Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Labour continues to struggle in Scotland where it used to hold

SystemSystem Posts: 11,020
edited June 2018 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Labour continues to struggle in Scotland where it used to hold 41 of the 59 seats

There is a new Scottish poll out this morning and the picture remains gloomy for LAB. As can be seen Panelbase still has the party in third place behind, of course, the SNP and the Conservatives.

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • Options
    PClippPClipp Posts: 2,138
    First?
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,426
    So the walkout had no impact based on this poll.

    No Indy question asked/released?

    We should be due an Ipsos MORI soon, that'll be interesting to see if it shows this sort of no change.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,983
    FPT: Mr. Sandpit, I checked with the C4F1 Twitter account, and I made a number of other errors, so I think the BBC must have erroneously used local times.

    Anyway, better to find out now than for qualifying.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,926
    The big picture looks like very little change in Scotland for me. Clearly many 2015GE SNP voters just stayed at home in GE17 but the GE17 ones look like they're here to stay from the above.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,426
    Pulpstar said:

    The big picture looks like very little change in Scotland for me. Clearly many 2015GE SNP voters just stayed at home in GE17 but the GE17 ones look like they're here to stay from the above.

    The SNP gained Labour's lazy voters.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,926
    Looks like my builder friend's anecdote re Milton Keynes and Max's recent experience fit the housing data:

    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/jun/29/london-house-price-growth-at-nine-year-low-amid-edinburgh-and-manchester-spurt
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,926

    Pulpstar said:

    The big picture looks like very little change in Scotland for me. Clearly many 2015GE SNP voters just stayed at home in GE17 but the GE17 ones look like they're here to stay from the above.

    The SNP gained Labour's lazy voters.
    Personally I don't know how people can miss the excitement of voting in a GE once every few years.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,298
    Pulpstar said:

    Looks like my builder friend's anecdote re Milton Keynes and Max's recent experience fit the housing data:

    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/jun/29/london-house-price-growth-at-nine-year-low-amid-edinburgh-and-manchester-spurt

    God bless Polish sparkys.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,426
    edited June 2018
    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    The big picture looks like very little change in Scotland for me. Clearly many 2015GE SNP voters just stayed at home in GE17 but the GE17 ones look like they're here to stay from the above.

    The SNP gained Labour's lazy voters.
    Personally I don't know how people can miss the excitement of voting in a GE once every few years.
    I don't understand it either.

    I don't understand the people that didn't vote in the Indyref either.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,334
    edited June 2018
    How far do the Scottish media report everything from a Scottish angle? - e.g. do splits in the Cabinet over Brexit get much coverage, or are they seen as relating to a faraway country?

    O/T: I'm just been cancelling my sub to the Times and Sunday Times (as I had it for work but my media team colleagues cover that now). Boy, they make it hard. You can't do it online - there's a number you have to call dedicated only to sub cancellations, and it seems to be barely manned (I got on with work while letting it ring for 25 minutes before they finally answered). They then made a series of haggling offers, finally offering the sub for £1 a week. I had to say three times "But I don't like the newspapers, I no longer need them, and I want to cancel" before they finally gave in. Is it actually in accordance with Trading Standards to require you to cancel via a rarely-answered phone number?

    For those who do like the papers, I recommend pretending to want to cancel, and holding out till you get the £1 offer.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,817
    edited June 2018
    10-15 years ago who would ever believe you'd see polls with the Conservatives ahead of Labour in Scotland???? :open_mouth:
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,995
    For anyone interested, a SpaceX rocket is to launch in 13 minutes. Watch it at:
    http://www.spacex.com/webcast

    This should be the last of the Block IV Falcon 9's, and there will be no landing attempt of the first stage.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,426
    edited June 2018
    GIN1138 said:

    10-15 years ago who would ever believe you'd see polls with the Conservatives ahead of Labour in Scotland???? :open_mouth:

    Dave’s golden legacy in Scotland.

    When he became Tory leader the Tories has 40 fewer MPs in Scotland than Labour.

    The day he retired the Tories had the same number of MPs in Scotland as Labour.

    Nationally he took the Tories from 198 MPs to 331 MPs.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,817

    How far do the Scottish media report everything from a Scottish angle? - e.g. do splits in the Cabinet over Brexit get much coverage, or are they seen as relating to a faraway country?

    O/T: I'm just been cancelling my sub to the Times and Sunday Times (as I had it for work but my media team colleagues cover that now). Boy, they make it hard. You can't do it online - there's a number you have to call dedicated only to sub cancellations, and it seems to be barely manned (I got on with work while letting it ring for 25 minutes before they finally answered). They then made a series of haggling offers, finally offering the sub for £1 a week. I had to say three times "But I don't like the newspapers, I no longer need them, and I want to cancel" before they finally gave in. Is it actually in accordance with Trading Standards to require you to cancel via a rarely-answered phone number?

    For those who do like the papers, I recommend pretending to want to cancel, and holding out till you get the £1 offer.

    From memory cancelling SKY is similarly difficult.

    Keep an eye on your bank account to make sure they don't "accidentally" take out any money after the cancellation... We had that with SKY and in the end we went into the bank and told to block any further payments to SKY.

    We eventually recovered the money they took but that was another saga.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,896
    Could anyone pick Richard Leonard out of an identity parade lineup?
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,426
    edited June 2018
    It could get even grimmer for Scottish Labour.

    I do think the Tories will get a boost shortly in Scotland, albeit temporarily.

    In the next few months there’s going to be lots of coverage of Ruth Davidson and her baby.

    Unless you’re rather craven or heartless you’ll like her a bit more.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,280
    Richard Leonard was pretty much unknown outside the Labour MSPs before his appointment and he still is. When I have heard him, and it's not often, he has actually sounded reasonably articulate but Scotland is dominated by 2 very strong women at present and it is difficult for anyone else to get a hearing.

    What is surprising in some ways is how the SNP support has remained so solid. The Scottish government has performed very poorly for some years now. Our health service is seriously struggling and Nicola's BFF forever has just had to "resign" as health minister. Education is a disaster area. Alex Bell, Salmond's one time speechwriter, is no friend of the SNP these days but this is a devastating description of Swinney's time at education: https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/opinion/alex-bell/678862/alex-bell-as-one-of-the-snps-three-ss-john-swinney-has-become-untouchable-despite-education-failures/

    At the same time as the reshuffle he abandoned the Education bill that he has been working on for 2 years. Taken with the named person fiasco it is difficult to see what has been achieved other than declining standards and an ever tighter grip on colleges and Universities that seeks to stamp out dissent.

    And of course in the last day or so we had some incompetent foul mouthed harridan who had to resign as a new Minister before she was even officially appointed.

