Jeremy Hunt was warned last year of 'urgent' need to update NHS cyber security
The Care Quality Commission wrote to the Health Secretary about the urgent need to update NHS software to prevent cyberattacks. A contract with Microsoft to update Windows XP security patches had been allowed to expire in 2015. FOI requests revealed defunct systems were still in use across the NHS. Hospitals were crippled on Friday following widespread "ransomware" attacks. Liberal Democrats are calling for an inquiry into the failure.
What surprised me about the widespread disruption in the NHS caused by out of date IT protection was the extent to which Microsoft Windows XP was still in such general use throughout the organisation. XP was introduced as long ago as October 2001 and was discontinued as a factory fitted option in June 2008, i.e. almost NINE years ago. Yet whenever I visit a hospital and that's been quite a few times, involving a number of different locations over the past five years or so, all the equipment on display, including its computers appears top of the market, no expense spared, new or nearly new. It's amazing to think that since XP, we have had Vista, Windows 7, 8 and now 10. But seemingly the NHS which repeatedly gives the impression of having chucked at it at every turn is labouring away with crucial pieces of kit which is between 9 and 16 years old.
At a consumer level, replacing a Windows OS on an existing machine is such a time-consuming pita, with no guarantee of a happy ending, that it's easier to stick with the old OS or buy a new computer.
It doesn't have to be this way, it took five minutes with the old Mac OSes (up to 9 - don't know about more recent versions) and with the more user friendly linux distros.
Some anecdata from dinner last night (leaving do for a member of staff):
Afro carribean 50 something voting Labour, both daughters doing so too. No real liking of Jezza, but real dislike of May, who was seen as cold, arrogant and rude.
A former Labour activist, now campaigning for the Womens Equality party.
The depressing thing was a long conversation between a group of EU staff, the longest serving having been in the dept 19 years, over the complexities and costs of applying for British residence. Having to demonstrate private health insurance being a major bar.
A low enthusiasm election with no one optomistic.
The private health requirement is normal in most EU countries. It would make sense for the NHS to offer a payment option in these cases with no pre-condition exclusions.
The cannot take private insurance retospectively though!
I have no sympathy for those who've failed to take residency for 19 years. If they've lived here full-time that is illegal.
Perhaps I wasn't clear. They are on PAYE on permanent contracts, just never needed to apply for permanant residency.
Ironically it is the highrst skilled, who have travelled the most that have the most difficulty with the forms. Accounting for a dozen foreign trips a year to conferences is harder than an annual visit to family.
The UK immigration "system" is not fit for purpose. We either want people to stay here or we don't. Those we want should be accepted quickly and easily; those we don't want should be excluded accurately and with minimum fuss. Deliberately making things as inefficient and cumbersome as possible so all but the lucky, the well connected or the most persistent give up isn't a solution.
Jeremy Hunt was warned last year of 'urgent' need to update NHS cyber security
The Care Quality Commission wrote to the Health Secretary about the urgent need to update NHS software to prevent cyberattacks. A contract with Microsoft to update Windows XP security patches had been allowed to expire in 2015. FOI requests revealed defunct systems were still in use across the NHS. Hospitals were crippled on Friday following widespread "ransomware" attacks. Liberal Democrats are calling for an inquiry into the failure.
What surprised me about the widespread disruption in the NHS caused by out of date IT protection was the extent to which Microsoft Windows XP was still in such general use throughout the organisation. XP was introduced as long ago as October 2001 and was discontinued as a factory fitted option in June 2008, i.e. almost NINE years ago. Yet whenever I visit a hospital and that's been quite a few times, involving a number of different locations over the past five years or so, all the equipment on display, including its computers appears top of the market, no expense spared, new or nearly new. It's amazing to think that since XP, we have had Vista, Windows 7, 8 and now 10. But seemingly the NHS which repeatedly gives the impression of having chucked at it at every turn is labouring away with crucial pieces of kit which is between 9 and 16 years old.
It's the cost of making sure the specialised software works on the newer versions of Windows. Cheaper just to leave the old machine as it is, although it does open you up to risks like these. I wonder why the machines don't operate exclusively on an internal NHS network.
This.
There's no need to have access to the external internet. Who cares if someone wants to play Candy Crush Saga or check their Facebook while they have some downtime, if there's no access to the internet the security is there.
Jeremy Hunt was warned last year of 'urgent' need to update NHS cyber security
The Care Quality Commission wrote to the Health Secretary about the urgent need to update NHS software to prevent cyberattacks. A contract with Microsoft to update Windows XP security patches had been allowed to expire in 2015. FOI requests revealed defunct systems were still in use across the NHS. Hospitals were crippled on Friday following widespread "ransomware" attacks. Liberal Democrats are calling for an inquiry into the failure.
What surprised me about the widespread disruption in the NHS caused by out of date IT protection was the extent to which Microsoft Windows XP was still in such general use throughout the organisation. XP was introduced as long ago as October 2001 and was discontinued as a factory fitted option in June 2008, i.e. almost NINE years ago. Yet whenever I visit a hospital and that's been quite a few times, involving a number of different locations over the past five years or so, all the equipment on display, including its computers appears top of the market, no expense spared, new or nearly new. It's amazing to think that since XP, we have had Vista, Windows 7, 8 and now 10. But seemingly the NHS which repeatedly gives the impression of having chucked at it at every turn is labouring away with crucial pieces of kit which is between 9 and 16 years old.
At a consumer level, replacing a Windows OS on an existing machine is such a time-consuming pita, with no guarantee of a happy ending, that it's easier to stick with the old OS or buy a new computer.
It doesn't have to be this way, it took five minutes with the old Mac OSes (up to 9 - don't know about more recent versions) and with the more user friendly linux distros.
