Governments are there to spend taxpayers money. The question is whether they spend it in an efficient and equitable way. Providing financial support to two children, but not a third, seems to fail both tests, logically.
Why? For a starter, the incremental running costs of the third child are less than the running costs of the first. Secondly, most freebies are capped, why not the number of children we pay for? Thirdly, it's up to parents to take personal responsibility for whether they are in a financial position to afford more children. And fourthly, the previous system was being disgracefully abused.
For a starter ... I don't have a problem with discounting subsequent children if costs can be reduced and still maintain the same level of effective benefit. However that discount would likely apply for the second child and taper from there.
Secondly ... If you think of children as freebie generators rather than individuals with real needs. Older couples don't get one free bus pass between them. Children aren't educated at state expense, or not, depending on how many siblings they have.
Thirdly ... A fair point but ultimately irrelevant to whether it's a good idea for the State to provide benefits for children. It comes back to the second point above. I accept some people may think that child benefit shouldn't exist at all and that would be a logical position to take.
Fourthly ... It's up to the government to limit abuse in a fair way, as with any benefit. This seems a completely arbitrary policy.
Exhaustion of natural resources due to overpopulation is not a problem in this country. It makes sense to aim for a birthrate of 2.1-2.2 rather than the current 1.8-1.9.
Water in the South East is, I read, becoming a big problem. Apparently they cannot take much more out of the rivers without causing major damage and the aquifers will not cope with the projected increase in population. So your point may not hold everywhere.
There is also the problem of non-natural resources. I am thinking here of things like roads, sewage disposal, railways etc.. The railways are already stretched to breaking point, the roads are becoming more and more gummed up (e.g. getting round past Heathrow without hitting a major delay is becoming rarer and rarer, even the M23 is becoming choked) and so on.
Yet the policy is to keep increasing the population without the necessary concomitant investment in infrastructure.
Thames Water wanted to build a large reservoir at Abingdon but the planners/regulators turned it down in 2011 and told them to plug the leaking pipes instead.
The company still want to build a reservoir but are unlikely to get permission.
I wonder whether there is any merit at all in some variant of the standard pub answer - "well, you just pump it down from Kielder, they've got loads of water". My understanding is that any plan involving long distance pumping at the volumes needed is stupendously expensive and impractical (for something as cheap as water), but given that the Thirlmere aquaduct supplies Manchester with Lake District water from 100 miles away, are any broadly downhill connections of the rivers north and south of Birmingham possible that could provide a link between northern and southern reservoir systems?
Off the top of my head, I'd be thinking of 3 converging north-side inlets, from the Severn somewhere in Shropshire, somewhere high enough on the southbound upper Trent, and somewhere on the Derbyshire Derwent, perhaps via the Warwickshire Avon and onwards to low enough on the Kennet or some such. If practical that could channel a semi-decent amount of catchment from the Welsh mountains and Peak District in the direction of London.
As ever, I will happily concede the possibility that I am talking out of my hat - after all, it has been known.
Just watching 'Westminster In Review' on BBC. Coverage of the Article 50 debate, after brief clips of David Davis and Keir Starmer, comprised:
Pro-Government: Bill Cash (brief) Nicky Morgan (brief, half of which taken up by her telling us she voted 'Remain') Gerald Howarth (brief)
Anti-Government: Stephen Gethins (brief) Nick Clegg (brief) Ken Clarke (extended) Tulip Siddiq (brief) Mary Creagh (extended) Claire Perry (extended) Alex Salmond (extended)
They then showed the clip of ardent Remainers singing the 'Ode to Joy' in te chamber, with the presenter of the programme likening them to the band playing as the 'Titanic' sank.
I shall be complaining to the BBC (not that I expect much)
I shall paraphrase the response you will get...after careful investigation we believe the BBC got it just about right.
I got in trouble last year for using the term brain storm, which I was told was offensive to those with epilepsy. When I said oh has somebody here got it, it was told no thats not the point.
I have epilepsy, and I can't say it would have occurred to me that that might be offensive.
I was told the preferred term was "Thought Shower"....
I thought that sounds like a shower of shit...not sure that was the point of the exercise.