    The SNP are living on the desire for independence. This has fallen off slightly but not by much and there is some evidence that the ongoing farce in Westminster is lifting it slightly again. It gives them a base that any other party in the UK would give their eye teeth for. But if Nicola is ultimately seen as not being able to deliver a second referendum all bets are off. It seems likely to me that Labour would be the main beneficiary in such a scenario.
  • Options
    archer101auarcher101au Posts: 1,612

    rcs1000 said:

    Nigelb said:

    <

    Surely it is only a final transfer if defaults do occur ?

    I am in bed, but for every Euro owed to the Bundesbank through Target2, there is an additional (capital flight) Euro owned by a peripheral Eurozone entity sitting in a German bank account.

    The whole lot could be sterilized if the Bundesbank revalued Italian holdings in Commerzbank accounts to New Lira.

    (Which would require primary legislation. But given Italy leaving the Eurozone would take at least a week, that should not be beyond the wit of man.)
    You should read the paper I linked. It does not work like that. The Bundesbank actually owe all the Target2 balances to the German commercial banks - see pages 52 and 53 of the paper. And what you are suggesting, which is the compulsory theft of Euros in depositors accounts in Germany and replacement with a less valuable asset, is so obviously illegal that even the ECJ might blush.
    Almost nothing is illegal that is properly legislated for. The principle of enforced removal of assets by the state is well established: it's called tax.
    That is not what is being talked about here. Taking your money out of your bank and replacing it with something worth less is theft. It is also illegal under all current laws, since the bank in question is still solvent - in this scenario it is the Bundesbank, not the commercial bank, that has the solvency problem. If you went to your bank tomorrow and they had switched all your pounds for Turkish Lira you might in fact consider this theft, especially if the bank intended to carry on trading as if nothing had happened.

    And if any bank in Europe tried such a trick, every deposit holder in Europe would instantly take their money out and put it in the bank of a country with a functioning legal system (eg the UK hopefully). So no more EU banking system.

    Apart from this, how would the bank know which deposit holders to steal from? They have an Italian sounding name?

    The point is that pro-EU people like to pretend that Target2 is not a problem. It is a problem, as this nonsensical suggestion shows.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607
    Pulpstar said:

    Looks like my builder friend's anecdote re Milton Keynes and Max's recent experience fit the housing data:

    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/jun/29/london-house-price-growth-at-nine-year-low-amid-edinburgh-and-manchester-spurt

    I think the drop in central London would be bigger if people asked for steeper discounts. I was telling a friend of mine that I asked for and got 15% off the asking price for my place and he was really shocked. They paid just £20k (~3%) below asking price for their place in outer London. It's a real buyers market.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,983
    Mr. Eagles, really?

    I don't dislike Davidson, but I don't see why having kids means you have to like someone more. Not disputing that a poll boost might follow the media coverage, though.

    [Also, I'm not sure 'craven' makes sense in that context].
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,983
    Mr. Archer, during the financial crisis (or just after) I believe Cypriot banks took funds from accounts. Could be wrong, but I think that's what happened.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,298

    It could get even grimmer for Scottish Labour.

    I do think the Tories will get a boost shortly in Scotland, albeit temporarily.

    In the next few months there’s going to be lots of coverage of Ruth Davidson and her baby.

    Unless you’re rather craven or heartless you’ll like her a bit more.

    It's the classic Tory dilemma - liking newborn babies, or eating them.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,896
    edited June 2018
    GIN1138 said:

    How far do the Scottish media report everything from a Scottish angle? - e.g. do splits in the Cabinet over Brexit get much coverage, or are they seen as relating to a faraway country?

    O/T: I'm just been cancelling my sub to the Times and Sunday Times (as I had it for work but my media team colleagues cover that now). Boy, they make it hard. You can't do it online - there's a number you have to call dedicated only to sub cancellations, and it seems to be barely manned (I got on with work while letting it ring for 25 minutes before they finally answered). They then made a series of haggling offers, finally offering the sub for £1 a week. I had to say three times "But I don't like the newspapers, I no longer need them, and I want to cancel" before they finally gave in. Is it actually in accordance with Trading Standards to require you to cancel via a rarely-answered phone number?

    For those who do like the papers, I recommend pretending to want to cancel, and holding out till you get the £1 offer.

    From memory cancelling SKY is similarly difficult.

    Keep an eye on your bank account to make sure they don't "accidentally" take out any money after the cancellation... We had that with SKY and in the end we went into the bank and told to block any further payments to SKY.

    We eventually recovered the money they took but that was another saga.
    Sky are a complete nightmare to cancel, even if you tell them you’re emigrating. It’s an annoying trend for companies to put their most experienced and empowered sales staff on the cancellations lines, and even businesses who work completely online make you phone them to cancel.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,081
    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:

    The big picture looks like very little change in Scotland for me. Clearly many 2015GE SNP voters just stayed at home in GE17 but the GE17 ones look like they're here to stay from the above.

    The SNP gained Labour's lazy voters.
    Personally I don't know how people can miss the excitement of voting in a GE once every few years.
    I agree, but if you'd had as many elections & refs as we Jocks have had, one can see why the average punter's enthusiasm may be a little dented.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,426

    Mr. Eagles, really?

    I don't dislike Davidson, but I don't see why having kids means you have to like someone more. Not disputing that a poll boost might follow the media coverage, though.

    [Also, I'm not sure 'craven' makes sense in that context].

    I was doing some research and I was trying to work out why Blair got a boost in late 1999 and the summer of 2000.

    It coincided with the announcement and the birth of Leo Blair.

    There’s going to be a lot of pictures of her with a newborn baby, the media love that stuff.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,298
    I presume that the Graun's headline:

    "Barnier says 'huge and serious' gap remains between UK and EU demands on Brexit – Politics live"

    means that we are on the verge of a deal.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,983
    Mr. Eagles, didn't that happen with Cameron's youngest child?
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,426

    Mr. Eagles, didn't that happen with Cameron's youngest child?

    It did but the polling happened with other major events happening, such as the election of Ed Miliband.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,983
    Mr. Eagles, ah, the good old days, when the Labour leader was a bit geeky rather than an actual socialist and self-declared friend of Hamas.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,280
    TOPPING said:

    I presume that the Graun's headline:

    "Barnier says 'huge and serious' gap remains between UK and EU demands on Brexit – Politics live"

    means that we are on the verge of a deal.