Last few Windows upgrades have been okay for me, although I agree the Mac experience is generally easier (and free!)
Labour will hold on best in London and the South, youthful seats, Remain voting seats, middle class seats, and do worst in seats in the North and Midlands (outside big cities) , Leave voting seats, working class seats.
I think Labour will do well in London, Manchester, Bristol, Newcastle, West Yorkshire and Liverpool. They may do better than expected in pockets with similar demographics - Brighton, Exeter, Cambridge, Oxford, Nottingham, Coventry. In Bath and Cheltenham, it is very possible they will take enough votes off the Liberal Democrats to deny them those seats.
I expect them to be absolutely massacred in Birmingham itself. If the former Labour vote is behaving anything like those who said they would vote Labour last time before about half of them confounded everyone by not voting or quietly voting Tory, they could lose almost every seat they hold.
Last time I genuinely thought until the day of the election that Labour would retake Cannock Chase because Labour's target vote was so vocally antipathetic to the Coalition in general and Cameron in particular. What was less obvious because they didn't mention it was that they felt much the same way about Miliband. Those voters have changed and swung right behind May. They like her, and loathe Corbyn and all he stands for. The crash will be brutal. That is why I think there is value betting against both Watson and Phillips.
Oddly, one seat that may buck the trend is - you guessed it - Edgbaston! As the seat of the university and the most affluent part of Birmingham I expect it to be far narrower than a UNS would predict, and there seems a remote chance of a Labour hold even without Stuart.
I agree that it looks like the Labour vote is going to hold up pretty well in certain types of seats. It might even go up slightly in a few of them.
or a divide by country (despite what the SNP might have you believe)
Yeah, apart from giving a pro immigration, pro refugee, pro EU, pro NHS, pro welfare state, anti Trident party the biggest mandate in Western Europe, and UKIP, the party that has supposedly been driving the political narrative in England for the last 10 years, one, single, measly elected representative.
Apart from that we're pretty much identical countries.
Biggest mandate in Western Europe? You mean the number of MPs, or the Holyrood election?
Holyrood.
'in the run-up to the European Union referendum, we are delighted on these benches that the Scottish electorate has returned a pro-European SNP government with the highest vote of any current party in any national election anywhere in western Europe.'
If you've any updates to refute Angus's claim, feel free to provide them.
Of course in three weeks the nasty party may likely surpass that in England. That'll really cement the similarities between the countries.
It's a paradox. I agree on the surface the Tories and SNP are very different but every study done seems to confirm little difference in attitudes between the English and Scots. And isn't it funny how this huge mandate given to this very different party is being used to do the square root of b*gger all.
What achievable policies do you think the SNP should be pursuing?
Jeremy Hunt was warned last year of 'urgent' need to update NHS cyber security
The Care Quality Commission wrote to the Health Secretary about the urgent need to update NHS software to prevent cyberattacks. A contract with Microsoft to update Windows XP security patches had been allowed to expire in 2015. FOI requests revealed defunct systems were still in use across the NHS. Hospitals were crippled on Friday following widespread "ransomware" attacks. Liberal Democrats are calling for an inquiry into the failure.
What surprised me about the widespread disruption in the NHS caused by out of date IT protection was the extent to which Microsoft Windows XP was still in such general use throughout the organisation. XP was introduced as long ago as October 2001 and was discontinued as a factory fitted option in June 2008, i.e. almost NINE years ago. Yet whenever I visit a hospital and that's been quite a few times, involving a number of different locations over the past five years or so, all the equipment on display, including its computers appears top of the market, no expense spared, new or nearly new. It's amazing to think that since XP, we have had Vista, Windows 7, 8 and now 10. But seemingly the NHS which repeatedly gives the impression of having chucked at it at every turn is labouring away with crucial pieces of kit which is between 9 and 16 years old.
Surely the responsible party in this case is Microsoft, who have been flooding the world with leaky operating systems for as long as anyone can remember, constantly playing catch-up with patch after patch after patch. Macintosh users are following this story with incredulity.
Oh, yes, I forgot. Macs are expensive, for some reason.
You have your cause and effect reversed.
Most hackers target Windows because the vast majority of computers run Windows.
As much TUD loves to claim the Scots are open and embracing pro-Europeanism etc the reality is the Scots have simply voted for a nation that will put Scotland first. And why shouldn't they?
Exactly they (the SNP not Scots) are nationalist internationalists if you believe their rhetoric, but most people can see the inherent contradiction in their stated aims of not being ruled by London, but lets hand more power to Brussels.
Mr. D, proper cookcraft requires appropriate attention! You can't be distracted by my wonderful tips when you're trying to add the perfect quantity of oregano to the onions you're about to roast!
Mr. D, proper cookcraft requires appropriate attention! You can't be distracted by my wonderful tips when you're trying to add the perfect quantity of oregano to the onions you're about to roast!
You have dramatically overestimated my cooking ability.
As much TUD loves to claim the Scots are open and embracing pro-Europeanism etc the reality is the Scots have simply voted for a nation that will put Scotland first. And why shouldn't they?
Exactly they (the SNP not Scots) are nationalist internationalists if you believe their rhetoric, but most people can see the inherent contradiction in their stated aims of not being ruled by London, but lets hand more power to Brussels.
Which extra powers over and above the ones already held by Westminster are you suggesting that the SNP want to hand over to Brussels?
As much TUD loves to claim the Scots are open and embracing pro-Europeanism etc the reality is the Scots have simply voted for a nation that will put Scotland first. And why shouldn't they?
Exactly they (the SNP not Scots) are nationalist internationalists if you believe their rhetoric, but most people can see the inherent contradiction in their stated aims of not being ruled by London, but lets hand more power to Brussels.
There is no contradiction when you realise that it's all about the English.
