Stodge, I don't understand why you so easily revert to being snide when discussing the Conservatives, including an almost automatic reflexive partisan response to any poster who responds to your points?
We have established a friendly and cordial dialogue on virtually every other issue. So, why can't you take my comments at face value?
Of course there is a gap between the rhetoric and the reality. It is so for every mainstream political party. May would like to win votes everywhere but the Conservatives also have limited resources and clearly they are not going to fight like lions for Gorton, in the same way Labour would not for Surrey Heath.
I appreciate it's a bit different for the Lib Dems as they could (arguably) challenge in most places in England.
I get a little irritated when three or four people feel they have to jump to the defence of the Conservatives every time there is a hint of criticism. There simply aren't as many LDs and given the pro-Conservative majority on here, it can sound like an echo chamber.
You, like one or two Conservatives in the past, have been entirely reasonable and if I offended you for my earlier, apologies. As an LD LEAVE supporter, I know what it's like to be in a minority, believe me.
If we're talking reflexive response, the truth is every time there's a by-election, there's a disproportionate amount of discussion on the LD prospects and indeed a ramping of those prospects by almost everyone except the LDs. I thought we had very good candidates in both Copeland and Stoke Central and we made limited headway but in neither seat were we ever challengers despite the past record.
In Gorton, too, we run the risk of becoming a sideshow if Galloway stands and builds some momentum on the ground. The problem is the LDs cannot afford poor results in the way the Conservatives can - we need, as part of the rebuilding process, to fight every seat while the Conservatives can ignore the likes of Gorton, put in a candidate, finish fifth and no one will care.
There is expectation and expectation management. I've not been to Gorton - I doubt I will go. There are many other County Council seats where activists are working hard in advance of May 4th. I hope for some good results in those elections and, frankly, to take some seats off the Conservatives as well as Labour and UKIP. Whether that will happen remains to be seen - I do think the potential for discontent with the Conservatives being manifest more strongly in local Government than suggested by opinion polls is valid.
He [ Erdogan himself ] wants not to join the EU. In fact, current arrangements suit Turkey fine. Since many countries do not want them anyway, everyone is happy !
Also, Britain does not have to worry about 88m Turks coming here after Brexit.
The fact that everyone from [ actually 11m more than the current population ] a country in the G20 and with an economy larger than Saudi Arabia will come over here was probably the most racist propaganda unleashed by the Leavers.
Who ever said 88m were coming here, why would objecting to 88m immigrants all at once be racist, why is their GDP relevant and why is Saudi Arabia an appropriate comparator?
No, that says that 88m will acquire the right to come here, not that 88m will come here. Like so many Remainers, you are clearly prepared to do whatever it takes to prevent Brexit except: understand the arguments, address the arguments, campaign for Remain, contribute financially to Remain, or in short exert yourself in any way whatever.
Scotland has a public sector workforce that is 20% of its total. UK average is 17% Scotland has a £12bn deficit which is nearly a quarter of the UK total.
Of course, Scotland could abandon any financial commitments it might be pressed to make to be part of NATO, the EU, EFTA or in overseas aid to address these money matters.
If it doesn't though, there's a whole lotta cuttin' goin' on.
Only a numpty would buy the 150 bucks a barrel schtick again.
Scotland could spend the same amount on defence, say, as Ireland.
The amount that most of Europe is keen to freeload on. Good luck with that lasting.
What is NATO or anyone else spending on Ireland's defence ? Who told them to spend that money ? It is bloody wasted anyway.
Maybe but if you want to be in the club then you pay the membership fee.
I perceive that the triumvirate of Merkel, May and Trump are all essentially "pay your fair share" conservatives.
I see it with EU spending, NATO commitments and Eurozone bailout demands.
Scotland has a public sector workforce that is 20% of its total. UK average is 17% Scotland has a £12bn deficit which is nearly a quarter of the UK total.
Of course, Scotland could abandon any financial commitments it might be pressed to make to be part of NATO, the EU, EFTA or in overseas aid to address these money matters.
If it doesn't though, there's a whole lotta cuttin' goin' on.
Only a numpty would buy the 150 bucks a barrel schtick again.
Scotland could spend the same amount on defence, say, as Ireland.
The amount that most of Europe is keen to freeload on. Good luck with that lasting.
What is NATO or anyone else spending on Ireland's defence ? Who told them to spend that money ? It is bloody wasted anyway.
Maybe but if you want to be in the club then you pay the membership fee.
I perceive that the triumvirate of Merkel, May and Trump are all essentially "pay your fair share" conservatives.
I see it with EU spending, NATO commitments and Eurozone bailout demands.
I've never thought that Carlotta was an individual, whether staying in a tax haven or not, more of a collective.
My money was on the collective Tory research dept - same repetition of a few misleading figures, consistent anti-Scottish mind set, bucketful of prejudices etc etc
A question for those who know how Twitter decides what tweets I might be interested in, in the emails it sends me:
I have a twitter a/c. I set it up in 2009 for possible business use. I didn't need it. I have sent a grand total of 1 tweet in that time in 2014 to get some free online storage space (Dropbox). I follow just two a/cs which are a local online paper and Dropbox (another requirement of the free space). I have 1 (I assume very disappointed) follower who I assume found me because of the business link (an IT company).
I get regular emails telling me what is happening on twitter. They usually consist of one from the local online paper, occasionally one on another random topic and usually 3 - 6 on American right wing a/cs.
Up until recently I have never looked at any of these type of sites, but I did start following the stuff Plato was posting and found them fascinating, but I have never done anything other than just read them.
Is there any link with my viewing activity (I can not see how there can be, because they are coming via an email that is not associated with my viewing) or do these sites just very actively send out links via twitter emails.
Has the unspoofable farce arrived in East Kilbride yet?
EK is just about visible from the top of the hill by me. I'll let you know when the Red Arrows flypast announces her jumping out of a UJ bedecked cake.
"Gorton was 72% for remain at the referendum and we do know that those opposed to leaving the EU are probably more motivated than those who aren’t at the moment"
The Long March fiasco on Saturday suggests otherwise. [snip]
Isn't it more that of those who feel strongly, the Remain camp are currently the more motivated? But there aren't all that many who feel strongly on either side. Brexit is not a magic bullet for the Lib Dems and could well be a dead end (to mix metaphors). They would be better off seeking a broader range of issues over which to capture the sensible centre-left ground from Labour.
Scotland has a public sector workforce that is 20% of its total. UK average is 17% Scotland has a £12bn deficit which is nearly a quarter of the UK total.
Of course, Scotland could abandon any financial commitments it might be pressed to make to be part of NATO, the EU, EFTA or in overseas aid to address these money matters.
If it doesn't though, there's a whole lotta cuttin' goin' on.
Only a numpty would buy the 150 bucks a barrel schtick again.
Scotland could spend the same amount on defence, say, as Ireland.
The amount that most of Europe is keen to freeload on. Good luck with that lasting.
What is NATO or anyone else spending on Ireland's defence ? Who told them to spend that money ? It is bloody wasted anyway.
Maybe but if you want to be in the club then you pay the membership fee.
I perceive that the triumvirate of Merkel, May and Trump are all essentially "pay your fair share" conservatives.
I see it with EU spending, NATO commitments and Eurozone bailout demands.
My money was on the collective Tory research dept - same repetition of a few misleading figures, consistent anti-Scottish mind set, bucketful of prejudices etc etc
There's apparently some serious research going on:
...Government figures are reading up on how the SNP was defeated in the 2014 independence referendum in anticipation of another vote.
Scotland has a public sector workforce that is 20% of its total. UK average is 17% Scotland has a £12bn deficit which is nearly a quarter of the UK total.
Of course, Scotland could abandon any financial commitments it might be pressed to make to be part of NATO, the EU, EFTA or in overseas aid to address these money matters.
If it doesn't though, there's a whole lotta cuttin' goin' on.
Only a numpty would buy the 150 bucks a barrel schtick again.
Scotland could spend the same amount on defence, say, as Ireland.
The amount that most of Europe is keen to freeload on. Good luck with that lasting.
What is NATO or anyone else spending on Ireland's defence ? Who told them to spend that money ? It is bloody wasted anyway.
Maybe but if you want to be in the club then you pay the membership fee.
I perceive that the triumvirate of Merkel, May and Trump are all essentially "pay your fair share" conservatives.
I see it with EU spending, NATO commitments and Eurozone bailout demands.
Ireland isn't a NATO member.
So Scotland is voting to leave NATO? Fair enough.
I don't see what would be in it for iScotland to try and maintain NATO membership. The rational post independence defence policy would look like Ireland or New Zealand.
My money was on the collective Tory research dept - same repetition of a few misleading figures, consistent anti-Scottish mind set, bucketful of prejudices etc etc
There's apparently some serious research going on:
...Government figures are reading up on how the SNP was defeated in the 2014 independence referendum in anticipation of another vote.