    As I predicted the June Summit has been completely dominated by Italy and immigration with Brexit barely getting a look in. Whether this results in the EU27 thinking, "we just need to do this, we have enough else to worry about", or, "maybe later, we don't have time to even think about this right now", remains uncertain. May might just get lucky.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,081
    On topic, what's SLab's offer when it comes to attracting new, or more accurately regaining past, voters? On Brexit, Indy/Unionism, leadership, unity & policies it's all v. thin. They might have a teeny bit of leverage on the progressive socialism front (ironic given their previous position on ending a 'something for nothing' culture in Scotland), but that's pretty entangled with the chances of Jezza getting his hands on the levers of power.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,298
    DavidL said:

    TOPPING said:

    I presume that the Graun's headline:

    "Barnier says 'huge and serious' gap remains between UK and EU demands on Brexit – Politics live"

    means that we are on the verge of a deal.

    As I predicted the June Summit has been completely dominated by Italy and immigration with Brexit barely getting a look in. Whether this results in the EU27 thinking, "we just need to do this, we have enough else to worry about", or, "maybe later, we don't have time to even think about this right now", remains uncertain. May might just get lucky.
    I am in the group (NPXMPX2, Meeks, you?) that believes a deal will be done which will deflate much of the outrage on both sides, although not of course the loons.

    As to the priority, I think with last night's deal they have shown that compromise can hold the association together but that might as easily embolden them as inhibit them , because ours is a different scenario whereby they don't need to hold anything together because we have told them we want to leave.

    But a deal will come, regardless.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607
    Just had a look at the GDP detail, we had 0.94% GDP growth on an annualised basis which in 0.2% in quarterly terms. Once the next construction revision comes through I have no doubt that the Q1 figure will be revised up to 0.3% or around 1.05% on an annualised basis.

    I also think that we've got through the worst of the downturn pretty much unscathed. It also goes some way to explaining why the deficit is still falling so fast, the economy is still growing.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,983
    F1: only first practice but right now the top 6 are separated by about a quarter of a second. 'tis rather close.
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    DavidL said:

    Richard Leonard was pretty much unknown outside the Labour MSPs before his appointment and he still is. When I have heard him, and it's not often, he has actually sounded reasonably articulate but Scotland is dominated by 2 very strong women at present and it is difficult for anyone else to get a hearing.

    What is surprising in some ways is how the SNP support has remained so solid. The Scottish government has performed very poorly for some years now. Our health service is seriously struggling and Nicola's BFF forever has just had to "resign" as health minister. Education is a disaster area. Alex Bell, Salmond's one time speechwriter, is no friend of the SNP these days but this is a devastating description of Swinney's time at education: https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/opinion/alex-bell/678862/alex-bell-as-one-of-the-snps-three-ss-john-swinney-has-become-untouchable-despite-education-failures/

    At the same time as the reshuffle he abandoned the Education bill that he has been working on for 2 years. Taken with the named person fiasco it is difficult to see what has been achieved other than declining standards and an ever tighter grip on colleges and Universities that seeks to stamp out dissent.

    And of course in the last day or so we had some incompetent foul mouthed harridan who had to resign as a new Minister before she was even officially appointed.

    The SNP are living on the desire for independence. This has fallen off slightly but not by much and there is some evidence that the ongoing farce in Westminster is lifting it slightly again. It gives them a base that any other party in the UK would give their eye teeth for. But if Nicola is ultimately seen as not being able to deliver a second referendum all bets are off. It seems likely to me that Labour would be the main beneficiary in such a scenario.

    Yes, the SNP is a massive tent based on a single issue, independence. It is not left wing or right wing: it is both, or neither. I'm not sure that England winning the World Cup in a fortnight's time will take independence off the menu. Come to think of it, Nicola should set up an inquiry to discover just what has gone wrong with Scottish football. It is not too long ago that Scotland qualified and England did not.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    How far do the Scottish media report everything from a Scottish angle? - e.g. do splits in the Cabinet over Brexit get much coverage, or are they seen as relating to a faraway country?

    There is a lot of subtle, intrinsic bias. Last time I was up there I noticed that they don't call people, 'people', they call them 'Scots'.

    In the UK news, "10,000 people died from Cancer this year"
    In the Scottish news, "10,000 Scots died from Cancer this year"

    Subtle, but important and pervades everything.

  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    Sandpit said:

    GIN1138 said:

    How far do the Scottish media report everything from a Scottish angle? - e.g. do splits in the Cabinet over Brexit get much coverage, or are they seen as relating to a faraway country?

    O/T: I'm just been cancelling my sub to the Times and Sunday Times (as I had it for work but my media team colleagues cover that now). Boy, they make it hard. You can't do it online - there's a number you have to call dedicated only to sub cancellations, and it seems to be barely manned (I got on with work while letting it ring for 25 minutes before they finally answered). They then made a series of haggling offers, finally offering the sub for £1 a week. I had to say three times "But I don't like the newspapers, I no longer need them, and I want to cancel" before they finally gave in. Is it actually in accordance with Trading Standards to require you to cancel via a rarely-answered phone number?

    For those who do like the papers, I recommend pretending to want to cancel, and holding out till you get the £1 offer.

    From memory cancelling SKY is similarly difficult.

    Keep an eye on your bank account to make sure they don't "accidentally" take out any money after the cancellation... We had that with SKY and in the end we went into the bank and told to block any further payments to SKY.

    We eventually recovered the money they took but that was another saga.
    Sky are a complete nightmare to cancel, even if you tell them you’re emigrating. It’s an annoying trend for companies to put their most experienced and empowered sales staff on the cancellations lines, and even businesses who work completely online make you phone them to cancel.
    It really shouldn’t be allowed that if you have a system where you can sign up online, you should also be able to cancel online. In this day and age there is no excuse for a business not to have this.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,896
    edited June 2018

    F1: only first practice but right now the top 6 are separated by about a quarter of a second. 'tis rather close.

    Yes, all quite tight at the top.

    Also good to see Kubica in the Williams, dare I suggest that he’s going to be a lot more useful in providing feedback to the engineers than a couple of young pay drivers.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    Sounds like the EU can’t agree on any real action to address the illegal immigration problem.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-44652846
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    Sandpit said:

    GIN1138 said:

    How far do the Scottish media report everything from a Scottish angle? - e.g. do splits in the Cabinet over Brexit get much coverage, or are they seen as relating to a faraway country?

    O/T: I'm just been cancelling my sub to the Times and Sunday Times (as I had it for work but my media team colleagues cover that now). Boy, they make it hard. You can't do it online - there's a number you have to call dedicated only to sub cancellations, and it seems to be barely manned (I got on with work while letting it ring for 25 minutes before they finally answered). They then made a series of haggling offers, finally offering the sub for £1 a week. I had to say three times "But I don't like the newspapers, I no longer need them, and I want to cancel" before they finally gave in. Is it actually in accordance with Trading Standards to require you to cancel via a rarely-answered phone number?