I probably would make the Conservatives very slight favourites in Sedgfield, given the huge regional swing underway. OTOH, I'd favour Labour to hold Westminster North, where they're 5/2.
Labour will hold on best in London and the South, youthful seats, Remain voting seats, middle class seats, and do worst in seats in the North and Midlands (outside big cities) , Leave voting seats, working class seats.
I'm suspicious of the general tendency to treat the Midlands as homogeneous. I know the East Midlands quite well and broadly they are bellweather territory, with a diverse populatiuon mix and swings very similar to the national average. There's very little regional identity (I've never met anyone who said "I'm from the East Midlands"). Politics tends to be milder, outside the embittered former coalfields, and people are generally open to argument (which is why my brand of retail persuasion one voter at a time flourished for a while in a traditionally Tory seat).
I don't know the West Midlands well but my impression is that they're much more conscious of industrial tradition and more more polarised, with pockets of strong working-class identity? I can well believe that e.g. an issue like immigration plays more strongly there, and memories of the Birmingham pub bombing have kept IRA feelings more intense, so I could imagine a bigger Con swing there than here.
I made money at the last election betting on Labour in Cambriddge, which was seen as a LibDem slam-dunk, and it feels the sort of place where Corbyn has positive appeal. Coupled with the faltering LibDem campaign, I suspect those 4-1 odds make it a decent bet for Labour to hold.
or a divide by country (despite what the SNP might have you believe)
Yeah, apart from giving a pro immigration, pro refugee, pro EU, pro NHS, pro welfare state, anti Trident party the biggest mandate in Western Europe, and UKIP, the party that has supposedly been driving the political narrative in England for the last 10 years, one, single, measly elected representative.
Apart from that we're pretty much identical countries.
Biggest mandate in Western Europe? You mean the number of MPs, or the Holyrood election?
Holyrood.
'in the run-up to the European Union referendum, we are delighted on these benches that the Scottish electorate has returned a pro-European SNP government with the highest vote of any current party in any national election anywhere in western Europe.'
If you've any updates to refute Angus's claim, feel free to provide them.
Of course in three weeks the nasty party may likely surpass that in England. That'll really cement the similarities between the countries.
It's a paradox. I agree on the surface the Tories and SNP are very different but every study done seems to confirm little difference in attitudes between the English and Scots. And isn't it funny how this huge mandate given to this very different party is being used to do the square root of b*gger all.
What achievable policies do you think the SNP should be pursuing?
They have no powers do they?
I do think from a Unionist perspective it could be a little dangerous to have this SNP-Tory divide where the SNP no longer try to be all things to all people, worrying about frightening the horses and start taking a genuinely left wing stance in contrast to Westminster.
The Tories should just continue to focus on the Nixonian side of the SNP.
The ruling actually says that almost all of the deal is under EU competence, but not ISDS mechanisms. We can avoid the need for that in Brexit by sticking with the ECJ.
How can the law and the way it's applied be made identical across all parties to the agreement without an unacceptable loss of sovereignty? The EU is not going to do anything different, so it means us taking over their law and regulation lock stock and barrel. I don't see an easy solution to this. The EU will push hard because they don't think the Swiss arrangement works.
Labour will hold on best in London and the South, youthful seats, Remain voting seats, middle class seats, and do worst in seats in the North and Midlands (outside big cities) , Leave voting seats, working class seats.
I think Labour will do well in London, Manchester, Bristol, Newcastle, West Yorkshire and Liverpool. They may do better than expected in pockets with similar demographics - Brighton, Exeter, Cambridge, Oxford, Nottingham, Coventry. In Bath and Cheltenham, it is very possible they will take enough votes off the Liberal Democrats to deny them those seats.
I expect them to be absolutely massacred in Birmingham itself. If the former Labour vote is behaving anything like those who said they would vote Labour last time before about half of them confounded everyone by not voting or quietly voting Tory, they could lose almost every seat they hold.
Last time I genuinely thought until the day of the election that Labour would retake Cannock Chase because Labour's target vote was so vocally antipathetic to the Coalition in general and Cameron in particular. What was less obvious because they didn't mention it was that they felt much the same way about Miliband. Those voters have changed and swung right behind May. They like her, and loathe Corbyn and all he stands for. The crash will be brutal. That is why I think there is value betting against both Watson and Phillips.
Oddly, one seat that may buck the trend is - you guessed it - Edgbaston! As the seat of the university and the most affluent part of Birmingham I expect it to be far narrower than a UNS would predict, and there seems a remote chance of a Labour hold even without Stuart.
I agree that it looks like the Labour vote is going to hold up pretty well in certain types of seats. It might even go up slightly in a few of them.
I don't think the university seats will be quite as supportive as some have predicted - after all a lot of the students will have gone home.
@SkyNewsBreak: Office for National Statistics says consumer price inflation was 2.7% in April which is up from 2.3% in March
Surely in normal times that should scream interest rate rise?
Rates should gave gone up 7 years ago
2.7% is within the Bank of England target. Certainly within "normal" times it is.
True, although tbf you can decouple interest and inflation to some extent. The low interest rates and money pumping are doing far worse long term damage than inflation would even above the 3% target. The world economy is being artificially kept alive in a way that is making it impossible to go back to normality, precipitating an eventual complete collapse.
@SkyNewsBreak: Office for National Statistics says consumer price inflation was 2.7% in April which is up from 2.3% in March
Surely in normal times that should scream interest rate rise?
Rates should gave gone up 7 years ago
Possibly but given that inflation has been below the 2% target (and outside acceptable bounds of 1-3%) for most of the last 4 years it would surely have been cut again.