"Gorton was 72% for remain at the referendum and we do know that those opposed to leaving the EU are probably more motivated than those who aren’t at the moment"
The Long March fiasco on Saturday suggests otherwise. [snip]
Isn't it more that of those who feel strongly, the Remain camp are currently the more motivated? But there aren't all that many who feel strongly on either side. Brexit is not a magic bullet for the Lib Dems and could well be a dead end (to mix metaphors). They would be better off seeking a broader range of issues over which to capture the sensible centre-left ground from Labour.
I think that is right; to most people Brexit or not Brexit was a 2016 issue which was settled in 2016, and we have now moved on. The march turnout really surprised me: I was thinking 250 000 was the bare minimum, 500 000 plus would really enthuse the anti brexiteers, and sub 100 000 was a fiasco.
If your point is, when the Conservatives are in Government, it's easier to get motivated to fight against the Government, er, yes. I'm not sure what other point you have apart from complaining when other parties have the temerity to argue against the Conservatives.
That isn't just a Conservative thing - it happens when Labour are in Government too. Look at Brent East, sorry, probably shouldn't mention that Conservative fiasco which did for the quiet man ?
I'm saying that in the main in the north the lib dems have no appetite or maybe party machinery to take the fight to Labour. In the metropolitan elite areas in the southern cities yes they do and they are pretty good at it.
I would expect next year for them to take back both Kingston and Richmond councils and are in with a squeak in Camden. Guildford is a target as is Mole Valley and possibly even Tandridge... elsewhere above the Watford gap..forget it.
Can't see Galloway making much headway here, because his main attributes are: 1 - appealing to the anti-war / disaffected left vote - covered by Corbyn 2 - appealing to Muslims - covered by Labour's candidate 3 - anti-EU - not going to help in a very pro-remain constituency
The turnout will likely be very low but I can't see the LDs getting within 10% vote share of Labour, even taking into account the possible apathy reported by the MEN. Meanwhile, George may have a battle on his hands even to come third. The reasons above applied in the London mayoral campaign where he bombed, so there's no reason to think it'll be different in Gorton.
A question for those who know how Twitter decides what tweets I might be interested in, in the emails it sends me:
I have a twitter a/c. I set it up in 2009 for possible business use. I didn't need it. I have sent a grand total of 1 tweet in that time in 2014 to get some free online storage space (Dropbox). I follow just two a/cs which are a local online paper and Dropbox (another requirement of the free space). I have 1 (I assume very disappointed) follower who I assume found me because of the business link (an IT company).
I get regular emails telling me what is happening on twitter. They usually consist of one from the local online paper, occasionally one on another random topic and usually 3 - 6 on American right wing a/cs.
Up until recently I have never looked at any of these type of sites, but I did start following the stuff Plato was posting and found them fascinating, but I have never done anything other than just read them.
Is there any link with my viewing activity (I can not see how there can be, because they are coming via an email that is not associated with my viewing) or do these sites just very actively send out links via twitter emails.
The last 4 pages of this are an appendix called "How twitter works". I find it very, very cool that this is an appendix to a High Court judgment - knocks on the head the usual view of judges as needing counsel to explain to them who the Beatles are, m'lud.
My money was on the collective Tory research dept - same repetition of a few misleading figures, consistent anti-Scottish mind set, bucketful of prejudices etc etc
There's apparently some serious research going on:
...Government figures are reading up on how the SNP was defeated in the 2014 independence referendum in anticipation of another vote.
How the SNP was defeated in Sindy? That's an easy one. When the official "bitter together" campaign was on the brink of defeat, the great clunking fist delivered the positive case and the rest is history.
Gordon Brown: he saved the pound, he saved the union, he saved the world. (And he's now officially only the third worst PM ever according to pb Tories, after Heath and Cameron.)
Unfortunately, EUref was run by people who could not find Scotland on a map, and who drew the wrong conclusion so ran an entirely negative campaign against Brexit, which is why they lost.
Scotland has a public sector workforce that is 20% of its total. UK average is 17% Scotland has a £12bn deficit which is nearly a quarter of the UK total.
Of course, Scotland could abandon any financial commitments it might be pressed to make to be part of NATO, the EU, EFTA or in overseas aid to address these money matters.
If it doesn't though, there's a whole lotta cuttin' goin' on.
Only a numpty would buy the 150 bucks a barrel schtick again.
Scotland could spend the same amount on defence, say, as Ireland.
The amount that most of Europe is keen to freeload on. Good luck with that lasting.
What is NATO or anyone else spending on Ireland's defence ? Who told them to spend that money ? It is bloody wasted anyway.
Maybe but if you want to be in the club then you pay the membership fee.
I perceive that the triumvirate of Merkel, May and Trump are all essentially "pay your fair share" conservatives.
I see it with EU spending, NATO commitments and Eurozone bailout demands.
Ireland isn't a NATO member.
So Scotland is voting to leave NATO? Fair enough.
I don't see what would be in it for iScotland to try and maintain NATO membership. The rational post independence defence policy would look like Ireland or New Zealand.
I imagine there's a reasonably credible argument for Scotland to only maintain a small defence force depending on the relationships it formed.
Can't see Galloway making much headway here, because his main attributes are: 1 - appealing to the anti-war / disaffected left vote - covered by Corbyn 2 - appealing to Muslims - covered by Labour's candidate 3 - anti-EU - not going to help in a very pro-remain constituency
The turnout will likely be very low but I can't see the LDs getting within 10% vote share of Labour, even taking into account the possible apathy reported by the MEN. Meanwhile, George may have a battle on his hands even to come third. The reasons above applied in the London mayoral campaign where he bombed, so there's no reason to think it'll be different in Gorton.
Sounds sensible. I'm all for people standing in new constituencies, but it really seems like with Galloway that he has no interest in the problems of constituents, just his own concerns. He tries to find places which share many of those concerns, but it feels like he would spend all his time banging on about the things he cares about and not do anything else - but I have no knowledge of reports of his worth as a constituency MP to back that up, admittedly, so he may be more attentive than I would expect.
If your point is, when the Conservatives are in Government, it's easier to get motivated to fight against the Government, er, yes. I'm not sure what other point you have apart from complaining when other parties have the temerity to argue against the Conservatives.
That isn't just a Conservative thing - it happens when Labour are in Government too. Look at Brent East, sorry, probably shouldn't mention that Conservative fiasco which did for the quiet man ?
I'm saying that in the main in the north the lib dems have no appetite or maybe party machinery to take the fight to Labour. In the metropolitan elite areas in the southern cities yes they do and they are pretty good at it.
I would expect next year for them to take back both Kingston and Richmond councils and are in with a squeak in Camden. Guildford is a target as is Mole Valley and possibly even Tandridge... elsewhere above the Watford gap..forget it.
Please, please, please can SeanT end up with a LibDem councillor...
If your point is, when the Conservatives are in Government, it's easier to get motivated to fight against the Government, er, yes. I'm not sure what other point you have apart from complaining when other parties have the temerity to argue against the Conservatives.
That isn't just a Conservative thing - it happens when Labour are in Government too. Look at Brent East, sorry, probably shouldn't mention that Conservative fiasco which did for the quiet man ?
I'm saying that in the main in the north the lib dems have no appetite or maybe party machinery to take the fight to Labour. In the metropolitan elite areas in the southern cities yes they do and they are pretty good at it.
I would expect next year for them to take back both Kingston and Richmond councils and are in with a squeak in Camden. Guildford is a target as is Mole Valley and possibly even Tandridge... elsewhere above the Watford gap..forget it.
Please, please, please can SeanT end up with a LibDem councillor...
Well their candidates do tend to be quite youthful...
Can't see Galloway making much headway here, because his main attributes are: 1 - appealing to the anti-war / disaffected left vote - covered by Corbyn 2 - appealing to Muslims - covered by Labour's candidate 3 - anti-EU - not going to help in a very pro-remain constituency
The turnout will likely be very low but I can't see the LDs getting within 10% vote share of Labour, even taking into account the possible apathy reported by the MEN. Meanwhile, George may have a battle on his hands even to come third. The reasons above applied in the London mayoral campaign where he bombed, so there's no reason to think it'll be different in Gorton.
Yes I suspect peak Georgeous was several years ago now.
the SNP is now turning towards rubbishing the only available economic statistics that reveal the truth.
Last week a number of senior SNP politicians sought in articles and on social media to rubbish the information provided by GERS, the annual publication of Government Expenditure and Revenue Scotland. What is astonishing about this behaviour is that GERS is published by the SNP Government; it is an official publication overseen by impartial public servants in Scotland using statistics validated as conforming to recognised standards by international institutions. Indeed its past reports provided the basis for independence itself and formed the foundation for the SNP Government’s White Paper of November 2013.