    For those who do like the papers, I recommend pretending to want to cancel, and holding out till you get the £1 offer.

    From memory cancelling SKY is similarly difficult.

    Keep an eye on your bank account to make sure they don't "accidentally" take out any money after the cancellation... We had that with SKY and in the end we went into the bank and told to block any further payments to SKY.

    We eventually recovered the money they took but that was another saga.
    Sky are a complete nightmare to cancel, even if you tell them you’re emigrating. It’s an annoying trend for companies to put their most experienced and empowered sales staff on the cancellations lines, and even businesses who work completely online make you phone them to cancel.
    It really shouldn’t be allowed that if you have a system where you can sign up online, you should also be able to cancel online. In this day and age there is no excuse for a business not to have this.
    There is no incentive to have this. Why invest serious £££ developing IT systems that reduce revenue?
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,280
    TOPPING said:

    DavidL said:

    TOPPING said:

    I presume that the Graun's headline:

    "Barnier says 'huge and serious' gap remains between UK and EU demands on Brexit – Politics live"

    means that we are on the verge of a deal.

    As I predicted the June Summit has been completely dominated by Italy and immigration with Brexit barely getting a look in. Whether this results in the EU27 thinking, "we just need to do this, we have enough else to worry about", or, "maybe later, we don't have time to even think about this right now", remains uncertain. May might just get lucky.
    I am in the group (NPXMPX2, Meeks, you?) that believes a deal will be done which will deflate much of the outrage on both sides, although not of course the loons.

    As to the priority, I think with last night's deal they have shown that compromise can hold the association together but that might as easily embolden them as inhibit them , because ours is a different scenario whereby they don't need to hold anything together because we have told them we want to leave.

    But a deal will come, regardless.
    Yep, as the bard almost put it there will be much sound and fury, ultimately signifying nothing. Both sides have a fair bit to lose not just in the deal itself but, far more importantly, going forward. Both sides will look to minimise the damage and to keep a close relationship. It would be crazy for either side to do anything else.

    I think if May comes back with a deal that makes many of the loons wince she will be cheered to the rooftops by the vast majority who really want all of this to go away and she will have no difficulty in getting it through the Commons. Still think that will be October but now would be good.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,081
    Jonathan said:

    How far do the Scottish media report everything from a Scottish angle? - e.g. do splits in the Cabinet over Brexit get much coverage, or are they seen as relating to a faraway country?

    There is a lot of subtle, intrinsic bias. Last time I was up there I noticed that they don't call people, 'people', they call them 'Scots'.

    In the UK news, "10,000 people died from Cancer this year"
    In the Scottish news, "10,000 Scots died from Cancer this year"

    Subtle, but important and pervades everything.

    All the people who died of cancer in the UK were Scots? Jeez, things are worse than I thought.
  • Options
    MaxPB said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Looks like my builder friend's anecdote re Milton Keynes and Max's recent experience fit the housing data:

    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/jun/29/london-house-price-growth-at-nine-year-low-amid-edinburgh-and-manchester-spurt

    I think the drop in central London would be bigger if people asked for steeper discounts. I was telling a friend of mine that I asked for and got 15% off the asking price for my place and he was really shocked. They paid just £20k (~3%) below asking price for their place in outer London. It's a real buyers market.
    I just sold my house in the Midlands for slightly more than the asking price. I'm not sure what that tells us though. Either the market is especially buoyant here, my asking price was too low, or my agent's marketing was top notch.
  • Options
    sarissasarissa Posts: 1,776

    So the walkout had no impact based on this poll.

    No Indy question asked/released?

    We should be due an Ipsos MORI soon, that'll be interesting to see if it shows this sort of no change.

    It's a Wings Over Scotland commissioned poll - there will be dozens of other questions released over the next few days.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited June 2018
    Jonathan said:

    Sandpit said:

    GIN1138 said:

    How far do the Scottish media report everything from a Scottish angle? - e.g. do splits in the Cabinet over Brexit get much coverage, or are they seen as relating to a faraway country?

    O/T: I'm just been cancelling my sub to the Times and Sunday Times (as I had it for work but my media team colleagues cover that now). Boy, they make it hard. You can't do it online - there's a number you have to call dedicated only to sub cancellations, and it seems to be barely manned (I got on with work while letting it ring for 25 minutes before they finally answered). They then made a series of haggling offers, finally offering the sub for £1 a week. I had to say three times "But I don't like the newspapers, I no longer need them, and I want to cancel" before they finally gave in. Is it actually in accordance with Trading Standards to require you to cancel via a rarely-answered phone number?

    For those who do like the papers, I recommend pretending to want to cancel, and holding out till you get the £1 offer.

    From memory cancelling SKY is similarly difficult.

    Keep an eye on your bank account to make sure they don't "accidentally" take out any money after the cancellation... We had that with SKY and in the end we went into the bank and told to block any further payments to SKY.

    We eventually recovered the money they took but that was another saga.
    Sky are a complete nightmare to cancel, even if you tell them you’re emigrating. It’s an annoying trend for companies to put their most experienced and empowered sales staff on the cancellations lines, and even businesses who work completely online make you phone them to cancel.
    It really shouldn’t be allowed that if you have a system where you can sign up online, you should also be able to cancel online. In this day and age there is no excuse for a business not to have this.
    There is no incentive to have this. Why invest serious £££ developing IT systems that reduce revenue?
    You misunderstood my point. I meant companies should be forced to do this, in the same way as consumers we have other rights over returns, cool off periods etc.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    Jonathan said:

    Sandpit said:

    GIN1138 said:

    How far do the Scottish media report everything from a Scottish angle? - e.g. do splits in the Cabinet over Brexit get much coverage, or are they seen as relating to a faraway country?

    O/T: I'm just been cancelling my sub to the Times and Sunday Times (as I had it for work but my media team colleagues cover that now). Boy, they make it hard. You can't do it online - there's a number you have to call dedicated only to sub cancellations, and it seems to be barely manned (I got on with work while letting it ring for 25 minutes before they finally answered). They then made a series of haggling offers, finally offering the sub for £1 a week. I had to say three times "But I don't like the newspapers, I no longer need them, and I want to cancel" before they finally gave in. Is it actually in accordance with Trading Standards to require you to cancel via a rarely-answered phone number?

    For those who do like the papers, I recommend pretending to want to cancel, and holding out till you get the £1 offer.

    From memory cancelling SKY is similarly difficult.

    Keep an eye on your bank account to make sure they don't "accidentally" take out any money after the cancellation... We had that with SKY and in the end we went into the bank and told to block any further payments to SKY.