I'm not sure why in normal times 2.7% should scream rate rise, the upper limit on inflation is 3% so in normal times an inflation rate of 2.7% is acceptable and does not entail the Governor of the Bank of England "writing a letter" yet.
Surely the responsible party in this case is Microsoft, who have been flooding the world with leaky operating systems for as long as anyone can remember, constantly playing catch-up with patch after patch after patch. Macintosh users are following this story with incredulity.
OS X/MacOS has twice as many vulnerabilities reported in 2017 than Windows 10.
Microsoft completely changed their software development processes after XP, with what is known as the Longhorn Reset. Microsoft now builds very good operating systems, the problem mainly lies with organisations being too damn slow to update and patch.
or a divide by country (despite what the SNP might have you believe)
Yeah, apart from giving a pro immigration, pro refugee, pro EU, pro NHS, pro welfare state, anti Trident party the biggest mandate in Western Europe, and UKIP, the party that has supposedly been driving the political narrative in England for the last 10 years, one, single, measly elected representative.
Apart from that we're pretty much identical countries.
Biggest mandate in Western Europe? You mean the number of MPs, or the Holyrood election?
Holyrood.
'in the run-up to the European Union referendum, we are delighted on these benches that the Scottish electorate has returned a pro-European SNP government with the highest vote of any current party in any national election anywhere in western Europe.'
If you've any updates to refute Angus's claim, feel free to provide them.
Of course in three weeks the nasty party may likely surpass that in England. That'll really cement the similarities between the countries.
It's a paradox. I agree on the surface the Tories and SNP are very different but every study done seems to confirm little difference in attitudes between the English and Scots. And isn't it funny how this huge mandate given to this very different party is being used to do the square root of b*gger all.
What achievable policies do you think the SNP should be pursuing?
They have no powers do they?
I do think from a Unionist perspective it could be a little dangerous to have this SNP-Tory divide where the SNP no longer try to be all things to all people, worrying about frightening the horses and start taking a genuinely left wing stance in contrast to Westminster.
The Tories should just continue to focus on the Nixonian side of the SNP.
It's just curious to me that after the standard prattle about the SNP getting on with day job and how they should start governing, when I ask for suggestions on that governance, answers come there none. Thanks for keeping up the 100% record.
See also, asking about the wonderful policies of 'the real opposition to the SNP' Ruth party.
I probably would make the Conservatives very slight favourites in Sedgfield, given the huge regional swing underway. OTOH, I'd favour Labour to hold Westminster North, where they're 5/2.
Labour will hold on best in London and the South, youthful seats, Remain voting seats, middle class seats, and do worst in seats in the North and Midlands (outside big cities) , Leave voting seats, working class seats.
I'm suspicious of the general tendency to treat the Midlands as homogeneous. I know the East Midlands quite well and broadly they are bellweather territory, with a diverse populatiuon mix and swings very similar to the national average. There's very little regional identity (I've never met anyone who said "I'm from the East Midlands"). Politics tends to be milder, outside the embittered former coalfields, and people are generally open to argument (which is why my brand of retail persuasion one voter at a time flourished for a while in a traditionally Tory seat).
I don't know the West Midlands well but my impression is that they're much more conscious of industrial tradition and more more polarised, with pockets of strong working-class identity? I can well believe that e.g. an issue like immigration plays more strongly there, and memories of the Birmingham pub bombing have kept IRA feelings more intense, so I could imagine a bigger Con swing there than here.
I made money at the last election betting on Labour in Cambriddge, which was seen as a LibDem slam-dunk, and it feels the sort of place where Corbyn has positive appeal. Coupled with the faltering LibDem campaign, I suspect those 4-1 odds make it a decent bet for Labour to hold.
I'm from the East Midlands
I lived in the West Midlands and nobody really self identified as West Mids. Birmingham, Black Country, Solihull, Sutton Colfield, Staffordshire, These were what people used.
or a divide by country (despite what the SNP might have you believe)
Yeah, apart from giving a pro immigration, pro refugee, pro EU, pro NHS, pro welfare state, anti Trident party the biggest mandate in Western Europe, and UKIP, the party that has supposedly been driving the political narrative in England for the last 10 years, one, single, measly elected representative.
Apart from that we're pretty much identical countries.
Biggest mandate in Western Europe? You mean the number of MPs, or the Holyrood election?
Holyrood.
'in the run-up to the European Union referendum, we are delighted on these benches that the Scottish electorate has returned a pro-European SNP government with the highest vote of any current party in any national election anywhere in western Europe.'
If you've any updates to refute Angus's claim, feel free to provide them.
Of course in three weeks the nasty party may likely surpass that in England. That'll really cement the similarities between the countries.
It's a paradox. I agree on the surface the Tories and SNP are very different but every study done seems to confirm little difference in attitudes between the English and Scots. And isn't it funny how this huge mandate given to this very different party is being used to do the square root of b*gger all.
What achievable policies do you think the SNP should be pursuing?
They have no powers do they?
I do think from a Unionist perspective it could be a little dangerous to have this SNP-Tory divide where the SNP no longer try to be all things to all people, worrying about frightening the horses and start taking a genuinely left wing stance in contrast to Westminster.
The Tories should just continue to focus on the Nixonian side of the SNP.
It's just curious to me that after the standard prattle about the SNP getting on with day job and how they should start governing, when I ask for suggestions on that governance, answers come there none. Thanks for keeping up the 100% record.
See also, asking about the wonderful policies of 'the real opposition to the SNP' Ruth party.
Admitting the SNP have no ideas, and thats why they aren't actually doing anything in Holyrood?
or a divide by country (despite what the SNP might have you believe)
Yeah, apart from giving a pro immigration, pro refugee, pro EU, pro NHS, pro welfare state, anti Trident party the biggest mandate in Western Europe, and UKIP, the party that has supposedly been driving the political narrative in England for the last 10 years, one, single, measly elected representative.