Out of interest, are there any current figures on Leavers' economic confidence vs Remainers'? I would expect Leavers to have a rosier view of our post-Brexit chances (he says, stating the bleedin' obvious), and therefore a majority-Remain area like Scotland to be more pessimistic than the majority-Leave UK.
Scanning the responses to a piece by David Baddiel about Ken Livingstone, what's shocking is the number of people saying that they hadn't understood why his comments were offensive until it was explained in detail. "Ken stated a fact" seems to be a very common view among his natural supporters.
Baddiel is being too kind to Livingstone and other left-wing Jew-baiters. In going on relentlessly about supposed Zionist accommodations with Hitler, Livingstone is implying that to some extent at least the Jews aided and abetted their own annihilation. That is just despicable.
Surely Livingstone's point is that some German Jews aided and abbetted their own move from Germany to Israel.
Under duress after having already had their property seized.
I wonder whether there is any merit at all in some variant of the standard pub answer - "well, you just pump it down from Kielder, they've got loads of water". My understanding is that any plan involving long distance pumping at the volumes needed is stupendously expensive and impractical (for something as cheap as water), but given that the Thirlmere aquaduct supplies Manchester with Lake District water from 100 miles away, are any broadly downhill connections of the rivers north and south of Birmingham possible that could provide a link between northern and southern reservoir systems?
There is the long-mooted suggestion to restore the Thames & Severn Canal and use that to transfer water from Severn to Thames (in the same way that the Llangollen Canal supplies Crewe's water from Wales, etc.). Invasive species are always cited as a concern.
There could be a snowball effect for Melenchon here - now that he is looking so close to overtaking Fillon, it will become the narrative and I wouldn't be surprised to see Hamon do even worse on the night, and the mini candidates lose their bounce, pushing Melenchon up to 19/20%.
Has Macron peaked too soon? If support for Mélenchon continues to increase, then surely it will principally be at the expense of Macron in terms of the three front runners.
Not so sure about that. Up until now, Melenchon's increase in support has come mainly at the expense of Hamon. However, there are an unusually large number of undecided voters in France this time around and it could be that Melenchon picks up more than his share of those undecided, influenced by the TV debates, and that all three of the front runners suffer equally.
Hamon took votes from Melenchon, who has taken them back.
I got in trouble last year for using the term brain storm, which I was told was offensive to those with epilepsy. When I said oh has somebody here got it, it was told no thats not the point.
I have epilepsy, and I can't say it would have occurred to me that that might be offensive.
I was told the preferred term was "Thought Shower"....
I thought that sounds like a shower of shit...not sure that was the point of the exercise.
"Thought shower" is meaningless bollocks.
That is the point, though, isn't it? I think there are two kinds of PC speech. There is the kind that is just good manners and having a little care for the effect your words may have on people, and there is the meaningless bollocks kind that is primarily meant to send out a certain sort of message about the speaker.
And imagine the headlines the first time someone makes what she believes to be a legitimate claim only to be knocked back by something in the small print.
Edit: I think I'm replying to Ishmael. One day I'll get the hang of block quotes.
Yes you were and that was an epic quote fail by me, not you.
Scanning the responses to a piece by David Baddiel about Ken Livingstone, what's shocking is the number of people saying that they hadn't understood why his comments were offensive until it was explained in detail. "Ken stated a fact" seems to be a very common view among his natural supporters.
Baddiel is being too kind to Livingstone and other left-wing Jew-baiters. In going on relentlessly about supposed Zionist accommodations with Hitler, Livingstone is implying that to some extent at least the Jews aided and abetted their own annihilation. That is just despicable.
Surely Livingstone's point is that some German Jews aided and abbetted their own move from Germany to Israel.
The problem as I see it is KL makes it sound as though it was a neutral common sense agreement w Hitler rather than ethnic cleansing
What? That is back to front: it was a neutral common sense agreement, and Livingstone is trying to make it sound like [Jews cooperating in] ethnic cleansing. None of this is historically controversial; "final solution" means the solution eventually settled on after previous solutions (expulsion to Israel/Madagascar/the rest of the world) had not worked. Livingstone's offence is not in the main misrepresenting the truth*, but stating it in a way designed to generate misinterpretations.
* that is, about the existence of the Agreement. His subsidiary claims about Hitler approving the flying of the Zionist flag in Germany are bonkers.
