Maybe half of Scotland can't STAND the SNP. That even includes some that vote for them and only tolerate them because they share the goal of independence for Scotland. If it's the last however I fear.her intervention will be counterproductive.
An attempt to coalesce the unionist vote around one party?
It seems easy to forget that the unionists won the referendum; it's their standard electoral divide that has handed the SNP a clear run ever since.
The only way the unionists will put a stop to the neverendum agenda is to unify around one party.
Bloody hell I'm back home and watching channel 4 news, they've been banging on about this banksy stuff for bloody ages. Do they not realise no one really gives a fuck?
On this 'but the Scots didn't know we might leave the EU' - their own government's White Paper told them it was a possibility - three times
In that White Paper, the Scottish Government referred to the referendum as a ‘once in a generation opportunity’ (pages i and 556). Crucially, it also explicitly raised the prospect of a referendum on the UK’s membership of the EU resulting in a vote to leave despite a majority of voters in Scotland voting to remain (pages 60, 217 and 460). In other words, although it explicitly highlighted the possibility of a majority of people in the UK as a whole voting to leave the EU while a majority of people in Scotland voted to remain, it still referred to the referendum as a ‘once in a generation’ opportunity, without any caveat or conditions with regard to future events.
The 15% of No voters who said EU membership was the most important reason for voting the way they did are extremely unlikely to have been influenced (or indeed even have read) that publication. The No campaign's central message in the mass media was that only a no vote ensured continued EU membership.
Sinn Fein have a chance of being largest party I think.
The DUP are already largest party on first preference votes, albeit narrowly
The largest party doesn't necessarily win, because they are using a proportional system.
Hang on a minute.....?!?!?!?!?
STV can produce a non-proportional result if a party is particularly unpopular outside its own support base.
Fianna Fail got hammered on exactly this basis in 2011 in the Republic of Ireland.
Why should proportionality to first choices be the only thing that matters?
In real life, situations where you can't do or have what you want, but get to express a preference between the remaining options that others want happen all the time.
Why should politics be any different?
If a party is unusually unpopular beyond its dedicated supporters, all the more reason why its (and their) influence should be contained IMHO.
On this 'but the Scots didn't know we might leave the EU' - their own government's White Paper told them it was a possibility - three times
In that White Paper, the Scottish Government referred to the referendum as a ‘once in a generation opportunity’ (pages i and 556). Crucially, it also explicitly raised the prospect of a referendum on the UK’s membership of the EU resulting in a vote to leave despite a majority of voters in Scotland voting to remain (pages 60, 217 and 460). In other words, although it explicitly highlighted the possibility of a majority of people in the UK as a whole voting to leave the EU while a majority of people in Scotland voted to remain, it still referred to the referendum as a ‘once in a generation’ opportunity, without any caveat or conditions with regard to future events.
The 15% of No voters who said EU membership was the most important reason for voting the way they did are extremely unlikely to have been influenced (or indeed even have read) that publication. The No campaign's central message in the mass media was that only a no vote ensured continued EU membership.
Yes, given just how much 'Better Together' made of the uncertainty about an independent Scotland being able to stay in the EU it's highly disingenuous to suggest that a No vote was in anyway anti-EU.
Heaven forbid they should try to get right some of the decisions that are currently got wrong.
Oh, don't get me wrong, I moan about refs as much as the next fan (though I'd like to think I call it as I see it). The problem is, how do you stop and restart the game? If the linesman keeps his flag down and an offside goal is scored, then that can be corrected. But if the linesman calls offside incorrectly, what do you do?
I think the rule will be to continue playing until it can be reviewed.
So we might as well do away with assistant refs. And does the clock rewind to when play should have stopped?
Mrs M doesn't seem to understand the first objective of a nationalist party.
Not for the first time I am trying to work out Mrs May's strategy. More precisely who she is pitching her remarks at?' The Scottish Conservatives in the conference hall (know your enemy)? The people of the UK (no more nonsense will be tolerated) ? The people of Scotland( don't choose independence) ?
The first makes some sense. Maybe half of Scotland can't STAND the SNP. That even includes some that vote for them and only tolerate them because they share the goal of independence for Scotland. If it's the last however I fear.her intervention will be counterproductive.