Apart from that we're pretty much identical countries.
Biggest mandate in Western Europe? You mean the number of MPs, or the Holyrood election?
Holyrood.
'in the run-up to the European Union referendum, we are delighted on these benches that the Scottish electorate has returned a pro-European SNP government with the highest vote of any current party in any national election anywhere in western Europe.'
If you've any updates to refute Angus's claim, feel free to provide them.
Of course in three weeks the nasty party may likely surpass that in England. That'll really cement the similarities between the countries.
It's a paradox. I agree on the surface the Tories and SNP are very different but every study done seems to confirm little difference in attitudes between the English and Scots. And isn't it funny how this huge mandate given to this very different party is being used to do the square root of b*gger all.
What achievable policies do you think the SNP should be pursuing?
They have no powers do they?
I do think from a Unionist perspective it could be a little dangerous to have this SNP-Tory divide where the SNP no longer try to be all things to all people, worrying about frightening the horses and start taking a genuinely left wing stance in contrast to Westminster.
The Tories should just continue to focus on the Nixonian side of the SNP.
It's just curious to me that after the standard prattle about the SNP getting on with day job and how they should start governing, when I ask for suggestions on that governance, answers come there none. Thanks for keeping up the 100% record.
See also, asking about the wonderful policies of 'the real opposition to the SNP' Ruth party.
Admitting the SNP have no ideas, and thats why they aren't actually doing anything in Holyrood?
Nope, just pointing out that in politics those that criticise but can't provide even a vague alternative are hopeless diddies.
What surprised me about the widespread disruption in the NHS caused by out of date IT protection was the extent to which Microsoft Windows XP was still in such general use throughout the organisation. XP was introduced as long ago as October 2001 and was discontinued as a factory fitted option in June 2008, i.e. almost NINE years ago. Yet whenever I visit a hospital and that's been quite a few times, involving a number of different locations over the past five years or so, all the equipment on display, including its computers appears top of the market, no expense spared, new or nearly new. It's amazing to think that since XP, we have had Vista, Windows 7, 8 and now 10. But seemingly the NHS which repeatedly gives the impression of having chucked at it at every turn is labouring away with crucial pieces of kit which is between 9 and 16 years old.
Surely the responsible party in this case is Microsoft, who have been flooding the world with leaky operating systems for as long as anyone can remember, constantly playing catch-up with patch after patch after patch. Macintosh users are following this story with incredulity.
Oh, yes, I forgot. Macs are expensive, for some reason.
You have your cause and effect reversed.
Most hackers target Windows because the vast majority of computers run Windows.
Apple releases just as many patches for security flaws. Here were January's, for example:
Decent piece David, I'm sure you're in the ball park.
On the topic of legislation or lack thereof, how would you define the SCon's policy offer, eg which pieces of your 2016 manifesto were you most disappointed not see enacted? The gormless Ruthy fanbois on here won't have a clue but I'd hope as an active member on the spot that you can put some meat on the bone.
Are you in favour of the reverse ferrets on the rape clause & prescription charges?
The 2016 Manifesto was an unusual one because it was a job application for leader of the Opposition but I liked the idea of a Council of Economic Advisors focussed on what Scotland can do to take advantage of their powers on taxation. I agreed that the way our Colleges are going is alarming and threatens our prospects of having a successful, employable, trained workforce in the future.
What I am really looking for is a Scottish Government with a laser like focus on growth and skills. All policies should be focussed on that and improving our tax base. I recognise that success in that area increases the risk that Independence might become viable but it is a price I am willing to pay.
Personally I am not in favour of taking away the rights of those who have been forced to have an additional child or raped to public money. I understand the politics of it. I am also not particularly in favour of abolition of prescription charges although I don't have access to the cost of running a recovery scheme where the majority of recipients are exempt anyway.
As much TUD loves to claim the Scots are open and embracing pro-Europeanism etc the reality is the Scots have simply voted for a nation that will put Scotland first. And why shouldn't they?
Exactly they (the SNP not Scots) are nationalist internationalists if you believe their rhetoric, but most people can see the inherent contradiction in their stated aims of not being ruled by London, but lets hand more power to Brussels.
Which extra powers over and above the ones already held by Westminster are you suggesting that the SNP want to hand over to Brussels?
Scotland joining the EU after independence would presumably be signing up for the monetary union, to be followed in time by fiscal union that is on the cards, shared foreign policy and defence, and all the other things that EU leaders and the commission think are necessary to "modernise" or more accurately federalise the EU after Brexit. Scotland wouldn't be "ruled by London" but that independence might not be all that different from being in the UK, so it seems to be a form of independence in name only.
It's just curious to me that after the standard prattle about the SNP getting on with day job and how they should start governing, when I ask for suggestions on that governance, answers come there none. Thanks for keeping up the 100% record.
See also, asking about the wonderful policies of 'the real opposition to the SNP' Ruth party.
My own personal suggestions as an Englishman looking north.
1: Get GERS into running a regular surplus. Would put Scotland on a far more secure footing and make the question of whether an independent Scotland is financially viable an easy one to answer.
2: Education, education, education. This is fully devolved as far as I am aware and yet Scotland is as far as I am aware falling down OECD rankings. That is a shame and again affects the future of Scotland.
3: Scottish healthcare. Again as far as I am aware this is fully devolved. Scots die two years sooner than the English do on average with Glaswegians having the lowest life expectancy in the UK. If Scottish governance is better than English then it should be possible to turn this around.
Balance the books, deliver good education and good healthcare. Get the basics of governance right essentially. Do that and the SNP will deserve to win independence.
So we can reasonably expect that inflation will begin to recede from July.
It's already noticeable that petrol price inflation is coming down.