It is not a neutral common sense agreement.
If tonight the British government rounded up all your property in the middle of the night and then said 'get out the country never to return and we will return your property to you' would your agreeing to that mean the agreement was neutral and common sense?
Just watching 'Westminster In Review' on BBC. Coverage of the Article 50 debate, after brief clips of David Davis and Keir Starmer, comprised:
Pro-Government: Bill Cash (brief) Nicky Morgan (brief, half of which taken up by her telling us she voted 'Remain') Gerald Howarth (brief)
Anti-Government: Stephen Gethins (brief) Nick Clegg (brief) Ken Clarke (extended) Tulip Siddiq (brief) Mary Creagh (extended) Claire Perry (extended) Alex Salmond (extended)
They then showed the clip of ardent Remainers singing the 'Ode to Joy' in te chamber, with the presenter of the programme likening them to the band playing as the 'Titanic' sank.
I shall be complaining to the BBC (not that I expect much)
Disgusting. The dubious quality of the government defenders selected by the KGBBC is obviously part of a sinister plot.
There could be a snowball effect for Melenchon here - now that he is looking so close to overtaking Fillon, it will become the narrative and I wouldn't be surprised to see Hamon do even worse on the night, and the mini candidates lose their bounce, pushing Melenchon up to 19/20%.
Has Macron peaked too soon? If support for Mélenchon continues to increase, then surely it will principally be at the expense of Macron in terms of the three front runners.
Not so sure about that. Up until now, Melenchon's increase in support has come mainly at the expense of Hamon. However, there are an unusually large number of undecided voters in France this time around and it could be that Melenchon picks up more than his share of those undecided, influenced by the TV debates, and that all three of the front runners suffer equally.
It could be both Hamon and Macron. Melenchon has been fishing in Hamon's pool so far, and I think he can squeeze more out of him yet, but it's a good point about Macron, especially considering his support is one of the flakiest of the main candidates. While to us anoraks their programs are very far apart, to those less devoted followers it's not unreasonable to switch from Macron to Melenchon. My own girlfrend is a big fan of Melenchon and has considered voting for him despite being far closer to Macron on the issues. He is seen as a very authentic candidate, rare amongst the current crop.
Coordinated with Carswell I assume they left the Tories together from UKIP and are now going back together though Reckless has now managed the unique feat of uniting Cameroons like TSE and Kippers in equal loathing of him
As Reckless says it also means the Tories and Plaid are now tied in the Welsh Assembly
Scanning the responses to a piece by David Baddiel about Ken Livingstone, what's shocking is the number of people saying that they hadn't understood why his comments were offensive until it was explained in detail. "Ken stated a fact" seems to be a very common view among his natural supporters.
Baddiel is being too kind to Livingstone and other left-wing Jew-baiters. In going on relentlessly about supposed Zionist accommodations with Hitler, Livingstone is implying that to some extent at least the Jews aided and abetted their own annihilation. That is just despicable.
Surely Livingstone's point is that some German Jews aided and abbetted their own move from Germany to Israel.
The problem as I see it is KL makes it sound as though it was a neutral common sense agreement w Hitler rather than ethnic cleansing
What? That is back to front: it was a neutral common sense agreement, and Livingstone is trying to make it sound like [Jews cooperating in] ethnic cleansing. None of this is historically controversial; "final solution" means the solution eventually settled on after previous solutions (expulsion to Israel/Madagascar/the rest of the world) had not worked. Livingstone's offence is not in the main misrepresenting the truth*, but stating it in a way designed to generate misinterpretations.
* that is, about the existence of the Agreement. His subsidiary claims about Hitler approving the flying of the Zionist flag in Germany are bonkers.
It is not a neutral common sense agreement.
If tonight the British government rounded up all your property in the middle of the night and then said 'get out the country never to return and we will return your property to you' would your agreeing to that mean the agreement was neutral and common sense?
Yes, if I knew that the other solutions to my continuing presence in the country the British government had in mind were those that Hitler was known to have in mind at the time of the agreement. If your point is that Hitler wasn't very nice, it is a valid one. What Livingstone is (I think) trying to derive from the history is that Hitler was secretly pro-Jew and vice versa. My point is that the existence of the agreement is evidence of nothing more than rational self-interest on both sides, given ultimate objectives of freeing Germany of Jews on the one hand, and remaining alive on the other.