An attempt to coalesce the unionist vote around one party?
It seems easy to forget that the unionists won the referendum; it's their standard electoral divide that has handed the SNP a clear run ever since.
The only way the unionists will put a stop to the neverendum agenda is to unify around one party.
To a certain extent that's happened. The Conservatives are the party of the Union in Scotland just as they are the party of Brexit in the UK. The problem is that Unionists are by definition more interested in UK politics than nationalists. As many of them voted Remain, they have a problem with the "Party of Brexit". Nationalists don't care about a UK Brexit. They just want independence.
Heaven forbid they should try to get right some of the decisions that are currently got wrong.
Oh, don't get me wrong, I moan about refs as much as the next fan (though I'd like to think I call it as I see it). The problem is, how do you stop and restart the game? If the linesman keeps his flag down and an offside goal is scored, then that can be corrected. But if the linesman calls offside incorrectly, what do you do?
I think the rule will be to continue playing until it can be reviewed.
So we might as well do away with assistant refs. And does the clock rewind to when play should have stopped?
That's rather simple surely it gets added on to stoppage time?
Mrs M doesn't seem to understand the first objective of a nationalist party.
Not for the first time I am trying to work out Mrs May's strategy. More precisely who she is pitching her remarks at?' The Scottish Conservatives in the conference hall (know your enemy)? The people of the UK (no more nonsense will be tolerated) ? The people of Scotland( don't choose independence) ?
The first makes some sense. Maybe half of Scotland can't STAND the SNP. That even includes some that vote for them and only tolerate them because they share the goal of independence for Scotland. If it's the last however I fear.her intervention will be counterproductive.
The point has to be made that Ruth Davidson is proving a more than able match against Sturgeon, the conservatives are regaining their lost popularity and they are the only party fully committed to the Union and prepared to say it.
Theresa May compliments Ruth Davidson and between the two of them the benefits of the Union will be well explained. Labour has managed to become as unpopular as the conservatives following the poll tax debacle and will take years, if ever, to become relevant in Scotland again
The elections this May are likely to see a rise in the conservative support, particularly in the North East and borders and elsewhere, as has been evidenced in local election results in Scotland.
Ironically just as the Lib Dems are the only pro EU party, the Scots Conservatives are already seen as the only true Unionist party in Scotland.
Let's see what happens but expect to see the smiles on Ruth and Theresa's faces post May election contrast to the despondent Sturgeon and scowling Labour party
Mmm perhaps, but there was an article in the FT this week which said that 3rd and 4th quarter trade and investment figs for the UK were distorted by Gold sales to China via Switzerland (not in EU).
Basically, we exported a lot of gold in 4th quarter to Non-EU which boosted "exports", but knocked down Fixed investments (as we had less assets).
In 3rd quarter the reverse was true.
So might be premature to hang out the Union Jack bunting.
"In the final three months of 2016, UK goods exports to Switzerland increased by 282 per cent to their highest level ever.
During the previous quarter these movements happened in the exact opposite direction as the UK became a net importer of gold."
However, all this illustrates is how EU Statistics over represent the UK's dependence on the EU. If the same transaction 'Gold to China' had been routed via Paris, Frankfurt or Schiphol, Eurostat would have called this a UK export to the EU. It's known to any competent economist as "the Rotterdam effect" (and the ONS wrote an article on the effect on UK export statistics: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160105160709/http:/www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/uktrade/uk-trade/december-2014/sty-trade-rotterdam-effect-.html). Taking the Rotterdam effect, and adding the smaller (but material) effects of Antwerp, Hamburg and other transshipment ports, the UK's exports to the EU are overstated by about 7% (and exports outside the EU are understated by 7%).
Unfortunately, this is too abstract and academic for the most Europhiliacs to understand, and those who understand are happy with the overstating of our trade with the EU as it assists their lies.
Mrs M doesn't seem to understand the first objective of a nationalist party.
Not for the first time I am trying to work out Mrs May's strategy. More precisely who she is pitching her remarks at?' The Scottish Conservatives in the conference hall (know your enemy)? The people of the UK (no more nonsense will be tolerated) ? The people of Scotland( don't choose independence) ?