It's also noticeable that additional taxation is playing a part in driving up the cost of things while the different timing of Easter has impacted costs on transport in particular.
2: Education, education, education. This is fully devolved as far as I am aware and yet Scotland is as far as I am aware falling down OECD rankings. That is a shame and again affects the future of Scotland.
Exactly
If the SNP took the money they spend on allowing foreign students to study at university in Scotland "for free" and spent it on primary education instead the results could be dramatic, but it wouldn't get them the headlines they craved.
I made money at the last election betting on Labour in Cambriddge, which was seen as a LibDem slam-dunk, and it feels the sort of place where Corbyn has positive appeal. Coupled with the faltering LibDem campaign, I suspect those 4-1 odds make it a decent bet for Labour to hold.
Where are you seeing 4-1?
Errrr...I picked that off someone else's post, seems to be 3.25 on Betfair. sorry.
I think this is a decent post from David on electoral prospects. However like most PBeers he suffers from seeing Scottish politics through the unionist prism.
Firstly in ten years the SNP have been an exceptionally competent Government. The proof of that is in their re-election twice under PR with large majorities. The theory that everybody is waiting to find out how bad they are is caused by the delusion which comes from reading too much of the Daily Mail. And that rubbish is , of course, is what informs the 'reporting' of the network media.
Second,Salmond, in particular, was a superb head of governence and the changes he made will stand Scotland in good stead for years to come. His introduction of the Scottish Futures Trust means that the capital investment programme has been around 30 per cent more efficient that PFI - and the many new schools don't fall down! Amid all the hullabaloo about a sample education survey it has been missed that Scottish children are now the second most employable in Europe after Germany. Why ? Because Salmond put 55 per cent of then into higher education, changed the mess of part time college course into full time work orientated ones and doubled the number of apprenticeships attaching each and every one to a job.
Third, Nicola Sturgeon was the best Health Secretary in recent times in any of the UK countries. The reason that the Scottish NHS, while under pressure, is so clearly outperforming the English one is that she avoided the disastrous meddling which has plunged the service into chaos elsewhere. She instead concentrated on simple things like patient safety - eg hospital aquired infections down by almost 90 per cent!
Finally through the Salmond years Scottish GDP per capita outgrew the UK for the first time since the war while Scottish employment was generally higher and unemployment lower - again a first. Sturgeon has been unfortunate in being in office during the oil downturn and the 100,000 job losses resulting. However the most recent unemployment figures are still Scotland 4.5% compared to the UK 4.7%!
The reason the SNP are still in charge and will be for some time to come is not in spite of their record. It is because of their record.
"Firstly in ten years the SNP have been an exceptionally competent Government. The proof of that is in their re-election twice under PR with large majorities."
That doesn't say anything about their competence in government. More about their opposition.
Thankfully we're leaving this Byzantine mess behind right?
No. We'll have much more of it, from the outside.
Highly improbable.
We will do less and less business with them. It's been a notable characteristic of trade with them for some time and that will continue, as the earlier business survey tweet implies. A process of disentanglement is already taking place.
The EU is of shrinking importance in terms of global trade.
Cambridge city-fringe pub, roughly two thirds aged 40+, town; one third aged 40-, gown. Former 100% May. Latter 100% Corbyn (sic... not just 'Lab' but specifically Corbyn).
All gone mammary glands up since Osborne left the Treasury.
Bring back George.
and the deficit is set to go up this year too.
That would be the deficit that Osborne promised to eliminate by 2016?
I've speculated before that Balls and Osborne colluded and concocted the whole 'austerity' image whilst only trying to gently reduce the deficit but to do so without upsetting the markets.
Decent piece David, I'm sure you're in the ball park.
On the topic of legislation or lack thereof, how would you define the SCon's policy offer, eg which pieces of your 2016 manifesto were you most disappointed not see enacted? The gormless Ruthy fanbois on here won't have a clue but I'd hope as an active member on the spot that you can put some meat on the bone.
Are you in favour of the reverse ferrets on the rape clause & prescription charges?
The 2016 Manifesto was an unusual one because it was a job application for leader of the Opposition but I liked the idea of a Council of Economic Advisors focussed on what Scotland can do to take advantage of their powers on taxation. I agreed that the way our Colleges are going is alarming and threatens our prospects of having a successful, employable, trained workforce in the future.
What I am really looking for is a Scottish Government with a laser like focus on growth and skills. All policies should be focussed on that and improving our tax base. I recognise that success in that area increases the risk that Independence might become viable but it is a price I am willing to pay.
Personally I am not in favour of taking away the rights of those who have been forced to have an additional child or raped to public money. I understand the politics of it. I am also not particularly in favour of abolition of prescription charges although I don't have access to the cost of running a recovery scheme where the majority of recipients are exempt anyway.
Thanks for the considered reply.
On the subject of growth and skills, don't you think control of our own immigration policy would be a big gun in that area? I believe Tessy and her pals are intent on keeping that as a reserved matter for ideological, 'precious, precious Union' reasons, regardless of whether its devolution would be beneficial for Scotland. What did you think of the Zielsdorf case? To me it just summed up the one size fits all, like it or lump it, f*ck your different needs attitude of Westminster.
On topic, I'd have liked this article to have provided reasons for its predictions.
Interesting that the author thinks the highland seats are better prospects for the LDs than Dunbartonshire, for example, but what's his reason? Candidates? Independence position? Brexit?
My main reason is that I think it will be much easier for the Lib Dems to consolidate the Unionist vote in the far north where they have a strong base than it will in the other seats in contention, particularly in Edinburgh. In both of these seats the Lib Dems are miles ahead of the other Unionist parties.