There could be a snowball effect for Melenchon here - now that he is looking so close to overtaking Fillon, it will become the narrative and I wouldn't be surprised to see Hamon do even worse on the night, and the mini candidates lose their bounce, pushing Melenchon up to 19/20%.
Has Macron peaked too soon? If support for Mélenchon continues to increase, then surely it will principally be at the expense of Macron in terms of the three front runners.
Not so sure about that. Up until now, Melenchon's increase in support has come mainly at the expense of Hamon. However, there are an unusually large number of undecided voters in France this time around and it could be that Melenchon picks up more than his share of those undecided, influenced by the TV debates, and that all three of the front runners suffer equally.
It could be both Hamon and Macron. Melenchon has been fishing in Hamon's pool so far, and I think he can squeeze more out of him yet, but it's a good point about Macron, especially considering his support is one of the flakiest of the main candidates. While to us anoraks their programs are very far apart, to those less devoted followers it's not unreasonable to switch from Macron to Melenchon. My own girlfrend is a big fan of Melenchon and has considered voting for him despite being far closer to Macron on the issues. He is seen as a very authentic candidate, rare amongst the current crop.
Coordinated with Carswell I assume they left the Tories together from UKIP and are now going back together though Reckless has now managed the unique feat of uniting Cameroons like TSE and Kippers in equal loathing of him
As Reckless says it also means the Tories and Plaid are now tied in the Welsh Assembly
I don't think kippers hate Reckless. Farage spoke well of him just yesterday
Coordinated with Carswell I assume they left the Tories together from UKIP and are now going back together though Reckless has now managed the unique feat of uniting Cameroons like TSE and Kippers in equal loathing of him
As Reckless says it also means the Tories and Plaid are now tied in the Welsh Assembly
I don't think kippers hate Reckless. Farage spoke well of him just yesterday
Exhaustion of natural resources due to overpopulation is not a problem in this country. It makes sense to aim for a birthrate of 2.1-2.2 rather than the current 1.8-1.9.
Water in the South East is, I read, becoming a big problem. Apparently they cannot take much more out of the rivers without causing major damage and the aquifers will not cope with the projected increase in population. So your point may not hold everywhere.
There is also the problem of non-natural resources. I am thinking here of things like roads, sewage disposal, railways etc.. The railways are already stretched to breaking point, the roads are becoming more and more gummed up (e.g. getting round past Heathrow without hitting a major delay is becoming rarer and rarer, even the M23 is becoming choked) and so on.
Yet the policy is to keep increasing the population without the necessary concomitant investment in infrastructure.
Thames Water wanted to build a large reservoir at Abingdon but the planners/regulators turned it down in 2011 and told them to plug the leaking pipes instead.
The company still want to build a reservoir but are unlikely to get permission.
I wonder whether there is any merit at all in some variant of the standard pub answer - "well, you just pump it down from Kielder, they've got loads of water". My understanding is that any plan involving long distance pumping at the volumes needed is stupendously expensive and impractical (for something as cheap as water), but given that the Thirlmere aquaduct supplies Manchester with Lake District water from 100 miles away, are any broadly downhill connections of the rivers north and south of Birmingham possible that could provide a link between northern and southern reservoir systems?
Off the top of my head, I'd be thinking of 3 converging north-side inlets, from the Severn somewhere in Shropshire, somewhere high enough on the southbound upper Trent, and somewhere on the Derbyshire Derwent, perhaps via the Warwickshire Avon and onwards to low enough on the Kennet or some such. If practical that could channel a semi-decent amount of catchment from the Welsh mountains and Peak District in the direction of London.
As ever, I will happily concede the possibility that I am talking out of my hat - after all, it has been known.
Alternatively we could just place a number of serially sinking boats on rivers from North to South then stick Mark Reckless on the northernmost one with a large bucket in his hand. Sort of like political Frogger/Crossy Road.
Scanning the responses to a piece by David Baddiel about Ken Livingstone, what's shocking is the number of people saying that they hadn't understood why his comments were offensive until it was explained in detail. "Ken stated a fact" seems to be a very common view among his natural supporters.