The first makes some sense. Maybe half of Scotland can't STAND the SNP. That even includes some that vote for them and only tolerate them because they share the goal of independence for Scotland. If it's the last however I fear.her intervention will be counterproductive.
An attempt to coalesce the unionist vote around one party?
It seems easy to forget that the unionists won the referendum; it's their standard electoral divide that has handed the SNP a clear run ever since.
The only way the unionists will put a stop to the neverendum agenda is to unify around one party.
To a certain extent that's happened. The Conservatives are the party of the Union in Scotland just as they are the party of Brexit in the UK. The problem is that Unionists are by definition more interested in UK politics than nationalists. As many of them voted Remain, they have a problem with the "Party of Brexit". Nationalists don't care about a UK Brexit. They just want independence.
Except that by the next major elections Brexit will have already happened and independence won't have. So the live issue will be unionism not remainism.
Ironically just as the Lib Dems are the only pro EU party, the Scots Conservatives are already seen as the only true Unionist party in Scotland.
Which, given that the Conservatives are the party of power in Westminster, means that one slip up in their governance of the UK, or management of Brexit, and Unionism won't have any friends north of the border.
Mrs M doesn't seem to understand the first objective of a nationalist party.
Not for the first time I am trying to work out Mrs May's strategy. More precisely who she is pitching her remarks at?' The Scottish Conservatives in the conference hall (know your enemy)? The people of the UK (no more nonsense will be tolerated) ? The people of Scotland( don't choose independence) ?
The first makes some sense. Maybe half of Scotland can't STAND the SNP. That even includes some that vote for them and only tolerate them because they share the goal of independence for Scotland. If it's the last however I fear.her intervention will be counterproductive.
An attempt to coalesce the unionist vote around one party?
It seems easy to forget that the unionists won the referendum; it's their standard electoral divide that has handed the SNP a clear run ever since.
The only way the unionists will put a stop to the neverendum agenda is to unify around one party.
To a certain extent that's happened. The Conservatives are the party of the Union in Scotland just as they are the party of Brexit in the UK. The problem is that Unionists are by definition more interested in UK politics than nationalists. As many of them voted Remain, they have a problem with the "Party of Brexit". Nationalists don't care about a UK Brexit. They just want independence.
Except that by the next major elections Brexit will have already happened and independence won't have. So the live issue will be unionism not remainism.
The only way Brexit could 'already happen' by the time of the next election is to go over a cliff edge, which the government has ruled out. If we have a staged withdrawal it will still be as much of an issue as it is now.
Mmm perhaps, but there was an article in the FT this week which said that 3rd and 4th quarter trade and investment figs for the UK were distorted by Gold sales to China via Switzerland (not in EU).
Basically, we exported a lot of gold in 4th quarter to Non-EU which boosted "exports", but knocked down Fixed investments (as we had less assets).
In 3rd quarter the reverse was true.
So might be premature to hang out the Union Jack bunting.
"In the final three months of 2016, UK goods exports to Switzerland increased by 282 per cent to their highest level ever.
During the previous quarter these movements happened in the exact opposite direction as the UK became a net importer of gold."
However, all this illustrates is how EU Statistics over represent the UK's dependence on the EU. If the same transaction 'Gold to China' had been routed via Paris, Frankfurt or Schiphol, Eurostat would have called this a UK export to the EU. It's known to any competent economist as "the Rotterdam effect" (and the ONS wrote an article on the effect on UK export statistics: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160105160709/http:/www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/uktrade/uk-trade/december-2014/sty-trade-rotterdam-effect-.html). Taking the Rotterdam effect, and adding the smaller (but material) effects of Antwerp, Hamburg and other transshipment ports, the UK's exports to the EU are overstated by about 7% (and exports outside the EU are understated by 7%).
Unfortunately, this is too abstract and academic for the most Europhiliacs to understand, and those who understand are happy with the overstating of our trade with the EU as it assists their lies.
To a certain extent that's happened. The Conservatives are the party of the Union in Scotland just as they are the party of Brexit in the UK. The problem is that Unionists are by definition more interested in UK politics than nationalists. As many of them voted Remain, they have a problem with the "Party of Brexit". Nationalists don't care about a UK Brexit. They just want independence.