Scotland has a public sector workforce that is 20% of its total. UK average is 17% Scotland has a £12bn deficit which is nearly a quarter of the UK total.
Of course, Scotland could abandon any financial commitments it might be pressed to make to be part of NATO, the EU, EFTA or in overseas aid to address these money matters.
If it doesn't though, there's a whole lotta cuttin' goin' on.
Only a numpty would buy the 150 bucks a barrel schtick again.
Scotland could spend the same amount on defence, say, as Ireland.
The amount that most of Europe is keen to freeload on. Good luck with that lasting.
What is NATO or anyone else spending on Ireland's defence ? Who told them to spend that money ? It is bloody wasted anyway.
Maybe but if you want to be in the club then you pay the membership fee.
I perceive that the triumvirate of Merkel, May and Trump are all essentially "pay your fair share" conservatives.
I see it with EU spending, NATO commitments and Eurozone bailout demands.
Ireland isn't a NATO member.
So Scotland is voting to leave NATO? Fair enough.
I don't see what would be in it for iScotland to try and maintain NATO membership. The rational post independence defence policy would look like Ireland or New Zealand.
I imagine there's a reasonably credible argument for Scotland to only maintain a small defence force depending on the relationships it formed.
The problem is Scotland is buzzed by the Russians, so either the Scots would need to respond or the rump-RAF would but English planes flying over Scotland might be politically awkward, or ... we could just ignore them. Maybe this could be an earner for Scotland if the old RAF bases were let to the USAF. They've got better planes than us anyway.
Genuine question - how do you feel about people 'actioning' things?
We're suckers for importing Americanisms and American "culture" although personally I don't dislike that particular term as it imbues a sense of purpose and intent.
Ahead of the meeting with Sturgeon, May will set out her "Plan for Britain" in an address at the Department for International Development (DFID) in East Kilbride.
I wonder how many DFID employees would keep their jobs in an Independent Scotland....
They would be made up many times over by other government jobs repatriated from London
Well, there's 50% of the current HMRC jobs in Scotland to go - unless you're suggesting Scotland's HMRC would be less efficient than England's?
Yes they are going to England if we stay where we are and many more thousands will be taken south by the Tories.
That's factually incorrect Malc. The HMRC roles are staying in Scotland but concentrating in Glasgow and Edinburgh. If you vote Sindy though then I guess they'd be massively at risk of going south. I'm sure the rUK would not want some of its core tax effort processed in a foreign country.
The Scottish Government's White Paper - no, don't laugh - said:
The Scottish Government plans to create a new, streamlined Scottish Motor Services Agency, which will bring together the functions of DVLA, DSA, VOSA, and VCA. By the end of the first term of an independent parliament, we will have completed the design and development work, with a view to the Agency going live early in the second Parliament.
So even by their own view they'd be dependent on the goodwill of the rUK to process the machinery of their government for them for about two parliaments. And to be busy massively investing in their own new systems and processes whilst running a 15% deficit before they begin. A low risk strategy! Scottish weather report: 'Rainy with the chance of clusterfuck'.
Patrick, you can be sure Westminster would overcharge us for any favours as usual. We will see ho well rumpUK does once cast adrift, given the duffers leading teh charge I would not be confident of much sunshine ahead.
A question for those who know how Twitter decides what tweets I might be interested in, in the emails it sends me:
I have a twitter a/c. I set it up in 2009 for possible business use. I didn't need it. I have sent a grand total of 1 tweet in that time in 2014 to get some free online storage space (Dropbox). I follow just two a/cs which are a local online paper and Dropbox (another requirement of the free space). I have 1 (I assume very disappointed) follower who I assume found me because of the business link (an IT company).
I get regular emails telling me what is happening on twitter. They usually consist of one from the local online paper, occasionally one on another random topic and usually 3 - 6 on American right wing a/cs.
Up until recently I have never looked at any of these type of sites, but I did start following the stuff Plato was posting and found them fascinating, but I have never done anything other than just read them.
Is there any link with my viewing activity (I can not see how there can be, because they are coming via an email that is not associated with my viewing) or do these sites just very actively send out links via twitter emails.
The last 4 pages of this are an appendix called "How twitter works". I find it very, very cool that this is an appendix to a High Court judgment - knocks on the head the usual view of judges as needing counsel to explain to them who the Beatles are, m'lud.
I've just heard an interview on radio 5 with an MP. I missed his name but after a five minute interview it was clear to me he was a UKIPer and a pretty unpleasant one.
It turned out he was John Mann Labour MP for Bassetlaw.
It's difficult to tell these days. I think before deciding which way to vote next time I'll look at a cv.
Ahead of the meeting with Sturgeon, May will set out her "Plan for Britain" in an address at the Department for International Development (DFID) in East Kilbride.
I wonder how many DFID employees would keep their jobs in an Independent Scotland....
They would be made up many times over by other government jobs repatriated from London
Well, there's 50% of the current HMRC jobs in Scotland to go - unless you're suggesting Scotland's HMRC would be less efficient than England's?
Yes they are going to England if we stay where we are and many more thousands will be taken south by the Tories.
That's factually incorrect Malc. The HMRC roles are staying in Scotland but concentrating in Glasgow and Edinburgh. If you vote Sindy though then I guess they'd be massively at risk of going south. I'm sure the rUK would not want some of its core tax effort processed in a foreign country.
Plenty the same for us Patrick , many more times the amount of public jobs are done outside Scotland as well. Usual claptrap from Carlotta who would hav eScotland as a desert to suit her twisted bitter ego. She really must have failed big time in Scotland.
Despite being a Scot, Carlotta is very anti Scottish. Maybe living in a tax free environment does it to you.
She does claim to be Scottish , but certainly does not sound like one , she hates Scotland with a vengence and cannot wait to tell any untruth to denigrate it. All the while from a tax haven that she never mentions. Sounds like a Tory plant to me.
Ah the old No True Scot refuge of the fool who has lost the argument.....
Mr. Rentool, the Americans have a saying: any noun can be verbed.
...and vice versa unfortunately... My current bete noir is people saying 'that's a big ask'. Shudders....
Isn't this one of the good things about English? It's flexibility.
Rogue apostrophe there mate! But...yes, you are right and in total contrast to eg French which the Academie Francaise would like to set in aspic (round about 1796). It's easy to forget what a wonderful language English is.
I've just heard an interview on radio 5 with an MP. I missed his name but after a five minute interview it was clear to me he was a UKIPer and a pretty unpleasant one.
It turned out he was John Mann Labour MP for Bassetlaw.
It's difficult to tell these days. I think before deciding which way to vote next time I'll look at a cv.
I've just heard an interview on radio 5 with an MP. I missed his name but after a five minute interview it was clear to me he was a UKIPer and a pretty unpleasant one.
It turned out he was John Mann Labour MP for Bassetlaw.
It's difficult to tell these days. I think before deciding which way to vote next time I'll look at a cv.
Ahead of the meeting with Sturgeon, May will set out her "Plan for Britain" in an address at the Department for International Development (DFID) in East Kilbride.
I wonder how many DFID employees would keep their jobs in an Independent Scotland....
They would be made up many times over by other government jobs repatriated from London
Well, there's 50% of the current HMRC jobs in Scotland to go - unless you're suggesting Scotland's HMRC would be less efficient than England's?
Yes they are going to England if we stay where we are and many more thousands will be taken south by the Tories.
That's factually incorrect Malc. The HMRC roles are staying in Scotland but concentrating in Glasgow and Edinburgh. If you vote Sindy though then I guess they'd be massively at risk of going south. I'm sure the rUK would not want some of its core tax effort processed in a foreign country.
The Scottish Government's White Paper - no, don't laugh - said:
The Scottish Government plans to create a new, streamlined Scottish Motor Services Agency, which will bring together the functions of DVLA, DSA, VOSA, and VCA. By the end of the first term of an independent parliament, we will have completed the design and development work, with a view to the Agency going live early in the second Parliament.
So even by their own view they'd be dependent on the goodwill of the rUK to process the machinery of their government for them for about two parliaments. And to be busy massively investing in their own new systems and processes whilst running a 15% deficit before they begin. A low risk strategy! Scottish weather report: 'Rainy with the chance of clusterfuck'.
Patrick, you can be sure Westminster would overcharge us for any favours as usual. We will see ho well rumpUK does once cast adrift, given the duffers leading teh charge I would not be confident of much sunshine ahead.
Mr. Rentool, the Americans have a saying: any noun can be verbed.
...and vice versa unfortunately... My current bete noir is people saying 'that's a big ask'. Shudders....
Isn't this one of the good things about English? It's flexibility.
Rogue apostrophe there mate! But...yes, you are right and in total contrast to eg French which the Academie Francaise would like to set in aspic (round about 1796). It's easy to forget what a wonderful language English is.