As I have explained down thread I fear that in the likes of Edinburgh West the Unionist vote will split too many ways and the withdrawal of the Greens means the nationalist vote won't. Same applies in Fife North East, a possible Lib Dem target as well.
My own personal suggestions as an Englishman looking north.
1: Get GERS into running a regular surplus. Would put Scotland on a far more secure footing and make the question of whether an independent Scotland is financially viable an easy one to answer.
Doesn't GERS include UK spending so it would be an impossible goal for the Scottish government?
Bravo-I wish I had written that! Might help a few here to realise that continuing support for the is not about flag waving though the Davidson "patriotic" opposition is very much about waving a union flag.
On topic, I'd have liked this article to have provided reasons for its predictions.
Interesting that the author thinks the highland seats are better prospects for the LDs than Dunbartonshire, for example, but what's his reason? Candidates? Independence position? Brexit?
My main reason is that I think it will be much easier for the Lib Dems to consolidate the Unionist vote in the far north where they have a strong base than it will in the other seats in contention, particularly in Edinburgh. In both of these seats the Lib Dems are miles ahead of the other Unionist parties.
As I have explained down thread I fear that in the likes of Edinburgh West the Unionist vote will split too many ways and the withdrawal of the Greens means the nationalist vote won't. Same applies in Fife North East, a possible Lib Dem target as well.
Thanks - useful explanation, and I may get in on the Highlands seats.
The local elections looked okay for the SNP and fairly weak for the LDs there. Would you tend to discount it due to Independents making the Highlands hard to read?
Thankfully we're leaving this Byzantine mess behind right?
No. We'll have much more of it, from the outside.
Highly improbable.
We will do less and less business with them. It's been a notable characteristic of trade with them for some time and that will continue, as the earlier business survey tweet implies. A process of disentanglement is already taking place.
The EU is of shrinking importance in terms of global trade.
Less trade with the EU just means less trade overall. Why would selling fewer widgets to France guarantee selling correspondingly more to China, particularly when Germany manages to sell more than we do to both places while in the EU? It's illogical. In any case it doesn't have any effect on our dealings with the EU. If we want a relationship with countries in the continent we inhabit, we have to go through the EU.
All gone mammary glands up since Osborne left the Treasury.
Bring back George.
and the deficit is set to go up this year too.
Depends who CoTE is come 9th June I guess.
Hopefully not Hammond.
My instinct at the moment is that the re-shuffle will be limited mainly to a few people switching places. Leadsom will go and Hunt will be replaced if a suitable successor can be found; May might have the guts to send Rudd there (Fallon to replace, Brokenshire (?) to Defence).
All gone mammary glands up since Osborne left the Treasury.
Bring back George.
and the deficit is set to go up this year too.
Depends who CoTE is come 9th June I guess.
Hopefully not Hammond.
My instinct at the moment is that the re-shuffle will be limited mainly to a few people switching places. Leadsom will go and Hunt will be replaced if a suitable successor can be found; May might have the guts to send Rudd there (Fallon to replace, Brokenshire (?) to Defence).
I know you're a BIG fan of posting the same thing over & over again.
Who wrote this on 25/06/16?
'4. Next PM. It's May for me, anyone but Boris.
5. Corbyn should go too. A total tool. About as effective as a leader and potential PM as a fart in a hurricane.
6.Lastly and this will shock many but Scotland should now opt for independence. There I said it. The will of the Scottish people on the EU, a matter of the most crucial significance for the future, was clear. Hopefully it will be an amicable uncoupling. I would vote for YES in SINDY2, if still around.
SINDY2 should take place within 18 months and a YES vote take effect on the date of BREXIT two years after Article 50 is enabled or before 2020 whichever is sooner.'
Comments
It doesn't have to be this way, it took five minutes with the old Mac OSes (up to 9 - don't know about more recent versions) and with the more user friendly linux distros.
There's no need to have access to the external internet. Who cares if someone wants to play Candy Crush Saga or check their Facebook while they have some downtime, if there's no access to the internet the security is there.
Most hackers target Windows because the vast majority of computers run Windows.
I do think from a Unionist perspective it could be a little dangerous to have this SNP-Tory divide where the SNP no longer try to be all things to all people, worrying about frightening the horses and start taking a genuinely left wing stance in contrast to Westminster.
The Tories should just continue to focus on the Nixonian side of the SNP.
I'm not sure why in normal times 2.7% should scream rate rise, the upper limit on inflation is 3% so in normal times an inflation rate of 2.7% is acceptable and does not entail the Governor of the Bank of England "writing a letter" yet.
https://www.cvedetails.com/top-50-products.php
Now you might think, Windows 10 is too new to rack up lots of vulnerabilities, so look at 2017 alone.
https://www.cvedetails.com/top-50-products.php?year=2017
OS X/MacOS has twice as many vulnerabilities reported in 2017 than Windows 10.
Microsoft completely changed their software development processes after XP, with what is known as the Longhorn Reset. Microsoft now builds very good operating systems, the problem mainly lies with organisations being too damn slow to update and patch.
See also, asking about the wonderful policies of 'the real opposition to the SNP' Ruth party.
Bring back George.
http://www.eweek.com/security/apple-macos-10.12.3-and-ios-10.2.1-fix-security-flaws
As you say, MacOS is targeted far less, because there are fewer devices out there.
Similarly, in the mobile space, hardly anyone bothers to exploit Windows Phone or iOS - the vast majority of exploits are for Android devices.
What I am really looking for is a Scottish Government with a laser like focus on growth and skills. All policies should be focussed on that and improving our tax base. I recognise that success in that area increases the risk that Independence might become viable but it is a price I am willing to pay.
Personally I am not in favour of taking away the rights of those who have been forced to have an additional child or raped to public money. I understand the politics of it. I am also not particularly in favour of abolition of prescription charges although I don't have access to the cost of running a recovery scheme where the majority of recipients are exempt anyway.