Baddiel is being too kind to Livingstone and other left-wing Jew-baiters. In going on relentlessly about supposed Zionist accommodations with Hitler, Livingstone is implying that to some extent at least the Jews aided and abetted their own annihilation. That is just despicable.
Surely Livingstone's point is that some German Jews aided and abbetted their own move from Germany to Israel.
The problem as I see it is KL makes it sound as though it was a neutral common sense agreement w Hitler rather than ethnic cleansing
What? That is back to front: it was a neutral common sense agreement, and Livingstone is trying to make it sound like [Jews cooperating in] ethnic cleansing. None of this is historically controversial; "final solution" means the solution eventually settled on after previous solutions (expulsion to Israel/Madagascar/the rest of the world) had not worked. Livingstone's offence is not in the main misrepresenting the truth*, but stating it in a way designed to generate misinterpretations.
* that is, about the existence of the Agreement. His subsidiary claims about Hitler approving the flying of the Zionist flag in Germany are bonkers.
It is not a neutral common sense agreement.
If tonight the British government rounded up all your property in the middle of the night and then said 'get out the country never to return and we will return your property to you' would your agreeing to that mean the agreement was neutral and common sense?
Re: aiding and abetting argument. Some Jews did vote for the Nazis in 1933. They had no idea of course what was coming and according to Snyder did so, "hoping this gesture of loyalty would bind the new system to them."
Coordinated with Carswell I assume they left the Tories together from UKIP and are now going back together though Reckless has now managed the unique feat of uniting Cameroons like TSE and Kippers in equal loathing of him
As Reckless says it also means the Tories and Plaid are now tied in the Welsh Assembly
I don't think kippers hate Reckless. Farage spoke well of him just yesterday
Which doesn't account for the differential growth rates between Scotland and rUK - as both are Brexiting.....
TBF, oil and finance, which are disproportionately heavy sectors in Scotland, account for most, perhaps all, the differential growth rates between Scotland and rUK. The SNP government is mediocre, but not everything bad is their fault.
""While the downturn in the oil and gas sector remains part of the explanation, it is difficult to ignore the substantial declines in construction over the past year (-6%) or in manufacturing (-7.3%) - with all areas of manufacturing, not just those tied to the North Sea supply chain, shrinking during 2016.""
All the spending being concentrated in London and south east as usual, that is UK policy.
The SNP have been found out. It's the economy, turnip.
Carlotta's little helper pops up , Big Momma struggling so junior gets kicked on stage
Excellent defence of the SNP's economic record!
Just what they deserve!
Yes , they balance their budget year in and year out, if only Westminster could manage that we would not have to listen to the guff on here about deficits.
@SkyNewsBreak: The Conservative party says Mark Reckless will be treated as a member of the group in the Welsh Assembly but is not re-joining the party
They have fallen between two stools - the clear options were to not allow an exception for rape victims, or not to have the limit at all.
I have noticed that has crept into the lexicon of victims of a range of crimes (not just rape) and other things like mental health, anorexia, etc...
Clearly victim or sufferer is not PC anymore. I better be careful otherwise I might have the thought-mob on me for using the incorrect terminology.
I got in trouble last year for using the term brain storm, which I was told was offensive to those with epilepsy. When I said oh has somebody here got it, it was told no thats not the point. I didn't bother telling them the next day I had similar session with a friend who does and they had arranged it.
You should have told the cretin to go do one and attempt to get a life.
Which doesn't account for the differential growth rates between Scotland and rUK - as both are Brexiting.....
TBF, oil and finance, which are disproportionately heavy sectors in Scotland, account for most, perhaps all, the differential growth rates between Scotland and rUK. The SNP government is mediocre, but not everything bad is their fault.
""While the downturn in the oil and gas sector remains part of the explanation, it is difficult to ignore the substantial declines in construction over the past year (-6%) or in manufacturing (-7.3%) - with all areas of manufacturing, not just those tied to the North Sea supply chain, shrinking during 2016.""
All the spending being concentrated in London and south east as usual, that is UK policy.
The SNP have been found out. It's the economy, turnip.
Carlotta's little helper pops up , Big Momma struggling so junior gets kicked on stage
Excellent defence of the SNP's economic record!
Just what they deserve!
Yes , they balance their budget year in and year out, if only Westminster could manage that we would not have to listen to the guff on here about deficits.