Ahead of the meeting with Sturgeon, May will set out her "Plan for Britain" in an address at the Department for International Development (DFID) in East Kilbride.
I wonder how many DFID employees would keep their jobs in an Independent Scotland....
They would be made up many times over by other government jobs repatriated from London
Well, there's 50% of the current HMRC jobs in Scotland to go - unless you're suggesting Scotland's HMRC would be less efficient than England's?
Yes they are going to England if we stay where we are and many more thousands will be taken south by the Tories.
That's factually incorrect Malc. The HMRC roles are staying in Scotland but concentrating in Glasgow and Edinburgh. If you vote Sindy though then I guess they'd be massively at risk of going south. I'm sure the rUK would not want some of its core tax effort processed in a foreign country.
Plenty the same for us Patrick , many more times the amount of public jobs are done outside Scotland as well. Usual claptrap from Carlotta who would hav eScotland as a desert to suit her twisted bitter ego. She really must have failed big time in Scotland.
Despite being a Scot, Carlotta is very anti Scottish. Maybe living in a tax free environment does it to you.
She does claim to be Scottish , but certainly does not sound like one , she hates Scotland with a vengence and cannot wait to tell any untruth to denigrate it. All the while from a tax haven that she never mentions. Sounds like a Tory plant to me.
Ah the old No True Scot refuge of the fool who has lost the argument.....
I've just heard an interview on radio 5 with an MP. I missed his name but after a five minute interview it was clear to me he was a UKIPer and a pretty unpleasant one.
It turned out he was John Mann Labour MP for Bassetlaw.
It's difficult to tell these days. I think before deciding which way to vote next time I'll look at the candidate's cv.
Frankly that's always a good idea. There are loads of MPs elected on a party brand who might divert from that brand's policies quite severely. Of course no one will accord 100% with a manifesto, but in some cases even if you support the brand generally, the local choice might be so out of step another option will in fact be best
I've just heard an interview on radio 5 with an MP. I missed his name but after a five minute interview it was clear to me he was a UKIPer and a pretty unpleasant one.
It turned out he was John Mann Labour MP for Bassetlaw.
It's difficult to tell these days. I think before deciding which way to vote next time I'll look at a cv.
UKIP don't have any MPs, that should help
Long before they hit their heights with good polling and 2 MPs, there were many MPs who clearly wished they were kipper but lacked the balls to leave the safety blanket of their current parties.
Scotland has a public sector workforce that is 20% of its total. UK average is 17% Scotland has a £12bn deficit which is nearly a quarter of the UK total.
Of course, Scotland could abandon any financial commitments it might be pressed to make to be part of NATO, the EU, EFTA or in overseas aid to address these money matters.
If it doesn't though, there's a whole lotta cuttin' goin' on.
Only a numpty would buy the 150 bucks a barrel schtick again.
Only a numpty would quote those bollox statistics, all UK government sponsored "estimates". I could easily attribute most of my deficit to Santander and say I am not skint just as UK does.
Scotslass hauled me up on 'misleading figures' earlier....I have an apology to make....the figures I quoted for % Civil Servants in Scotland at 10.0% were for 2015.
The most up to date figure is not 10.0%, but 10.3%.....
Scotland has a public sector workforce that is 20% of its total. UK average is 17% Scotland has a £12bn deficit which is nearly a quarter of the UK total.
Of course, Scotland could abandon any financial commitments it might be pressed to make to be part of NATO, the EU, EFTA or in overseas aid to address these money matters.
If it doesn't though, there's a whole lotta cuttin' goin' on.
Only a numpty would buy the 150 bucks a barrel schtick again.
Scotland could spend the same amount on defence, say, as Ireland.
The amount that most of Europe is keen to freeload on. Good luck with that lasting.
Genuine question - how do you feel about people 'actioning' things?
"Greenlight" has a specific meaning in Hollywood. "Action" as a verb is horrible.
It's true that verbs make prose more punchy, and that nominalisations are used far too much, but making up verbs from nouns isn't usually the answer.
The answer is using verbs precisely, which means getting a good vocabulary. Otherwise one is left with too much usage of bland verbs such as "do", "give", "get", and "make".
I think the two big lessons of the coalition were: 1. The junior partner should have whole ministries for itself rather than being subsumed into a larger whole. They then become distinct and accountable in their own areas. And they don't become quite so politically attached to their senior partner. 2. Don't badmouth your own government or seek to be an opposition in power. Maybe 1 above solves this too.
Both true - and I believe it's the case with most coalition governments in Europe. The LDs deliberately went against this, thinking it wouldn't work in our more aggressive political system. Clegg himself should have taken on a big4 cabinet role to make him seem more heavyweight in the country at large - rather than just a floating deputy PM (a position that has never really meant anything in our country).
I've just heard an interview on radio 5 with an MP. I missed his name but after a five minute interview it was clear to me he was a UKIPer and a pretty unpleasant one.
It turned out he was John Mann Labour MP for Bassetlaw.
It's difficult to tell these days. I think before deciding which way to vote next time I'll look at a cv.
You have only just realised John Mann is an unpleasant mp...I know you are a bit slow but really..
Scotland has a public sector workforce that is 20% of its total. UK average is 17% Scotland has a £12bn deficit which is nearly a quarter of the UK total.
Of course, Scotland could abandon any financial commitments it might be pressed to make to be part of NATO, the EU, EFTA or in overseas aid to address these money matters.
If it doesn't though, there's a whole lotta cuttin' goin' on.
Only a numpty would buy the 150 bucks a barrel schtick again.
Scotland could spend the same amount on defence, say, as Ireland.
The amount that most of Europe is keen to freeload on. Good luck with that lasting.
What is NATO or anyone else spending on Ireland's defence ? Who told them to spend that money ? It is bloody wasted anyway.
Maybe but if you want to be in the club then you pay the membership fee.
I perceive that the triumvirate of Merkel, May and Trump are all essentially "pay your fair share" conservatives.
I see it with EU spending, NATO commitments and Eurozone bailout demands.
Ireland isn't a NATO member.
So Scotland is voting to leave NATO? Fair enough.
I don't see what would be in it for iScotland to try and maintain NATO membership. The rational post independence defence policy would look like Ireland or New Zealand.
I imagine there's a reasonably credible argument for Scotland to only maintain a small defence force depending on the relationships it formed.
The problem is Scotland is buzzed by the Russians, so either the Scots would need to respond or the rump-RAF would but English planes flying over Scotland might be politically awkward, or ... we could just ignore them. Maybe this could be an earner for Scotland if the old RAF bases were let to the USAF. They've got better planes than us anyway.
I could see a situation where iScotland gets an 'Iceland' style NATO membership (ie have no military to speak of but still NATO members because of their strategic location) and then get a Baltic style air policing operation which would be rotated through willing member nations.
I think the two big lessons of the coalition were: 1. The junior partner should have whole ministries for itself rather than being subsumed into a larger whole. They then become distinct and accountable in their own areas. And they don't become quite so politically attached to their senior partner. 2. Don't badmouth your own government or seek to be an opposition in power. Maybe 1 above solves this too.
Both true - and I believe it's the case with most coalition governments in Europe. The LDs deliberately went against this, thinking it wouldn't work in our more aggressive political system. Clegg himself should have taken on a big4 cabinet role to make him seem more heavyweight in the country at large - rather than just a floating deputy PM (a position that has never really meant anything in our country).
That always surprised me. I'd guess the LDs did worse than expected - they lost MPs rather than gained even - and the Tories argued in negotiation the LDs hadn't done enough to justify one of the Great Offices.
The problem is Scotland is buzzed by the Russians, so either the Scots would need to respond or the rump-RAF would but English planes flying over Scotland might be politically awkward, or ... we could just ignore them. Maybe this could be an earner for Scotland if the old RAF bases were let to the USAF. They've got better planes than us anyway.
The other thing that sprung to mind was the protection of territorial waters.
Outside the EU, they are the UKs. Outside the UK, they are Scotland's. Outside Scotland, they may belong to the Shetlands etc.
I read an interesting piece last evening that nine major EU nations have set up a European Fisheries Alliance because they are so concerned at the loss of fishing rights in UK waters.
There are some interesting figures on fish consumption and given that it is widely regarded that fish is especially healthy food it seems that we have developed a very strange economic and consumption model in relation to it. These things seem to get lost in the core tribalism of these referendum discussions.
"Gorton was 72% for remain at the referendum and we do know that those opposed to leaving the EU are probably more motivated than those who aren’t at the moment"
The Long March fiasco on Saturday suggests otherwise. [snip]
Isn't it more that of those who feel strongly, the Remain camp are currently the more motivated? But there aren't all that many who feel strongly on either side. Brexit is not a magic bullet for the Lib Dems and could well be a dead end (to mix metaphors). They would be better off seeking a broader range of issues over which to capture the sensible centre-left ground from Labour.