1: Get GERS into running a regular surplus. Would put Scotland on a far more secure footing and make the question of whether an independent Scotland is financially viable an easy one to answer.
2: Education, education, education. This is fully devolved as far as I am aware and yet Scotland is as far as I am aware falling down OECD rankings. That is a shame and again affects the future of Scotland.
3: Scottish healthcare. Again as far as I am aware this is fully devolved. Scots die two years sooner than the English do on average with Glaswegians having the lowest life expectancy in the UK. If Scottish governance is better than English then it should be possible to turn this around.
Balance the books, deliver good education and good healthcare. Get the basics of governance right essentially. Do that and the SNP will deserve to win independence.
It's already noticeable that petrol price inflation is coming down.
It's also noticeable that additional taxation is playing a part in driving up the cost of things while the different timing of Easter has impacted costs on transport in particular.
If the SNP took the money they spend on allowing foreign students to study at university in Scotland "for free" and spent it on primary education instead the results could be dramatic, but it wouldn't get them the headlines they craved.
I think this is a decent post from David on electoral prospects. However like most PBeers he suffers from seeing Scottish politics through the unionist prism.
Firstly in ten years the SNP have been an exceptionally competent Government. The proof of that is in their re-election twice under PR with large majorities. The theory that everybody is waiting to find out how bad they are is caused by the delusion which comes from reading too much of the Daily Mail. And that rubbish is , of course, is what informs the 'reporting' of the network media.
Second,Salmond, in particular, was a superb head of governence and the changes he made will stand Scotland in good stead for years to come. His introduction of the Scottish Futures Trust means that the capital investment programme has been around 30 per cent more efficient that PFI - and the many new schools don't fall down! Amid all the hullabaloo about a sample education survey it has been missed that Scottish children are now the second most employable in Europe after Germany. Why ? Because Salmond put 55 per cent of then into higher education, changed the mess of part time college course into full time work orientated ones and doubled the number of apprenticeships attaching each and every one to a job.
Third, Nicola Sturgeon was the best Health Secretary in recent times in any of the UK countries. The reason that the Scottish NHS, while under pressure, is so clearly outperforming the English one is that she avoided the disastrous meddling which has plunged the service into chaos elsewhere. She instead concentrated on simple things like patient safety - eg hospital aquired infections down by almost 90 per cent!
Finally through the Salmond years Scottish GDP per capita outgrew the UK for the first time since the war while Scottish employment was generally higher and unemployment lower - again a first. Sturgeon has been unfortunate in being in office during the oil downturn and the 100,000 job losses resulting. However the most recent unemployment figures are still Scotland 4.5% compared to the UK 4.7%!
The reason the SNP are still in charge and will be for some time to come is not in spite of their record. It is because of their record.
"Firstly in ten years the SNP have been an exceptionally competent Government. The proof of that is in their re-election twice under PR with large majorities."
That doesn't say anything about their competence in government. More about their opposition.
People who voted Leave because they don't like the EU much and would rather not have to deal with it are going to be sorely disappointed.
Especially if Theresa May continues with her lefty economic pound shop Miliband bollocks.
We will do less and less business with them. It's been a notable characteristic of trade with them for some time and that will continue, as the earlier business survey tweet implies. A process of disentanglement is already taking place.
The EU is of shrinking importance in terms of global trade.
Cambridge city-fringe pub, roughly two thirds aged 40+, town; one third aged 40-, gown. Former 100% May. Latter 100% Corbyn (sic... not just 'Lab' but specifically Corbyn).
On the subject of growth and skills, don't you think control of our own immigration policy would be a big gun in that area? I believe Tessy and her pals are intent on keeping that as a reserved matter for ideological, 'precious, precious Union' reasons, regardless of whether its devolution would be beneficial for Scotland. What did you think of the Zielsdorf case? To me it just summed up the one size fits all, like it or lump it, f*ck your different needs attitude of Westminster.
https://twitter.com/AdamBienkov/status/864411958623252480
https://twitter.com/thedailymash/status/864417880716316672
As I have explained down thread I fear that in the likes of Edinburgh West the Unionist vote will split too many ways and the withdrawal of the Greens means the nationalist vote won't. Same applies in Fife North East, a possible Lib Dem target as well.
I'm trying to check two models against each other and extracting all the England constituencies I run into
"Basildon South & Thurrock East" vs "South Basildon and East Thurrock"
Why not just Billericay ?
Bravo-I wish I had written that! Might help a few here to realise that continuing support for the is not about flag waving though the Davidson "patriotic" opposition is very much about waving a union flag.
Who could possibly believe things have come to this point?
PS. Not sure why Nick Brown is with him. Surely one of Gordon's closest acolytes. I guess he needed a job.
Hopefully not Hammond.
If they can't launch a manifesto on time, how will they make renationalised trains run on time?
The local elections looked okay for the SNP and fairly weak for the LDs there. Would you tend to discount it due to Independents making the Highlands hard to read?
LOL. This is pure comedy hour.
Who wrote this on 25/06/16?
'4. Next PM. It's May for me, anyone but Boris.
5. Corbyn should go too. A total tool. About as effective as a leader and potential PM as a fart in a hurricane.
6.Lastly and this will shock many but Scotland should now opt for independence. There I said it. The will of the Scottish people on the EU, a matter of the most crucial significance for the future, was clear. Hopefully it will be an amicable uncoupling. I would vote for YES in SINDY2, if still around.
SINDY2 should take place within 18 months and a YES vote take effect on the date of BREXIT two years after Article 50 is enabled or before 2020 whichever is sooner.'
And who replied:
'Nice to see you ****.
I agree on all 3 points.'