Which doesn't account for the differential growth rates between Scotland and rUK - as both are Brexiting.....
TBF, oil and finance, which are disproportionately heavy sectors in Scotland, account for most, perhaps all, the differential growth rates between Scotland and rUK. The SNP government is mediocre, but not everything bad is their fault.
""While the downturn in the oil and gas sector remains part of the explanation, it is difficult to ignore the substantial declines in construction over the past year (-6%) or in manufacturing (-7.3%) - with all areas of manufacturing, not just those tied to the North Sea supply chain, shrinking during 2016.""
All the spending being concentrated in London and south east as usual, that is UK policy.
The SNP have been found out. It's the economy, turnip.
Carlotta's little helper pops up , Big Momma struggling so junior gets kicked on stage
Excellent defence of the SNP's economic record!
Just what they deserve!
Yes , they balance their budget year in and year out, if only Westminster could manage that we would not have to listen to the guff on here about deficits.
Ha Ha Ha , next we will be told it is Greg Clark that i sselling the bombs to the Saudis and St Theresa is just on her Easter holidays at great public expense. Get a grip.
Which doesn't account for the differential growth rates between Scotland and rUK - as both are Brexiting.....
TBF, oil and finance, which are disproportionately heavy sectors in Scotland, account for most, perhaps all, the differential growth rates between Scotland and rUK. The SNP government is mediocre, but not everything bad is their fault.
""While the downturn in the oil and gas sector remains part of the explanation, it is difficult to ignore the substantial declines in construction over the past year (-6%) or in manufacturing (-7.3%) - with all areas of manufacturing, not just those tied to the North Sea supply chain, shrinking during 2016.""
All the spending being concentrated in London and south east as usual, that is UK policy.
The SNP have been found out. It's the economy, turnip.
Carlotta's little helper pops up , Big Momma struggling so junior gets kicked on stage
Excellent defence of the SNP's economic record!
Just what they deserve!
Yes , they balance their budget year in and year out, if only Westminster could manage that we would not have to listen to the guff on here about deficits.
Can Holyrood raise money on the open market?
NO , they can borrow a few quid from Westminster at most. Westminster does teh borrowing and blames it on Scotland, what a laugh.
Which doesn't account for the differential growth rates between Scotland and rUK - as both are Brexiting.....
TBF, oil and finance, which are disproportionately heavy sectors in Scotland, account for most, perhaps all, the differential growth rates between Scotland and rUK. The SNP government is mediocre, but not everything bad is their fault.
""While the downturn in the oil and gas sector remains part of the explanation, it is difficult to ignore the substantial declines in construction over the past year (-6%) or in manufacturing (-7.3%) - with all areas of manufacturing, not just those tied to the North Sea supply chain, shrinking during 2016.""
All the spending being concentrated in London and south east as usual, that is UK policy.
The SNP have been found out. It's the economy, turnip.
Carlotta's little helper pops up , Big Momma struggling so junior gets kicked on stage
Excellent defence of the SNP's economic record!
Just what they deserve!
Yes , they balance their budget year in and year out, if only Westminster could manage that we would not have to listen to the guff on here about deficits.
Aren't they legally required to?
Time the wasters in Westminster had only pocket money and working on same rules. It should be law that these useless arses should not be allowed to borrow money , lay the blame on Scotland and make Scotland pay for their mistakes.
Which doesn't account for the differential growth rates between Scotland and rUK - as both are Brexiting.....
TBF, oil and finance, which are disproportionately heavy sectors in Scotland, account for most, perhaps all, the differential growth rates between Scotland and rUK. The SNP government is mediocre, but not everything bad is their fault.
""While the downturn in the oil and gas sector remains part of the explanation, it is difficult to ignore the substantial declines in construction over the past year (-6%) or in manufacturing (-7.3%) - with all areas of manufacturing, not just those tied to the North Sea supply chain, shrinking during 2016.""
All the spending being concentrated in London and south east as usual, that is UK policy.
The SNP have been found out. It's the economy, turnip.
Carlotta's little helper pops up , Big Momma struggling so junior gets kicked on stage
Excellent defence of the SNP's economic record!
Just what they deserve!
Yes , they balance their budget year in and year out, if only Westminster could manage that we would not have to listen to the guff on here about deficits.