I think that is right; to most people Brexit or not Brexit was a 2016 issue which was settled in 2016, and we have now moved on. The march turnout really surprised me: I was thinking 250 000 was the bare minimum, 500 000 plus would really enthuse the anti brexiteers, and sub 100 000 was a fiasco.
Yesterday you were telling the BBC off for saying it was 'tens of thousands'.
Scotland has a public sector workforce that is 20% of its total. UK average is 17% Scotland has a £12bn deficit which is nearly a quarter of the UK total.
Of course, Scotland could abandon any financial commitments it might be pressed to make to be part of NATO, the EU, EFTA or in overseas aid to address these money matters.
If it doesn't though, there's a whole lotta cuttin' goin' on.
Only a numpty would buy the 150 bucks a barrel schtick again.
Scotland could spend the same amount on defence, say, as Ireland.
The amount that most of Europe is keen to freeload on. Good luck with that lasting.
What is NATO or anyone else spending on Ireland's defence ? Who told them to spend that money ? It is bloody wasted anyway.
Maybe but if you want to be in the club then you pay the membership fee.
I perceive that the triumvirate of Merkel, May and Trump are all essentially "pay your fair share" conservatives.
I see it with EU spending, NATO commitments and Eurozone bailout demands.
Ireland isn't a NATO member.
So Scotland is voting to leave NATO? Fair enough.
I don't see what would be in it for iScotland to try and maintain NATO membership. The rational post independence defence policy would look like Ireland or New Zealand.
I imagine there's a reasonably credible argument for Scotland to only maintain a small defence force depending on the relationships it formed.
The problem is Scotland is buzzed by the Russians, so either the Scots would need to respond or the rump-RAF would but English planes flying over Scotland might be politically awkward, or ... we could just ignore them. Maybe this could be an earner for Scotland if the old RAF bases were let to the USAF. They've got better planes than us anyway.
Russian hardware is one thing but cyberwarfare is another altogether. NATO has a cyber-defence arm, to assist in defending the national networks of members. Presumably, this is something that will be developed much further given the scope for attacks from several states, and from any number of autonomous individuals or groups. For all the game-playing by Russian aircraft, they're not going to actually start dropping bombs. Cyber-warfare, by contrast, is rather more real.
Any small country outside a large defence block could well be running substantial risks if it hasn't created its own autonomous highly-developed cyber-defence.
I think the two big lessons of the coalition were: 1. The junior partner should have whole ministries for itself rather than being subsumed into a larger whole. They then become distinct and accountable in their own areas. And they don't become quite so politically attached to their senior partner. 2. Don't badmouth your own government or seek to be an opposition in power. Maybe 1 above solves this too.
Both true - and I believe it's the case with most coalition governments in Europe. The LDs deliberately went against this, thinking it wouldn't work in our more aggressive political system. Clegg himself should have taken on a big4 cabinet role to make him seem more heavyweight in the country at large - rather than just a floating deputy PM (a position that has never really meant anything in our country).
Clegg should have insisted on being CotE. Pissing off Osborne big time would have been a bonus.
Mr. Rentool, the Americans have a saying: any noun can be verbed.
...and vice versa unfortunately... My current bete noir is people saying 'that's a big ask'. Shudders....
Isn't this one of the good things about English? It's flexibility.
Those upset by the changing English language presumably excoriate Shakespeare, who not only invented a great many words and re-purposed others but landed the language with any number of cliches too.
the SNP is now turning towards rubbishing the only available economic statistics that reveal the truth.
Last week a number of senior SNP politicians sought in articles and on social media to rubbish the information provided by GERS, the annual publication of Government Expenditure and Revenue Scotland. What is astonishing about this behaviour is that GERS is published by the SNP Government; it is an official publication overseen by impartial public servants in Scotland using statistics validated as conforming to recognised standards by international institutions. Indeed its past reports provided the basis for independence itself and formed the foundation for the SNP Government’s White Paper of November 2013.
Those UK governments estimates and guesses of how they split , read the Uk statement and see how many times it says estimated. Since the UK cannot provide ( more like will not ) real data that shows split of the UK revenues etc , who knows what reality is but Scottish government can only use what is made available given they do not have access to the data which is closely guarded by UK goons.
LONDON — Labour’s Shadow Brexit secretary Keir Starmer will today set out six impossible conditions for backing Theresa May’s final Brexit deal.
At a speech at Chatham House on Monday morning, Starmer will insist that Labour will only vote in favour of May’s deal if it passes “six tests”.
The tests are:
1. Does it ensure a strong and collaborative future relationship with the EU? 2. Does it deliver the “exact same benefits” as we currently have as members of the Single Market and Customs Union? 3. Does it ensure the fair management of migration in the interests of the economy and communities? 4. Does it defend rights and protections and prevent a race to the bottom? 5. Does it protect national security and our capacity to tackle cross-border crime? 6. Does it deliver for all regions and nations of the UK?
There is no way that May can pass all of these tests.There is simply no deal available outside of the Single Market and the Customs Union which will deliver the “exact same benefits” as being inside of the Single Market and the Customs Union.
"Gorton was 72% for remain at the referendum and we do know that those opposed to leaving the EU are probably more motivated than those who aren’t at the moment"
The Long March fiasco on Saturday suggests otherwise. [snip]
Isn't it more that of those who feel strongly, the Remain camp are currently the more motivated? But there aren't all that many who feel strongly on either side. Brexit is not a magic bullet for the Lib Dems and could well be a dead end (to mix metaphors). They would be better off seeking a broader range of issues over which to capture the sensible centre-left ground from Labour.
I think that is right; to most people Brexit or not Brexit was a 2016 issue which was settled in 2016, and we have now moved on. The march turnout really surprised me: I was thinking 250 000 was the bare minimum, 500 000 plus would really enthuse the anti brexiteers, and sub 100 000 was a fiasco.
Yesterday you were telling the BBC off for saying it was 'tens of thousands'.
I am not, as should be clear to the meanest intelligence, stating any case as to what the actual attendance was, I am saying what my personal, subjective benchmarks were against which I would measure the actual turnout.
LONDON — Labour’s Shadow Brexit secretary Keir Starmer will today set out six impossible conditions for backing Theresa May’s final Brexit deal.
At a speech at Chatham House on Monday morning, Starmer will insist that Labour will only vote in favour of May’s deal if it passes “six tests”.
The tests are:
1. Does it ensure a strong and collaborative future relationship with the EU? 2. Does it deliver the “exact same benefits” as we currently have as members of the Single Market and Customs Union? 3. Does it ensure the fair management of migration in the interests of the economy and communities? 4. Does it defend rights and protections and prevent a race to the bottom? 5. Does it protect national security and our capacity to tackle cross-border crime? 6. Does it deliver for all regions and nations of the UK?
There is no way that May can pass all of these tests.There is simply no deal available outside of the Single Market and the Customs Union which will deliver the “exact same benefits” as being inside of the Single Market and the Customs Union.
If you take "exact same benefits" as being all the fruits of the single market, then this is possible in some kind of bespoke deal. The more interesting issue, of course, will be that the nature and rules of the single market will be outside the UK's influence, regardless of whether or how they benefit from it.
On government figures, my starting position is to assume that as precise calculations they are probably worthless. However, it comes down to, if the methodology is the same, if people who supported them previously criticise them now, or vice versa, depending on if they show what they want.
I think the two big lessons of the coalition were: 1. The junior partner should have whole ministries for itself rather than being subsumed into a larger whole. They then become distinct and accountable in their own areas. And they don't become quite so politically attached to their senior partner. 2. Don't badmouth your own government or seek to be an opposition in power. Maybe 1 above solves this too.
Both true - and I believe it's the case with most coalition governments in Europe. The LDs deliberately went against this, thinking it wouldn't work in our more aggressive political system. Clegg himself should have taken on a big4 cabinet role to make him seem more heavyweight in the country at large - rather than just a floating deputy PM (a position that has never really meant anything in our country).
That always surprised me. I'd guess the LDs did worse than expected - they lost MPs rather than gained even - and the Tories argued in negotiation the LDs hadn't done enough to justify one of the Great Offices.
They did do a lot worse (as an enthusiastic first time LD voter that was not a fun night for me!), but to an extent they underestimated their leverage over the tories. The arithmetic was not there for a stable coalition with Labour, but it was sufficient to block the tories for a time. They got played by the tories. For me, it seems like the Lib Dems were dealt a bad hand in that election, and then played it badly.
the SNP is now turning towards rubbishing the only available economic statistics that reveal the truth.