    We eventually recovered the money they took but that was another saga.
    Sky are a complete nightmare to cancel, even if you tell them you’re emigrating. It’s an annoying trend for companies to put their most experienced and empowered sales staff on the cancellations lines, and even businesses who work completely online make you phone them to cancel.
    It really shouldn’t be allowed that if you have a system where you can sign up online, you should also be able to cancel online. In this day and age there is no excuse for a business not to have this.
    There is no incentive to have this. Why invest serious £££ developing IT systems that reduce revenue?
    You missed understood my point. I meant companies should be forced to do this.
    How?
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,280

    DavidL said:

    Richard Leonard was pretty much unknown outside the Labour MSPs before his appointment and he still is. When I have heard him, and it's not often, he has actually sounded reasonably articulate but Scotland is dominated by 2 very strong women at present and it is difficult for anyone else to get a hearing.

    What is surprising in some ways is how the SNP support has remained so solid. The Scottish government has performed very poorly for some years now. Our health service is seriously struggling and Nicola's BFF forever has just had to "resign" as health minister. Education is a disaster area. Alex Bell, Salmond's one time speechwriter, is no friend of the SNP these days but this is a devastating description of Swinney's time at education: https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/opinion/alex-bell/678862/alex-bell-as-one-of-the-snps-three-ss-john-swinney-has-become-untouchable-despite-education-failures/

    At the same time as the reshuffle he abandoned the Education bill that he has been working on for 2 years. Taken with the named person fiasco it is difficult to see what has been achieved other than declining standards and an ever tighter grip on colleges and Universities that seeks to stamp out dissent.

    And of course in the last day or so we had some incompetent foul mouthed harridan who had to resign as a new Minister before she was even officially appointed.

    The SNP are living on the desire for independence. This has fallen off slightly but not by much and there is some evidence that the ongoing farce in Westminster is lifting it slightly again. It gives them a base that any other party in the UK would give their eye teeth for. But if Nicola is ultimately seen as not being able to deliver a second referendum all bets are off. It seems likely to me that Labour would be the main beneficiary in such a scenario.

    Yes, the SNP is a massive tent based on a single issue, independence. It is not left wing or right wing: it is both, or neither. I'm not sure that England winning the World Cup in a fortnight's time will take independence off the menu. Come to think of it, Nicola should set up an inquiry to discover just what has gone wrong with Scottish football. It is not too long ago that Scotland qualified and England did not.
    You still think inquiries actually find the answers to things? As opposed to producing what people want to hear?

    Remarkable.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,216

    Jonathan said:

    Sandpit said:

    GIN1138 said:

    How far do the Scottish media report everything from a Scottish angle? - e.g. do splits in the Cabinet over Brexit get much coverage, or are they seen as relating to a faraway country?

    O/T: I'm just been cancelling my sub to the Times and Sunday Times (as I had it for work but my media team colleagues cover that now). Boy, they make it hard. You can't do it online - there's a number you have to call dedicated only to sub cancellations, and it seems to be barely manned (I got on with work while letting it ring for 25 minutes before they finally answered). They then made a series of haggling offers, finally offering the sub for £1 a week. I had to say three times "But I don't like the newspapers, I no longer need them, and I want to cancel" before they finally gave in. Is it actually in accordance with Trading Standards to require you to cancel via a rarely-answered phone number?

    For those who do like the papers, I recommend pretending to want to cancel, and holding out till you get the £1 offer.

    From memory cancelling SKY is similarly difficult.

    Keep an eye on your bank account to make sure they don't "accidentally" take out any money after the cancellation... We had that with SKY and in the end we went into the bank and told to block any further payments to SKY.

    We eventually recovered the money they took but that was another saga.
    Sky are a complete nightmare to cancel, even if you tell them you’re emigrating. It’s an annoying trend for companies to put their most experienced and empowered sales staff on the cancellations lines, and even businesses who work completely online make you phone them to cancel.
    It really shouldn’t be allowed that if you have a system where you can sign up online, you should also be able to cancel online. In this day and age there is no excuse for a business not to have this.
    There is no incentive to have this. Why invest serious £££ developing IT systems that reduce revenue?
    You misunderstood my point. I meant companies should be forced to do this.
    :+1::+1:
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Sandpit said:

    GIN1138 said:

    How far do the Scottish media report everything from a Scottish angle? - e.g. do splits in the Cabinet over Brexit get much coverage, or are they seen as relating to a faraway country?

    O/T: I'm just been cancelling my sub to the Times and Sunday Times (as I had it for work but my media team colleagues cover that now). Boy, they make it hard. You can't do it online - there's a number you have to call dedicated only to sub cancellations, and it seems to be barely manned (I got on with work while letting it ring for 25 minutes before they finally answered). They then made a series of haggling offers, finally offering the sub for £1 a week. I had to say three times "But I don't like the newspapers, I no longer need them, and I want to cancel" before they finally gave in. Is it actually in accordance with Trading Standards to require you to cancel via a rarely-answered phone number?

    For those who do like the papers, I recommend pretending to want to cancel, and holding out till you get the £1 offer.

    From memory cancelling SKY is similarly difficult.

    Keep an eye on your bank account to make sure they don't "accidentally" take out any money after the cancellation... We had that with SKY and in the end we went into the bank and told to block any further payments to SKY.

    We eventually recovered the money they took but that was another saga.
    Sky are a complete nightmare to cancel, even if you tell them you’re emigrating. It’s an annoying trend for companies to put their most experienced and empowered sales staff on the cancellations lines, and even businesses who work completely online make you phone them to cancel.
    It really shouldn’t be allowed that if you have a system where you can sign up online, you should also be able to cancel online. In this day and age there is no excuse for a business not to have this.
    There is no incentive to have this. Why invest serious £££ developing IT systems that reduce revenue?
    You missed understood my point. I meant companies should be forced to do this.
    How?
    The same way companies have to give you a cool off period, accept return of goods etc. If you offer online signup, you should also be required to ensure the customer can cancel online with similar ease.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,280

    Jonathan said:

    How far do the Scottish media report everything from a Scottish angle? - e.g. do splits in the Cabinet over Brexit get much coverage, or are they seen as relating to a faraway country?

    There is a lot of subtle, intrinsic bias. Last time I was up there I noticed that they don't call people, 'people', they call them 'Scots'.

    In the UK news, "10,000 people died from Cancer this year"
    In the Scottish news, "10,000 Scots died from Cancer this year"

    Subtle, but important and pervades everything.

    All the people who died of cancer in the UK were Scots? Jeez, things are worse than I thought.
    Exactly. The media use "Scots" to make it clear it is a Scottish number, not a UK number. Conspiracy theories are overrated (if occasionally fun).
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    edited June 2018

    The same way companies have to give you a cool off period, accept return of goods etc. If you offer online signup, you should also be required to ensure the customer can cancel online with similar ease.