Can Holyrood raise money on the open market?
NO , they can borrow a few quid from Westminster at most. Westminster does teh borrowing and blames it on Scotland, what a laugh.
"The Scottish Government has the option of borrowing from the National Loan Fund (NLF), commercial lenders and, as of April this year, issuing Scottish Government bonds."
Unlike Cameron, who was never regarded by MPs as "one of them", May has forged warm relations through policies such as grammar schools and a more traditional line on climate change and international aid. Crucially, the country also likes the PM. Under May, the Tories have enjoyed their best poll ratings since returning to government. While Labour MPs grow more rebellious in times of political success, their Conservative counterparts tend to respect it. Cameron's worst period coincided with the 2012 "omnishambles" Budget, forcing him to concede a referendum the following January. Under the former PM, some Tory MPs viewed defeat to Labour as inevitable, they are now urged by ministers not to jeopardise what most regard as inevitable victory at the next election.
Which doesn't account for the differential growth rates between Scotland and rUK - as both are Brexiting.....
TBF, oil and finance, which are disproportionately heavy sectors in Scotland, account for most, perhaps all, the differential growth rates between Scotland and rUK. The SNP government is mediocre, but not everything bad is their fault.
""While the downturn in the oil and gas sector remains part of the explanation, it is difficult to ignore the substantial declines in construction over the past year (-6%) or in manufacturing (-7.3%) - with all areas of manufacturing, not just those tied to the North Sea supply chain, shrinking during 2016.""
All the spending being concentrated in London and south east as usual, that is UK policy.
The SNP have been found out. It's the economy, turnip.
Carlotta's little helper pops up , Big Momma struggling so junior gets kicked on stage
Excellent defence of the SNP's economic record!
Just what they deserve!
Yes , they balance their budget year in and year out, if only Westminster could manage that we would not have to listen to the guff on here about deficits.
Can Holyrood raise money on the open market?
very very very limited, not enpough that could make any difference
Which doesn't account for the differential growth rates between Scotland and rUK - as both are Brexiting.....
TBF, oil and finance, which are disproportionately heavy sectors in Scotland, account for most, perhaps all, the differential growth rates between Scotland and rUK. The SNP government is mediocre, but not everything bad is their fault.
""While the downturn in the oil and gas sector remains part of the explanation, it is difficult to ignore the substantial declines in construction over the past year (-6%) or in manufacturing (-7.3%) - with all areas of manufacturing, not just those tied to the North Sea supply chain, shrinking during 2016.""
All the spending being concentrated in London and south east as usual, that is UK policy.
The SNP have been found out. It's the economy, turnip.
Carlotta's little helper pops up , Big Momma struggling so junior gets kicked on stage
Excellent defence of the SNP's economic record!
Just what they deserve!
Yes , they balance their budget year in and year out, if only Westminster could manage that we would not have to listen to the guff on here about deficits.
Can Holyrood raise money on the open market?
NO , they can borrow a few quid from Westminster at most. Westminster does teh borrowing and blames it on Scotland, what a laugh.
"The Scottish Government has the option of borrowing from the National Loan Fund (NLF), commercial lenders and, as of April this year, issuing Scottish Government bonds."
No more news yet on the story about confidential police documents being found at the French National Front's HQ.
As I understand it, they were found in February this year, but their status as police documents that were supposed to be confidential was only revealed yesterday.
This is not to be confused with the raid of February 2016, on which occasion Le Pen filmed the police with her mobile phone, and when they asked her to stop she famously "wedged" it between her tits, continuing to film and daring them to come and get it. (Report in the Times.)
Which doesn't account for the differential growth rates between Scotland and rUK - as both are Brexiting.....
TBF, oil and finance, which are disproportionately heavy sectors in Scotland, account for most, perhaps all, the differential growth rates between Scotland and rUK. The SNP government is mediocre, but not everything bad is their fault.
""While the downturn in the oil and gas sector remains part of the explanation, it is difficult to ignore the substantial declines in construction over the past year (-6%) or in manufacturing (-7.3%) - with all areas of manufacturing, not just those tied to the North Sea supply chain, shrinking during 2016.""
All the spending being concentrated in London and south east as usual, that is UK policy.