Last week a number of senior SNP politicians sought in articles and on social media to rubbish the information provided by GERS, the annual publication of Government Expenditure and Revenue Scotland. What is astonishing about this behaviour is that GERS is published by the SNP Government; it is an official publication overseen by impartial public servants in Scotland using statistics validated as conforming to recognised standards by international institutions. Indeed its past reports provided the basis for independence itself and formed the foundation for the SNP Government’s White Paper of November 2013.
Those UK governments estimates and guesses of how they split , read the Uk statement and see how many times it says estimated. Since the UK cannot provide ( more like will not ) real data that shows split of the UK revenues etc , who knows what reality is but Scottish government can only use what is made available given they do not have access to the data which is closely guarded by UK goons.
These are Scottish Government statistics - are you saying Scottish statisticians are not up to the job?
I think the two big lessons of the coalition were: 1. The junior partner should have whole ministries for itself rather than being subsumed into a larger whole. They then become distinct and accountable in their own areas. And they don't become quite so politically attached to their senior partner. 2. Don't badmouth your own government or seek to be an opposition in power. Maybe 1 above solves this too.
Both true - and I believe it's the case with most coalition governments in Europe. The LDs deliberately went against this, thinking it wouldn't work in our more aggressive political system. Clegg himself should have taken on a big4 cabinet role to make him seem more heavyweight in the country at large - rather than just a floating deputy PM (a position that has never really meant anything in our country).
That always surprised me. I'd guess the LDs did worse than expected - they lost MPs rather than gained even - and the Tories argued in negotiation the LDs hadn't done enough to justify one of the Great Offices.
Taking a Great Office would have been a mistake too. One of the biggest errors the Lib Dems made was not bagging a big-spending ministry, which is one place you can deliver on-the-ground changes. It would have been far better for them to land Education or Health than the Home or Foreign Office (because the Home Office isn't really that big these days now that Justice has been hived off, and the FO is in reality subservient to No 10). By allowing the Tories to hold education, health, DWP and defence, the Lib Dems let them introduce major reforms and establish a reputation in office. Had they bagged health or education, say, not only could they have prevented those reforms but they'd have gone into 2015 able to point to achievements of their own and able to question the Tories' ability to run them.
I think the two big lessons of the coalition were: 1. The junior partner should have whole ministries for itself rather than being subsumed into a larger whole. They then become distinct and accountable in their own areas. And they don't become quite so politically attached to their senior partner. 2. Don't badmouth your own government or seek to be an opposition in power. Maybe 1 above solves this too.
Both true - and I believe it's the case with most coalition governments in Europe. The LDs deliberately went against this, thinking it wouldn't work in our more aggressive political system. Clegg himself should have taken on a big4 cabinet role to make him seem more heavyweight in the country at large - rather than just a floating deputy PM (a position that has never really meant anything in our country).
That always surprised me. I'd guess the LDs did worse than expected - they lost MPs rather than gained even - and the Tories argued in negotiation the LDs hadn't done enough to justify one of the Great Offices.
They did do a lot worse (as an enthusiastic first time LD voter that was not a fun night for me!), but to an extent they underestimated their leverage over the tories. The arithmetic was not there for a stable coalition with Labour, but it was sufficient to block the tories for a time. They got played by the tories. For me, it seems like the Lib Dems were dealt a bad hand in that election, and then played it badly.
I'd guess they were worried if they had no formal deal there would be a new election not that long after - a year or two maybe - at which they might find themselves in an even worse position, so that might be their only chance to get into power and prove their worth (as it was half their support left immediately, clearly not willing to work with the Tories under any circumstances, before it could be seen if the cost would be worth the rewards, and others then left presumably feeling they were doing a poor job within the coalition even if in theory it could work). As it is, that will be correct, for different reasons. They'll never coalitions ith the Tories again in my lifetime even if the numbers are there, and while more will be happy to be Labour lite, they'll lose support if they do that too enthusiastically too.
LONDON — Labour’s Shadow Brexit secretary Keir Starmer will today set out six impossible conditions for backing Theresa May’s final Brexit deal.
At a speech at Chatham House on Monday morning, Starmer will insist that Labour will only vote in favour of May’s deal if it passes “six tests”.
The tests are:
1. Does it ensure a strong and collaborative future relationship with the EU? 2. Does it deliver the “exact same benefits” as we currently have as members of the Single Market and Customs Union? 3. Does it ensure the fair management of migration in the interests of the economy and communities? 4. Does it defend rights and protections and prevent a race to the bottom? 5. Does it protect national security and our capacity to tackle cross-border crime? 6. Does it deliver for all regions and nations of the UK?
There is no way that May can pass all of these tests.There is simply no deal available outside of the Single Market and the Customs Union which will deliver the “exact same benefits” as being inside of the Single Market and the Customs Union.
Mr. kle4, ones that annoy me include 'to podium' and 'to medal'.
Edited extra bit: which reminds me, you're the chap who (as well as me) watched Checkpoint, right?
Ever see Unskippable? They've made a very similar sort of thing, but 30 minutes long, called Running Start. First episode is called The First Templar.
I am - loved unskippable, shame it came to an end and cannot find time for watching streaming. I'll have to check it out, cheers - been in the distant and grim north (well, Redcar and cleveland) so must have missed that.
LONDON — Labour’s Shadow Brexit secretary Keir Starmer will today set out six impossible conditions for backing Theresa May’s final Brexit deal.
At a speech at Chatham House on Monday morning, Starmer will insist that Labour will only vote in favour of May’s deal if it passes “six tests”.
The tests are:
1. Does it ensure a strong and collaborative future relationship with the EU? 2. Does it deliver the “exact same benefits” as we currently have as members of the Single Market and Customs Union? 3. Does it ensure the fair management of migration in the interests of the economy and communities? 4. Does it defend rights and protections and prevent a race to the bottom? 5. Does it protect national security and our capacity to tackle cross-border crime? 6. Does it deliver for all regions and nations of the UK?
There is no way that May can pass all of these tests.There is simply no deal available outside of the Single Market and the Customs Union which will deliver the “exact same benefits” as being inside of the Single Market and the Customs Union.
2 and 3 are incompatible - EU to blame.99% is achievable.
4 is simply nonsense. What is the minimum wage in Latvia? How about the corporation tax rate in Ireland? The EUs lack of uniformity creates the race to the bottom.
the SNP is now turning towards rubbishing the only available economic statistics that reveal the truth.
Last week a number of senior SNP politicians sought in articles and on social media to rubbish the information provided by GERS, the annual publication of Government Expenditure and Revenue Scotland. What is astonishing about this behaviour is that GERS is published by the SNP Government; it is an official publication overseen by impartial public servants in Scotland using statistics validated as conforming to recognised standards by international institutions. Indeed its past reports provided the basis for independence itself and formed the foundation for the SNP Government’s White Paper of November 2013.
Those UK governments estimates and guesses of how they split , read the Uk statement and see how many times it says estimated. Since the UK cannot provide ( more like will not ) real data that shows split of the UK revenues etc , who knows what reality is but Scottish government can only use what is made available given they do not have access to the data which is closely guarded by UK goons.
These are Scottish Government statistics - are you saying Scottish statisticians are not up to the job?
they are using UK government ESTIMATES, there are no actual statistics that split the revenues, ie they are just made up and could be miles out especially given the UK will always try to show themselves in a good light at the expense of Scotland.
Just want to clarify something - Labour has said it will not support the final Brexit deal if the six tests aren't met - doesn't that mean that there will then be no deal and we leave on WTO rules?
Labour position on any brexit deal...We will only vote for it if Mrs may can prove she can break the world high jump record while wearing those expensive leather trousers and high heels...And isn't allowed to use the fosbury flop technique.
LONDON — Labour’s Shadow Brexit secretary Keir Starmer will today set out six impossible conditions for backing Theresa May’s final Brexit deal.
At a speech at Chatham House on Monday morning, Starmer will insist that Labour will only vote in favour of May’s deal if it passes “six tests”.
The tests are:
1. Does it ensure a strong and collaborative future relationship with the EU? 2. Does it deliver the “exact same benefits” as we currently have as members of the Single Market and Customs Union? 3. Does it ensure the fair management of migration in the interests of the economy and communities? 4. Does it defend rights and protections and prevent a race to the bottom? 5. Does it protect national security and our capacity to tackle cross-border crime? 6. Does it deliver for all regions and nations of the UK?
There is no way that May can pass all of these tests.There is simply no deal available outside of the Single Market and the Customs Union which will deliver the “exact same benefits” as being inside of the Single Market and the Customs Union.
they are using UK government ESTIMATES, there are no actual statistics that split the revenues, ie they are just made up and could be miles out especially given the UK will always try to show themselves in a good light at the expense of Scotland.
All Statistics use estimates - even the Vicar of Bath approves of GERS:
LONDON — Labour’s Shadow Brexit secretary Keir Starmer will today set out six impossible conditions for backing Theresa May’s final Brexit deal.