From the Panelbase Poll:
Euro Sindy : 31% Hard Sindy : 10% Euro Brits : 26% Indy Brits : 27%
Ideal scenario - 53 in the UK, 41 out
Leaving the UK to be under the Euroboot is a 31% strategy.
If I were a Scot wanting Sindy, I'd push for Brexit, then an anglosphere trade arrangement and then go for it.
Mrs M doesn't seem to understand the first objective of a nationalist party.
Not for the first time I am trying to work out Mrs May's strategy. More precisely who she is pitching her remarks at?' The Scottish Conservatives in the conference hall (know your enemy)? The people of the UK (no more nonsense will be tolerated) ? The people of Scotland( don't choose independence) ?
The first makes some sense. Maybe half of Scotland can't STAND the SNP. That even includes some that vote for them and only tolerate them because they share the goal of independence for Scotland. If it's the last however I fear.her intervention will be counterproductive.
An attempt to coalesce the unionist vote around one party?
It seems easy to forget that the unionists won the referendum; it's their standard electoral divide that has handed the SNP a clear run ever since.
The only way the unionists will put a stop to the neverendum agenda is to unify around one party.
To a certain extent that's happened. The Conservatives are the party of the Union in Scotland just as they are the party of Brexit in the UK. The problem is that Unionists are by definition more interested in UK politics than nationalists. As many of them voted Remain, they have a problem with the "Party of Brexit". Nationalists don't care about a UK Brexit. They just want independence.
Except that by the next major elections Brexit will have already happened and independence won't have. So the live issue will be unionism not remainism.
Which elections? There's the not so small matter of the independence referendum that Mrs May seems to be taunting Ms Sturgeon to hold or not hold. It will probably take place just as the assumptions behind a Brexit that Scotland didn't vote for are unravelling. That doesn't seem like a good backdrop for a reassertion of unionism.
The union looks pretty safe on that basis. I don't think a campaign would change many minds and it would be very ugly.
Nearly 30% of SNP voters do not support Scottish independence.
Nationalist parties often morph into pressure groups. See UKIP.
It's normally 10-15% of SNP who don't support independence (and contrariwise 85% of independence supporters intend to vote SNP). It's important to compare CURRENT voting intentions as support fot the SNP and independence fluctuates in lockstep.
Just looked at pictures of the resurgent Tory party conference in Scotland. Oh dear what idiot booked the SEC, they must have been listening to the Klaxon. Empty does not begin to describe the hall, unbelievably embarrassing.
The ticket booking website crashed due to demand.
Everyone was eager to hear May make the case against a smaller country detaching itself from a larger entity.
Ironically just as the Lib Dems are the only pro EU party, the Scots Conservatives are already seen as the only true Unionist party in Scotland.
Which, given that the Conservatives are the party of power in Westminster, means that one slip up in their governance of the UK, or management of Brexit, and Unionism won't have any friends north of the border.
And what if Theresa May makes a success of Brexit despite the longing by so many who voted remain for it to fail. The point is that following the A50 notice the management or otherwise of Brexit will depend on the EU being sensible, as any impression they are the cause of problems, will just strengthen the will to leave.
As someone who is married to a Scot, has lived in Edinburgh, and has a large Scottish family the devolved Government needs to contribute postively to the negotiations and help to make the deal a great one for all of us. Now is not the time to threaten another referendum and indeed constantly talking of it is a turn off for many
The union looks pretty safe on that basis. I don't think a campaign would change many minds and it would be very ugly.
Nearly 30% of SNP voters do not support Scottish independence.
Nationalist parties often morph into pressure groups. See UKIP.
It's normally 10-15% of SNP who don't support independence (and contrariwise 85% of independence supporters intend to vote SNP). It's important to compare CURRENT voting intentions as support fot the SNP and independence fluctuates in lockstep.
Just looked at pictures of the resurgent Tory party conference in Scotland. Oh dear what idiot booked the SEC, they must have been listening to the Klaxon. Empty does not begin to describe the hall, unbelievably embarrassing.
The ticket booking website crashed due to demand.
Everyone was eager to hear May make the case against a smaller country detaching itself from a larger entity.
Now is not the time to threaten another referendum and indeed constantly talking of it is a turn off for many
Constant talk of an EU referendum was a turn off for millions of people in the UK, but it was held and the separatists won. I wouldn't read too much into the feelings of those who are simply fatigued by the whole business.