The SNP have been found out. It's the economy, turnip.
Carlotta's little helper pops up , Big Momma struggling so junior gets kicked on stage
Excellent defence of the SNP's economic record!
Just what they deserve!
Yes , they balance their budget year in and year out, if only Westminster could manage that we would not have to listen to the guff on here about deficits.
Can Holyrood raise money on the open market?
NO , they can borrow a few quid from Westminster at most. Westminster does teh borrowing and blames it on Scotland, what a laugh.
"The Scottish Government has the option of borrowing from the National Loan Fund (NLF), commercial lenders and, as of April this year, issuing Scottish Government bonds."
Comments
Secondly ... If you think of children as freebie generators rather than individuals with real needs. Older couples don't get one free bus pass between them. Children aren't educated at state expense, or not, depending on how many siblings they have.
Thirdly ... A fair point but ultimately irrelevant to whether it's a good idea for the State to provide benefits for children. It comes back to the second point above. I accept some people may think that child benefit shouldn't exist at all and that would be a logical position to take.
Fourthly ... It's up to the government to limit abuse in a fair way, as with any benefit. This seems a completely arbitrary policy.
Off the top of my head, I'd be thinking of 3 converging north-side inlets, from the Severn somewhere in Shropshire, somewhere high enough on the southbound upper Trent, and somewhere on the Derbyshire Derwent, perhaps via the Warwickshire Avon and onwards to low enough on the Kennet or some such. If practical that could channel a semi-decent amount of catchment from the Welsh mountains and Peak District in the direction of London.
As ever, I will happily concede the possibility that I am talking out of my hat - after all, it has been known.
I thought that sounds like a shower of shit...not sure that was the point of the exercise.
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/830011/snp-nicola-sturgeon-angus-robertson-investment-us/?CMP=Spklr-_-Editorial-_-ScottishSun-_-News-_-FBLink-_-Statement-_-TWITTER
That is the point, though, isn't it? I think there are two kinds of PC speech. There is the kind that is just good manners and having a little care for the effect your words may have on people, and there is the meaningless bollocks kind that is primarily meant to send out a certain sort of message about the speaker.
Thought shower my arse.
If tonight the British government rounded up all your property in the middle of the night and then said 'get out the country never to return and we will return your property to you' would your agreeing to that mean the agreement was neutral and common sense?
@fperraudin: Speaking to ITV news, Corbyn says he has asked Ken Livingstone not to make anymore public comments on the subject of Hitler and Zionism
The dubious quality of the government defenders selected by the KGBBC is obviously part of a sinister plot.
Damning.
As Reckless says it also means the Tories and Plaid are now tied in the Welsh Assembly
https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/849956990851973120
EDIT although...
https://twitter.com/realarehman/status/849944066569764864
On France, I now think a Melenchon win would be the funniest outcome.
It's probably the shoes. I think I'd find them off putting if I were a deity.
It looks as though that is still the state of play, as Reckless is an Independent who will vote with the Tories.
"The Scottish Government has the option of borrowing from the National Loan Fund (NLF), commercial lenders and, as of April this year, issuing Scottish Government bonds."
http://www.niesr.ac.uk/blog/scotland’s-fiscal-framework#.WOY124WcFFo
NEW THREAD
Unlike Cameron, who was never regarded by MPs as "one of them", May has forged warm relations through policies such as grammar schools and a more traditional line on climate change and international aid. Crucially, the country also likes the PM. Under May, the Tories have enjoyed their best poll ratings since returning to government. While Labour MPs grow more rebellious in times of political success, their Conservative counterparts tend to respect it. Cameron's worst period coincided with the 2012 "omnishambles" Budget, forcing him to concede a referendum the following January. Under the former PM, some Tory MPs viewed defeat to Labour as inevitable, they are now urged by ministers not to jeopardise what most regard as inevitable victory at the next election.
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2017/04/theresa-may-softens-her-brexit-why-are-tory-mps-so-calm
As I understand it, they were found in February this year, but their status as police documents that were supposed to be confidential was only revealed yesterday.
This is not to be confused with the raid of February 2016, on which occasion Le Pen filmed the police with her mobile phone, and when they asked her to stop she famously "wedged" it between her tits, continuing to film and daring them to come and get it. (Report in the Times.)