    Aren't they very different things? One is a high-level legal framework. The other is specifying how something is implemented.

    You could ask companies to execute cancellation requests within 24hrs, but you really can't tell them how to do it.

    (note irony of Labour voter pointing out to Tory voter the trouble of regulating business)
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Jonathan said:

    How far do the Scottish media report everything from a Scottish angle? - e.g. do splits in the Cabinet over Brexit get much coverage, or are they seen as relating to a faraway country?

    There is a lot of subtle, intrinsic bias. Last time I was up there I noticed that they don't call people, 'people', they call them 'Scots'.

    In the UK news, "10,000 people died from Cancer this year"
    In the Scottish news, "10,000 Scots died from Cancer this year"

    Subtle, but important and pervades everything.

    As it happens, I've faced this drafting question only this morning. Writing "Brits" or "Britons" feels respectively too slangy and too quaint, so I use "people". Writing "Scots" feels fine.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,896
    edited June 2018
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Sandpit said:

    GIN1138 said:

    How far do the Scottish media report everything from a Scottish angle? - e.g. do splits in the Cabinet over Brexit get much coverage, or are they seen as relating to a faraway country?

    O/T: I'm just been cancelling my sub to the Times and Sunday Times (as I had it for work but my media team colleagues cover that now). Boy, they make it hard. You can't do it online - there's a number you have to call dedicated only to sub cancellations, and it seems to be barely manned (I got on with work while letting it ring for 25 minutes before they finally answered). They then made a series of haggling offers, finally offering the sub for £1 a week. I had to say three times "But I don't like the newspapers, I no longer need them, and I want to cancel" before they finally gave in. Is it actually in accordance with Trading Standards to require you to cancel via a rarely-answered phone number?

    For those who do like the papers, I recommend pretending to want to cancel, and holding out till you get the £1 offer.

    From memory cancelling SKY is similarly difficult.

    Keep an eye on your bank account to make sure they don't "accidentally" take out any money after the cancellation... We had that with SKY and in the end we went into the bank and told to block any further payments to SKY.

    We eventually recovered the money they took but that was another saga.
    Sky are a complete nightmare to cancel, even if you tell them you’re emigrating. It’s an annoying trend for companies to put their most experienced and empowered sales staff on the cancellations lines, and even businesses who work completely online make you phone them to cancel.
    It really shouldn’t be allowed that if you have a system where you can sign up online, you should also be able to cancel online. In this day and age there is no excuse for a business not to have this.
    There is no incentive to have this. Why invest serious £££ developing IT systems that reduce revenue?
    You missed understood my point. I meant companies should be forced to do this.
    How?
    They already have a user portal, adding a “cancel subscription” button, with an “are you sure” button after it is no effort at all. They’re deliberately being arseholes in making it as difficult as possible to cancel an arrangement.

    The Telegraph last year covered a number of stories about people trying to cancel Sky, that included people closing bank accounts, solicitors’ letters and small claims court cases. People got little or no response until journalists got involved.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,280
    Jonathan said:

    The same way companies have to give you a cool off period, accept return of goods etc. If you offer online signup, you should also be required to ensure the customer can cancel online with similar ease.

    Aren't they very different things? One is a high-level legal framework. The other is specifying how something is implemented.

    You could ask companies to execute cancellation requests within 24hrs, but you really can't tell them how to do it.

    (note irony of Labour voter pointing out to Tory voter the trouble of regulating business)
    Does cancelling the credit card from which they draw payment not work as well as anything?
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,612
    I would be perfectly happy for the SNP to gain all of Labour's Scottish seats if they gained twice as many from the Tories at the same time.

    I suppose it is easy for me to say this as I'm not a SLAB MP defending his/her seat!
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,612

    Jonathan said:

    How far do the Scottish media report everything from a Scottish angle? - e.g. do splits in the Cabinet over Brexit get much coverage, or are they seen as relating to a faraway country?

    There is a lot of subtle, intrinsic bias. Last time I was up there I noticed that they don't call people, 'people', they call them 'Scots'.

    In the UK news, "10,000 people died from Cancer this year"
    In the Scottish news, "10,000 Scots died from Cancer this year"

    Subtle, but important and pervades everything.

    As it happens, I've faced this drafting question only this morning. Writing "Brits" or "Britons" feels respectively too slangy and too quaint, so I use "people". Writing "Scots" feels fine.
    You could go with 'British Subjects".

    Or "Comrades".
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,896
    DavidL said:

    Jonathan said:

    The same way companies have to give you a cool off period, accept return of goods etc. If you offer online signup, you should also be required to ensure the customer can cancel online with similar ease.

    Aren't they very different things? One is a high-level legal framework. The other is specifying how something is implemented.

    You could ask companies to execute cancellation requests within 24hrs, but you really can't tell them how to do it.

    (note irony of Labour voter pointing out to Tory voter the trouble of regulating business)
    Does cancelling the credit card from which they draw payment not work as well as anything?
    Nope, it results in them sending a debt collector for the bounced payment.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,983
    Mr. Urquhart, I agree on the sign up/close down point, but if a business opts to be entirely offline (I believe Quakers do this sometimes) I think that's fair enough.

    Mr. Sandpit, Sirotkin's been praised quite a bit, I understand. Gives good feedback and doesn't complain, or sometimes even mention, an unfixable problem, leaving discussion of it for the garage.

    Mr. Meeks, you could write "10,000 of Her Majesty's loyal subjects".
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    DavidL said:

    Jonathan said:

    How far do the Scottish media report everything from a Scottish angle? - e.g. do splits in the Cabinet over Brexit get much coverage, or are they seen as relating to a faraway country?

    There is a lot of subtle, intrinsic bias. Last time I was up there I noticed that they don't call people, 'people', they call them 'Scots'.

    In the UK news, "10,000 people died from Cancer this year"
    In the Scottish news, "10,000 Scots died from Cancer this year"

    Subtle, but important and pervades everything.

    All the people who died of cancer in the UK were Scots? Jeez, things are worse than I thought.
    Exactly. The media use "Scots" to make it clear it is a Scottish number, not a UK number. Conspiracy theories are overrated (if occasionally fun).
    It's more than that. There is bias. Imagine a vox pop about some issue or other, with some journalist bothering folk down godforsaken high street.

    The piece will be introduced by someone saying, "What does X mean for Scots? Let's join Fred in the high street.

    I am not saying that it is a conspiracy. Far from it. But it is there, a very subtle thing. Personally, I think word Scot just sounds better/punchier. But it has a political effect.
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,612
    Sandpit said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Sandpit said:

    GIN1138 said:

    How far do the Scottish media report everything from a Scottish angle? - e.g. do splits in the Cabinet over Brexit get much coverage, or are they seen as relating to a faraway country?