At a speech at Chatham House on Monday morning, Starmer will insist that Labour will only vote in favour of May’s deal if it passes “six tests”.
The tests are:
1. Does it ensure a strong and collaborative future relationship with the EU? 2. Does it deliver the “exact same benefits” as we currently have as members of the Single Market and Customs Union? 3. Does it ensure the fair management of migration in the interests of the economy and communities? 4. Does it defend rights and protections and prevent a race to the bottom? 5. Does it protect national security and our capacity to tackle cross-border crime? 6. Does it deliver for all regions and nations of the UK?
There is no way that May can pass all of these tests.There is simply no deal available outside of the Single Market and the Customs Union which will deliver the “exact same benefits” as being inside of the Single Market and the Customs Union.
The tests have been designed so that May must fail them. Any sensible opposition would do that. The whole purpose is to be able to give a speech where Starmer can say 'Fail' six times (though he might have to be imaginative there: number 5 looks particularly achievable).
In fact, I very much doubt that May would want to pass all those tests. Number 2, if taken as a narrow definition, clearly runs counter to the government's objectives; number 3 is definitional but again, immigration control is a core objective of the government and is probably incompatible with the 'test'; number 4 is a two-parter so that the govt can fail the first part and then be criticised on the second; and number 6 is so wide that it's open to just about any interpretation.
So, in summary, Keir Starmer is saying that Labour will try to torpedo any deal with the EU, with the consequences that (a) were they to succeed in voting down the deal, we'd be left with no deal at all, and (b) either way, Labour will be providing the SNP with ammunition to claim that the Brexit deal is a disaster for Scotland.
Mr. Rentool, the Americans have a saying: any noun can be verbed.
...and vice versa unfortunately... My current bete noir is people saying 'that's a big ask'. Shudders....
Isn't this one of the good things about English? It's flexibility.
Those upset by the changing English language presumably excoriate Shakespeare, who not only invented a great many words and re-purposed others but landed the language with any number of cliches too.
The reason Shakespeare was able to be so innovative with his use of language was because he had talent, knowledge, and the benefits of a rudimentary education in the Classics and foreign languages. It is impossible to be "creative" without either knowledge or skill - a point which I would like to make with increasing force to a number of contemporary "artists" and others in the "creative" occupations. Personally, I would rather be regarded as "competent" than "creative".
Just want to clarify something - Labour has said it will not support the final Brexit deal if the six tests aren't met - doesn't that mean that there will then be no deal and we leave on WTO rules?
Yes it's as illogical as wanting a vote on the negotiations. Or a referendum. All they would be doing is giving themselves the right to force WTO rules on us, overriding whatever deal had been negotiated.
LONDON — Labour’s Shadow Brexit secretary Keir Starmer will today set out six impossible conditions for backing Theresa May’s final Brexit deal.
At a speech at Chatham House on Monday morning, Starmer will insist that Labour will only vote in favour of May’s deal if it passes “six tests”.
The tests are:
1. Does it ensure a strong and collaborative future relationship with the EU? 2. Does it deliver the “exact same benefits” as we currently have as members of the Single Market and Customs Union? 3. Does it ensure the fair management of migration in the interests of the economy and communities? 4. Does it defend rights and protections and prevent a race to the bottom? 5. Does it protect national security and our capacity to tackle cross-border crime? 6. Does it deliver for all regions and nations of the UK?
There is no way that May can pass all of these tests.There is simply no deal available outside of the Single Market and the Customs Union which will deliver the “exact same benefits” as being inside of the Single Market and the Customs Union.
Obviously those are absolute positions prior to the commencement of negotiations. In practice, they should be interpreted along the lines of "How far does it..."
As such, I think they are pretty reasonable tests and will be viewed as such by the public, doing Starmer's reputation no harm at all.
And if there is going to be a problem reaching those goals, that could be even more of a problem for May. I suspect that unlike Labour she is not going to sign up wholeheartedly to 4, even though the EU is going to want her to. That will only it more difficult for her to reach a deal which goes some way to satisfying both 2 and 3.
Just want to clarify something - Labour has said it will not support the final Brexit deal if the six tests aren't met - doesn't that mean that there will then be no deal and we leave on WTO rules?
Essentially yes. It's posturing.
It condemns them to either supporting unfettered immigration or tariffs on UK exporters.
Just want to clarify something - Labour has said it will not support the final Brexit deal if the six tests aren't met - doesn't that mean that there will then be no deal and we leave on WTO rules?
May will just have to hope the whipping operation is as good as the one Richard Ryder ran for John Major over Maastricht.
Just want to clarify something - Labour has said it will not support the final Brexit deal if the six tests aren't met - doesn't that mean that there will then be no deal and we leave on WTO rules?
Yes it's as illogical as wanting a vote on the negotiations. Or a referendum. All they would be doing is giving themselves the right to force WTO rules on us, overriding whatever deal had been negotiated.
Remember that the EU will be publishing their negotiating guidelines. It's very unlikely that remaining as we are will not explicitly be on the table from day one.
they are using UK government ESTIMATES, there are no actual statistics that split the revenues, ie they are just made up and could be miles out especially given the UK will always try to show themselves in a good light at the expense of Scotland.
All Statistics use estimates - even the Vicar of Bath approves of GERS:
LONDON — Labour’s Shadow Brexit secretary Keir Starmer will today set out six impossible conditions for backing Theresa May’s final Brexit deal.
At a speech at Chatham House on Monday morning, Starmer will insist that Labour will only vote in favour of May’s deal if it passes “six tests”.
The tests are:
1. Does it ensure a strong and collaborative future relationship with the EU? 2. Does it deliver the “exact same benefits” as we currently have as members of the Single Market and Customs Union? 3. Does it ensure the fair management of migration in the interests of the economy and communities? 4. Does it defend rights and protections and prevent a race to the bottom? 5. Does it protect national security and our capacity to tackle cross-border crime? 6. Does it deliver for all regions and nations of the UK?
There is no way that May can pass all of these tests.There is simply no deal available outside of the Single Market and the Customs Union which will deliver the “exact same benefits” as being inside of the Single Market and the Customs Union.
Scotland has a public sector workforce that is 20% of its total. UK average is 17% Scotland has a £12bn deficit which is nearly a quarter of the UK total.
Of course, Scotland could abandon any financial commitments it might be pressed to make to be part of NATO, the EU, EFTA or in overseas aid to address these money matters.
If it doesn't though, there's a whole lotta cuttin' goin' on.
Only a numpty would buy the 150 bucks a barrel schtick again.
Only a numpty would quote those bollox statistics, all UK government sponsored "estimates". I could easily attribute most of my deficit to Santander and say I am not skint just as UK does.
Agreed. Hosie, Wishart, McAlpine, Swinney, Robertson et al are a prize shower of numpties.
Just want to clarify something - Labour has said it will not support the final Brexit deal if the six tests aren't met - doesn't that mean that there will then be no deal and we leave on WTO rules?
Yes it's as illogical as wanting a vote on the negotiations. Or a referendum. All they would be doing is giving themselves the right to force WTO rules on us, overriding whatever deal had been negotiated.
Remember that the EU will be publishing their negotiating guidelines. It's very unlikely that remaining as we are will not explicitly be on the table from day one.
We shall see. I think there will be some fudge.
So you are saying that the default option written into the agreement will be "if no agreement is reached at the end of two years, then the UK continues to enjoy all the rights and benefits and is liable for all the obligations and costs as currently exist."
Would be super-duper interesting if that was the case. And yes, I think people, and I include myself, have been too fixated on the "no deal = WTO" idea. There will be plenty of creativity.
LONDON — Labour’s Shadow Brexit secretary Keir Starmer will today set out six impossible conditions for backing Theresa May’s final Brexit deal.
At a speech at Chatham House on Monday morning, Starmer will insist that Labour will only vote in favour of May’s deal if it passes “six tests”.
The tests are:
1. Does it ensure a strong and collaborative future relationship with the EU? 2. Does it deliver the “exact same benefits” as we currently have as members of the Single Market and Customs Union? 3. Does it ensure the fair management of migration in the interests of the economy and communities? 4. Does it defend rights and protections and prevent a race to the bottom? 5. Does it protect national security and our capacity to tackle cross-border crime? 6. Does it deliver for all regions and nations of the UK?
There is no way that May can pass all of these tests.There is simply no deal available outside of the Single Market and the Customs Union which will deliver the “exact same benefits” as being inside of the Single Market and the Customs Union.
Finally, finally. Labour is doing something and not sitting on their collective arses. We have to ensure that those Leavers who promised us the single market carries out what they promised.
Comments
You, like one or two Conservatives in the past, have been entirely reasonable and if I offended you for my earlier, apologies. As an LD LEAVE supporter, I know what it's like to be in a minority, believe me.