On this 'but the Scots didn't know we might leave the EU' - their own government's White Paper told them it was a possibility - three times
In that White Paper, the Scottish Government referred to the referendum as a ‘once in a generation opportunity’ (pages i and 556). Crucially, it also explicitly raised the prospect of a referendum on the UK’s membership of the EU resulting in a vote to leave despite a majority of voters in Scotland voting to remain (pages 60, 217 and 460). In other words, although it explicitly highlighted the possibility of a majority of people in the UK as a whole voting to leave the EU while a majority of people in Scotland voted to remain, it still referred to the referendum as a ‘once in a generation’ opportunity, without any caveat or conditions with regard to future events.
Sinn Fein have a chance of being largest party I think.
The DUP are already largest party on first preference votes, albeit narrowly
The largest party doesn't necessarily win, because they are using a proportional system.
Hang on a minute.....?!?!?!?!?
STV can produce a non-proportional result if a party is particularly unpopular outside its own support base.
Fianna Fail got hammered on exactly this basis in 2011 in the Republic of Ireland.
Why should proportionality to first choices be the only thing that matters?
In real life, situations where you can't do or have what you want, but get to express a preference between the remaining options that others want happen all the time.
Why should politics be any different?
If a party is unusually unpopular beyond its dedicated supporters, all the more reason why its (and their) influence should be contained IMHO.
If you're around I'm curious what your attitude is now towards independence. You voted Brexit but Nicola's whole strategy is based around rejoining Europe possibly going as far as using the Euro.
The union looks pretty safe on that basis. I don't think a campaign would change many minds and it would be very ugly.
Nearly 30% of SNP voters do not support Scottish independence.
Nationalist parties often morph into pressure groups. See UKIP.
It's normally 10-15% of SNP who don't support independence (and contrariwise 85% of independence supporters intend to vote SNP). It's important to compare CURRENT voting intentions as support fot the SNP and independence fluctuates in lockstep.
Just looked at pictures of the resurgent Tory party conference in Scotland. Oh dear what idiot booked the SEC, they must have been listening to the Klaxon. Empty does not begin to describe the hall, unbelievably embarrassing.
The ticket booking website crashed due to demand.
Everyone was eager to hear May make the case against a smaller country detaching itself from a larger entity.
Mmm perhaps, but there was an article in the FT this week which said that 3rd and 4th quarter trade and investment figs for the UK were distorted by Gold sales to China via Switzerland (not in EU).
Basically, we exported a lot of gold in 4th quarter to Non-EU which boosted "exports", but knocked down Fixed investments (as we had less assets).
In 3rd quarter the reverse was true.
So might be premature to hang out the Union Jack bunting.
"In the final three months of 2016, UK goods exports to Switzerland increased by 282 per cent to their highest level ever.
During the previous quarter these movements happened in the exact opposite direction as the UK became a net importer of gold."
However, all this illustrates is how EU Statistics over represent the UK's dependence on the EU. If the same transaction 'Gold to China' had been routed via Paris, Frankfurt or Schiphol, Eurostat would have called this a UK export to the EU. It's known to any competent economist as "the Rotterdam effect" (and the ONS wrote an article on the effect on UK export statistics: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160105160709/http:/www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/uktrade/uk-trade/december-2014/sty-trade-rotterdam-effect-.html). Taking the Rotterdam effect, and adding the smaller (but material) effects of Antwerp, Hamburg and other transshipment ports, the UK's exports to the EU are overstated by about 7% (and exports outside the EU are understated by 7%).
Unfortunately, this is too abstract and academic for the most Europhiliacs to understand, and those who understand are happy with the overstating of our trade with the EU as it assists their lies.
yep, fair enough, the devil is in the detail as always... as I'm sure those Brexiteers in charge of our negotiations with the EU will find out soon enough too....
Comments
Humble pie, please waiter. A large portion. No, just one spoon — the lady will be dining alone.
Under pressure on her dismal schools record, the First Minister went full Salmond, sneering, guffawing, gesticulating. Now, Ruth Davidson and Kezia Dugdale did cite facts about educational attainment under the SNP, which is just plain unsportsmanlike.