    O/T: I'm just been cancelling my sub to the Times and Sunday Times (as I had it for work but my media team colleagues cover that now). Boy, they make it hard. You can't do it online - there's a number you have to call dedicated only to sub cancellations, and it seems to be barely manned (I got on with work while letting it ring for 25 minutes before they finally answered). They then made a series of haggling offers, finally offering the sub for £1 a week. I had to say three times "But I don't like the newspapers, I no longer need them, and I want to cancel" before they finally gave in. Is it actually in accordance with Trading Standards to require you to cancel via a rarely-answered phone number?

    For those who do like the papers, I recommend pretending to want to cancel, and holding out till you get the £1 offer.

    From memory cancelling SKY is similarly difficult.

    .
    It really shouldn’t be allowed that if you have a system where you can sign up online, you should also be able to cancel online. In this day and age there is no excuse for a business not to have this.
    There is no incentive to have this. Why invest serious £££ developing IT systems that reduce revenue?
    You missed understood my point. I meant companies should be forced to do this.
    How?
    They already have a user portal, adding a “cancel subscription” button, with an “are you sure” button after it is no effort at all. They’re deliberately being arseholes in making it as difficult as possible to cancel an arrangement.

    The Telegraph last year covered a number of stories about people trying to cancel Sky, that included people closing bank accounts, solicitors’ letters and small claims court cases. People got little or no response until journalists got involved.
    Getting out of Facebook is an order of magnitude harder.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,280
    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    Jonathan said:

    The same way companies have to give you a cool off period, accept return of goods etc. If you offer online signup, you should also be required to ensure the customer can cancel online with similar ease.

    Aren't they very different things? One is a high-level legal framework. The other is specifying how something is implemented.

    You could ask companies to execute cancellation requests within 24hrs, but you really can't tell them how to do it.

    (note irony of Labour voter pointing out to Tory voter the trouble of regulating business)
    Does cancelling the credit card from which they draw payment not work as well as anything?
    Nope, it results in them sending a debt collector for the bounced payment.
    And you simply tell them that you have cancelled the arrangement. As long as you actually have and don't try to sneak the cricket back on that should be the end of it.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Jonathan said:



    Aren't they very different things? One is a high-level legal framework. The other is specifying how something is implemented.

    You could ask companies to execute cancellation requests within 24hrs, but you really can't tell them how to do it.

    Why not?

    It's about accessibility and that is very much something that can be regulated. If a company said you can only cancel by calling a toll number between 3am and 4am on a Wednesday during a full moon would that be ok?
  • Options
    RhubarbRhubarb Posts: 359
    edited June 2018
    DavidL said:

    Jonathan said:

    The same way companies have to give you a cool off period, accept return of goods etc. If you offer online signup, you should also be required to ensure the customer can cancel online with similar ease.

    Aren't they very different things? One is a high-level legal framework. The other is specifying how something is implemented.

    You could ask companies to execute cancellation requests within 24hrs, but you really can't tell them how to do it.

    (note irony of Labour voter pointing out to Tory voter the trouble of regulating business)
    Does cancelling the credit card from which they draw payment not work as well as anything?
    Not if it's direct debt.

    Edit: But you can cancel that yourself - so this is a pointless post.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited June 2018
    Jonathan said:

    The same way companies have to give you a cool off period, accept return of goods etc. If you offer online signup, you should also be required to ensure the customer can cancel online with similar ease.

    Aren't they very different things? One is a high-level legal framework. The other is specifying how something is implemented.

    You could ask companies to execute cancellation requests within 24hrs, but you really can't tell them how to do it.

    (note irony of Labour voter pointing out to Tory voter the trouble of regulating business)
    Erhhhh one time Tory voter as an anti-corbyn vote.

    Also, see EU digital vat rules for forcing businesses to do things. You have to check 3 different methods of location ID before allowing a purchase, then collect the VAT, provide paperwork for all 27 countries, yadda yadda. You basically have to be the VAT police for every EU country.

    Forcing a company to have a cancel subscription button really is trivial compared to that.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,280

    Mr. Urquhart, I agree on the sign up/close down point, but if a business opts to be entirely offline (I believe Quakers do this sometimes) I think that's fair enough.

    Mr. Sandpit, Sirotkin's been praised quite a bit, I understand. Gives good feedback and doesn't complain, or sometimes even mention, an unfixable problem, leaving discussion of it for the garage.

    Mr. Meeks, you could write "10,000 of Her Majesty's loyal subjects".

    Well, you could but would that not exclude people like Corbyn? Lawyers have to be careful about these things.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    Sandpit said:


    They already have a user portal, adding a “cancel subscription” button, with an “are you sure” button after it is no effort at all. They’re deliberately being arseholes in making it as difficult as possible to cancel an arrangement.

    The Telegraph last year covered a number of stories about people trying to cancel Sky, that included people closing bank accounts, solicitors’ letters and small claims court cases. People got little or no response until journalists got involved.

    Adding the button is easy. You're right. A two minute job. Hooking that up to make changes into backend systems like SAP, covering all use cases, is never cheap - even for seemingly trivial things.

    Companies tend to like to bear that sort of integration cost for the things that make you money, not the things that cost you money.

  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,190

    Jonathan said:

    How far do the Scottish media report everything from a Scottish angle? - e.g. do splits in the Cabinet over Brexit get much coverage, or are they seen as relating to a faraway country?

    There is a lot of subtle, intrinsic bias. Last time I was up there I noticed that they don't call people, 'people', they call them 'Scots'.

    In the UK news, "10,000 people died from Cancer this year"
    In the Scottish news, "10,000 Scots died from Cancer this year"

    Subtle, but important and pervades everything.

    As it happens, I've faced this drafting question only this morning. Writing "Brits" or "Britons" feels respectively too slangy and too quaint, so I use "people". Writing "Scots" feels fine.
    You could go with 'British Subjects".

    Or "Comrades".
    Plebs.
  • Options
    OblitusSumMeOblitusSumMe Posts: 9,143
    edited June 2018
    Jonathan said:

    How far do the Scottish media report everything from a Scottish angle? - e.g. do splits in the Cabinet over Brexit get much coverage, or are they seen as relating to a faraway country?

    There is a lot of subtle, intrinsic bias. Last time I was up there I noticed that they don't call people, 'people', they call them 'Scots'.

    In the UK news, "10,000 people died from Cancer this year"
    In the Scottish news, "10,000 Scots died from Cancer this year"

    Subtle, but important and pervades everything.
    I've lived in Edinburgh for nearly three years now, and I don't have much contact with the Scottish media.