If we're talking reflexive response, the truth is every time there's a by-election, there's a disproportionate amount of discussion on the LD prospects and indeed a ramping of those prospects by almost everyone except the LDs. I thought we had very good candidates in both Copeland and Stoke Central and we made limited headway but in neither seat were we ever challengers despite the past record.
In Gorton, too, we run the risk of becoming a sideshow if Galloway stands and builds some momentum on the ground. The problem is the LDs cannot afford poor results in the way the Conservatives can - we need, as part of the rebuilding process, to fight every seat while the Conservatives can ignore the likes of Gorton, put in a candidate, finish fifth and no one will care.
There is expectation and expectation management. I've not been to Gorton - I doubt I will go. There are many other County Council seats where activists are working hard in advance of May 4th. I hope for some good results in those elections and, frankly, to take some seats off the Conservatives as well as Labour and UKIP. Whether that will happen remains to be seen - I do think the potential for discontent with the Conservatives being manifest more strongly in local Government than suggested by opinion polls is valid.
But I am sure you were marching on Saturday.
I perceive that the triumvirate of Merkel, May and Trump are all essentially "pay your fair share" conservatives.
I see it with EU spending, NATO commitments and Eurozone bailout demands.
https://twitter.com/dailymailuk/status/846289553262612480
My money was on the collective Tory research dept - same repetition of a few misleading figures, consistent anti-Scottish mind set, bucketful of prejudices etc etc
I have a twitter a/c. I set it up in 2009 for possible business use. I didn't need it. I have sent a grand total of 1 tweet in that time in 2014 to get some free online storage space (Dropbox). I follow just two a/cs which are a local online paper and Dropbox (another requirement of the free space). I have 1 (I assume very disappointed) follower who I assume found me because of the business link (an IT company).
I get regular emails telling me what is happening on twitter. They usually consist of one from the local online paper, occasionally one on another random topic and usually 3 - 6 on American right wing a/cs.
Up until recently I have never looked at any of these type of sites, but I did start following the stuff Plato was posting and found them fascinating, but I have never done anything other than just read them.
Is there any link with my viewing activity (I can not see how there can be, because they are coming via an email that is not associated with my viewing) or do these sites just very actively send out links via twitter emails.
Let us not speak of this again.
...Government figures are reading up on how the SNP was defeated in the 2014 independence referendum in anticipation of another vote.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/25/exclusive-saving-union-scottish-independence-put-heart-brexit/
In the metropolitan elite areas in the southern cities yes they do and they are pretty good at it.
I would expect next year for them to take back both Kingston and Richmond councils and are in with a squeak in Camden. Guildford is a target as is Mole Valley and possibly even Tandridge... elsewhere above the Watford gap..forget it.
1 - appealing to the anti-war / disaffected left vote - covered by Corbyn
2 - appealing to Muslims - covered by Labour's candidate
3 - anti-EU - not going to help in a very pro-remain constituency
The turnout will likely be very low but I can't see the LDs getting within 10% vote share of Labour, even taking into account the possible apathy reported by the MEN. Meanwhile, George may have a battle on his hands even to come third. The reasons above applied in the London mayoral campaign where he bombed, so there's no reason to think it'll be different in Gorton.
The last 4 pages of this are an appendix called "How twitter works". I find it very, very cool that this is an appendix to a High Court judgment - knocks on the head the usual view of judges as needing counsel to explain to them who the Beatles are, m'lud.
Interesting post. You may well be right.
Gordon Brown: he saved the pound, he saved the union, he saved the world. (And he's now officially only the third worst PM ever according to pb Tories, after Heath and Cameron.)
Unfortunately, EUref was run by people who could not find Scotland on a map, and who drew the wrong conclusion so ran an entirely negative campaign against Brexit, which is why they lost.
Are you equally shocked by the use of 'light' as a verb ?
the SNP is now turning towards rubbishing the only available economic statistics that reveal the truth.
Last week a number of senior SNP politicians sought in articles and on social media to rubbish the information provided by GERS, the annual publication of Government Expenditure and Revenue Scotland. What is astonishing about this behaviour is that GERS is published by the SNP Government; it is an official publication overseen by impartial public servants in Scotland using statistics validated as conforming to recognised standards by international institutions. Indeed its past reports provided the basis for independence itself and formed the foundation for the SNP Government’s White Paper of November 2013.
http://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/brian-monteith-snp-government-is-turning-on-its-own-figures-1-4403947
https://twitter.com/AgentP22/status/846127677673275393
My current bete noir is people saying 'that's a big ask'. Shudders....
Cheers.
It turned out he was John Mann Labour MP for Bassetlaw.
It's difficult to tell these days. I think before deciding which way to vote next time I'll look at a cv.
The most up to date figure is not 10.0%, but 10.3%.....
https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/publicsectorpersonnel/bulletins/civilservicestatistics/2016
It's true that verbs make prose more punchy, and that nominalisations are used far too much, but making up verbs from nouns isn't usually the answer.
The answer is using verbs precisely, which means getting a good vocabulary. Otherwise one is left with too much usage of bland verbs such as "do", "give", "get", and "make".
Outside the EU, they are the UKs.
Outside the UK, they are Scotland's.
Outside Scotland, they may belong to the Shetlands etc.
I read an interesting piece last evening that nine major EU nations have set up a European Fisheries Alliance because they are so concerned at the loss of fishing rights in UK waters.
There are some interesting figures on fish consumption and given that it is widely regarded that fish is especially healthy food it seems that we have developed a very strange economic and consumption model in relation to it. These things seem to get lost in the core tribalism of these referendum discussions.
https://order-order.com/2017/03/27/nige-vs-bad-al-campbell-brexit-bust/
Any small country outside a large defence block could well be running substantial risks if it hasn't created its own autonomous highly-developed cyber-defence.
Pissing off Osborne big time would have been a bonus.
LONDON — Labour’s Shadow Brexit secretary Keir Starmer will today set out six impossible conditions for backing Theresa May’s final Brexit deal.
At a speech at Chatham House on Monday morning, Starmer will insist that Labour will only vote in favour of May’s deal if it passes “six tests”.
The tests are:
1. Does it ensure a strong and collaborative future relationship with the EU?
2. Does it deliver the “exact same benefits” as we currently have as members of the Single Market and Customs Union?
3. Does it ensure the fair management of migration in the interests of the economy and communities?
4. Does it defend rights and protections and prevent a race to the bottom?
5. Does it protect national security and our capacity to tackle cross-border crime?
6. Does it deliver for all regions and nations of the UK?
There is no way that May can pass all of these tests.There is simply no deal available outside of the Single Market and the Customs Union which will deliver the “exact same benefits” as being inside of the Single Market and the Customs Union.
http://www.businessinsider.co.id/labours-keir-starmer-article-50-brexit-deal-six-tests-wto-2017-3/?r=UK&IR=T#xzyp7FqCsIKwXUkl.97
Edited extra bit: which reminds me, you're the chap who (as well as me) watched Checkpoint, right?
Ever see Unskippable? They've made a very similar sort of thing, but 30 minutes long, called Running Start. First episode is called The First Templar.
Funny that, they used to be:
https://twitter.com/JstOpinion/status/846110777895522304
2 and 3 are incompatible - EU to blame.99% is achievable.
4 is simply nonsense. What is the minimum wage in Latvia? How about the corporation tax rate in Ireland? The EUs lack of uniformity creates the race to the bottom.
I must warn you that Paul now has a beard.
https://twitter.com/WingsScotland__/status/845380440089341952
In fact, I very much doubt that May would want to pass all those tests. Number 2, if taken as a narrow definition, clearly runs counter to the government's objectives; number 3 is definitional but again, immigration control is a core objective of the government and is probably incompatible with the 'test'; number 4 is a two-parter so that the govt can fail the first part and then be criticised on the second; and number 6 is so wide that it's open to just about any interpretation.
As such, I think they are pretty reasonable tests and will be viewed as such by the public, doing Starmer's reputation no harm at all.
And if there is going to be a problem reaching those goals, that could be even more of a problem for May. I suspect that unlike Labour she is not going to sign up wholeheartedly to 4, even though the EU is going to want her to. That will only it more difficult for her to reach a deal which goes some way to satisfying both 2 and 3.
It condemns them to either supporting unfettered immigration or tariffs on UK exporters.
https://twitter.com/WingsScotland/status/845462408353206272
https://twitter.com/paulieboy1/status/845572939642785793
So you are saying that the default option written into the agreement will be "if no agreement is reached at the end of two years, then the UK continues to enjoy all the rights and benefits and is liable for all the obligations and costs as currently exist."
Would be super-duper interesting if that was the case. And yes, I think people, and I include myself, have been too fixated on the "no deal = WTO" idea. There will be plenty of creativity.