Miss Sturgeon became infuriated, snapping at Miss Davidson to ‘get behind this government’s reforms instead of continuing to come to this chamber and simply moan’. She really struggles with this concept of opposition. Heading up a party that welcomes dissent in the same way the mafia welcomes unpaid debts, Miss Sturgeon is unfamiliar with other points of view.
https://stephendaisley.com/2017/03/03/sturgeon-sneered-and-guffawed-just-like-her-predecessor/
With all this nonsense Le Pen deserves to win.
Basically, we exported a lot of gold in 4th quarter to Non-EU which boosted "exports", but knocked down Fixed investments (as we had less assets).
In 3rd quarter the reverse was true.
So might be premature to hang out the Union Jack bunting.
"In the final three months of 2016, UK goods exports to Switzerland increased by 282 per cent to their highest level ever.
During the previous quarter these movements happened in the exact opposite direction as the UK became a net importer of gold."
I remember it well! I was at junior school I think, and the sexual metaphors passed me by until I was about 35!
The first makes some sense. Maybe half of Scotland can't STAND the SNP. That even includes some that vote for them and only tolerate them because they share the goal of independence for Scotland. If it's the last however I fear.her intervention will be counterproductive.
It seems easy to forget that the unionists won the referendum; it's their standard electoral divide that has handed the SNP a clear run ever since.
The only way the unionists will put a stop to the neverendum agenda is to unify around one party.
What's the story?
In real life, situations where you can't do or have what you want, but get to express a preference between the remaining options that others want happen all the time.
Why should politics be any different?
If a party is unusually unpopular beyond its dedicated supporters, all the more reason why its (and their) influence should be contained IMHO.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/03/banksy-opens-bethlehem-barrier-wall-hotel
Theresa May compliments Ruth Davidson and between the two of them the benefits of the Union will be well explained. Labour has managed to become as unpopular as the conservatives following the poll tax debacle and will take years, if ever, to become relevant in Scotland again
The elections this May are likely to see a rise in the conservative support, particularly in the North East and borders and elsewhere, as has been evidenced in local election results in Scotland.
Ironically just as the Lib Dems are the only pro EU party, the Scots Conservatives are already seen as the only true Unionist party in Scotland.
Let's see what happens but expect to see the smiles on Ruth and Theresa's faces post May election contrast to the despondent Sturgeon and scowling Labour party
Edit: Actually, they said they wouldn't go back into government with the DUP, so that might lead to direct rule from Westminster.
Unfortunately, this is too abstract and academic for the most Europhiliacs to understand, and those who understand are happy with the overstating of our trade with the EU as it assists their lies.
Euro Sindy : 31%
Hard Sindy : 10%
Euro Brits : 26%
Indy Brits : 27%
Ideal scenario - 53 in the UK, 41 out
Leaving the UK to be under the Euroboot is a 31% strategy.
If I were a Scot wanting Sindy, I'd push for Brexit, then an anglosphere trade arrangement and then go for it.
Productivity
1970-1980 22% increase
2005-2015 3% increase
https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/labourproductivity/timeseries/a4ym/prdy
Government Debt as a percentage of GDP
1975 56% (earliest year on the ONS)
1985 44%
2006 35%
2016 86%
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/timeseries/hf6x/pusf
Trade Balance cumulative
1971-1980 £2bn surplus
2007-2016 £369bn deficit
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/timeseries/ikbj/pn2
GDP per head increase
1970-1980 25%
2006-2016 4%
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/timeseries/n3y6/pn2
The 1970s were also an era of rising home ownership - the opposite of the last decade.
As someone who is married to a Scot, has lived in Edinburgh, and has a large Scottish family the devolved Government needs to contribute postively to the negotiations and help to make the deal a great one for all of us. Now is not the time to threaten another referendum and indeed constantly talking of it is a turn off for many
I feel a massive fall coming along at some point if she just continues to ignore perspectives that don't support her own.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7R__GiEc5wc
Does this mean that Salmond should employ a food taster? If Sturgeon poisoned him, she could claim the lifetime had ended!
If you're around I'm curious what your attitude is now towards independence. You voted Brexit but Nicola's whole strategy is based around rejoining Europe possibly going as far as using the Euro.
NEW THREAD