    Mostly I get my news from R4 (national UK), The Guardian (national UK) or the Irish Times (national Ireland - for a view on Brexit from within the continuity EU). Very rarely I will see something from the Edinburgh Evening News about cycle lanes (Facebook knows that I'm of an age/gender to be cycling).

    I think it must be pretty different on TV news.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Jonathan said:

    Sandpit said:


    They already have a user portal, adding a “cancel subscription” button, with an “are you sure” button after it is no effort at all. They’re deliberately being arseholes in making it as difficult as possible to cancel an arrangement.

    The Telegraph last year covered a number of stories about people trying to cancel Sky, that included people closing bank accounts, solicitors’ letters and small claims court cases. People got little or no response until journalists got involved.

    Adding the button is easy. You're right. A two minute job. Hooking that up to make changes into backend systems like SAP, covering all use cases, is never cheap - even for seemingly trivial things.

    Companies tend to like to bear that sort of integration cost for the things that make you money, not the things that cost you money.

    How is it any different to GDPR?
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    Jonathan said:

    The same way companies have to give you a cool off period, accept return of goods etc. If you offer online signup, you should also be required to ensure the customer can cancel online with similar ease.

    Aren't they very different things? One is a high-level legal framework. The other is specifying how something is implemented.

    You could ask companies to execute cancellation requests within 24hrs, but you really can't tell them how to do it.

    (note irony of Labour voter pointing out to Tory voter the trouble of regulating business)
    Erhhhh one time Tory voter as an anti-corbyn vote.

    Also, see EU digital vat rules for forcing businesses to do things. You have to check 3 different methods of location ID before allowing a purchase, the collect the VAT, provide paperwork for all 27 countries, yadda yadda.

    Forcing a company to have a cancel subscription button really is trivial compared to that.
    VAT regs are a nightmare. But again, companies will overcome that sort of thing, because they want cash. You are asking them to spend resources on losing revenue. In a world of infinite demand for new products and features, it ain't going to happen.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,586
    FPT
    TOPPING said:

    Nigelb said:

    TOPPING said:

    Nigelb said:


    TOPPING said:

    Here's a (my) working list for example:

    No foreign interventions for reasons that are only tenuously connected with a threat to the UK*.
    Able to participate in isolated humanitarian operations.
    Able to engage in force level deployments where there is a clear national interest involved*.
    Contributing to NATO/EU peacekeeping missions.
    Having forces sufficient to enact MACP.
    Having forces sufficient to maintain the integrity and safety of our internal borders if necessary (eg. NI).

    *difficult to determine, short of threat to our borders from a hostile force.

    Conspicuously missing from that list is what the requirement might be for the basic defence of the UK....
    No. 3?
    'When...' ?
    Surely it is always is the national interest to provide for the defence of the nation.
    And this is only the third item in a working list ??

    I think you need to go back to first principles, and consider what are the priorities.
    well it was written down at random and I suppose uppermost in my mind (I drew it up a couple of days ago) was that PB was discussing Blair and the Iraq intervention.
    Fair enough - though it seems the MOD have taken a similar approach to formulating policy for some time now...
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,896
    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    Jonathan said:

    The same way companies have to give you a cool off period, accept return of goods etc. If you offer online signup, you should also be required to ensure the customer can cancel online with similar ease.

    Aren't they very different things? One is a high-level legal framework. The other is specifying how something is implemented.

    You could ask companies to execute cancellation requests within 24hrs, but you really can't tell them how to do it.

    (note irony of Labour voter pointing out to Tory voter the trouble of regulating business)
    Does cancelling the credit card from which they draw payment not work as well as anything?
    Nope, it results in them sending a debt collector for the bounced payment.
    And you simply tell them that you have cancelled the arrangement. As long as you actually have and don't try to sneak the cricket back on that should be the end of it.
    From memory their contract has 60 days’ notice, and if you phone them to cancel you get a very pushy salesperson who just won’t accept your request. There have been stories of their head office refusing to accept letters sent recorded delivery, that sort of thing. They also won’t let you cancel if you’re in “debt” having “missed” a payment. If you take them to court they’ll fold, but most people don’t want to go through that for a TV service.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    DavidL said:

    What is surprising in some ways is how the SNP support has remained so solid.

    https://twitter.com/AgentP22/status/1012305381484302341
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited June 2018
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    The same way companies have to give you a cool off period, accept return of goods etc. If you offer online signup, you should also be required to ensure the customer can cancel online with similar ease.

    Aren't they very different things? One is a high-level legal framework. The other is specifying how something is implemented.

    You could ask companies to execute cancellation requests within 24hrs, but you really can't tell them how to do it.

    (note irony of Labour voter pointing out to Tory voter the trouble of regulating business)
    Erhhhh one time Tory voter as an anti-corbyn vote.

    Also, see EU digital vat rules for forcing businesses to do things. You have to check 3 different methods of location ID before allowing a purchase, the collect the VAT, provide paperwork for all 27 countries, yadda yadda.

    Forcing a company to have a cancel subscription button really is trivial compared to that.
    VAT regs are a nightmare. But again, companies will overcome that sort of thing, because they want cash. You are asking them to spend resources on losing revenue. In a world of infinite demand for new products and features, it ain't going to happen.
    I don’t see how it is any different from a company having to offer a cooling off period. They would rather not do it, as people will cancel in that window. But it is good for the consumer and the right thing to do. Is that not what the state is for?

    One of my businesses have a subscription service and we only offer online sign-up and cancellation, and it is all pretty much automated.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,298
    Talking of deals, this has just been published by the EU.

    Although I've no idea what it is actually saying. Must try harder, it sounds like.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,586
    edited June 2018
    DavidL said:

    TOPPING said:

    DavidL said:

    TOPPING said:

    I presume that the Graun's headline:

    "Barnier says 'huge and serious' gap remains between UK and EU demands on Brexit – Politics live"

    means that we are on the verge of a deal.

    As I predicted the June Summit has been completely dominated by Italy and immigration with Brexit barely getting a look in. Whether this results in the EU27 thinking, "we just need to do this, we have enough else to worry about", or, "maybe later, we don't have time to even think about this right now", remains uncertain. May might just get lucky.
    I am ... leave.

    But a deal will come, regardless.
    Yep, as the bard almost put it there will be much sound and fury, ultimately signifying nothing. Both sides have a fair bit to lose not just in the deal itself but, far more importantly, going forward. Both sides will look to minimise the damage and to keep a close relationship. It would be crazy for either side to do anything else.

    I think if May comes back with a deal that makes many of the loons wince she will be cheered to the rooftops by the vast majority who really want all of this to go away and she will have no difficulty in getting it through the Commons. Still think that will be October but now would be good.
    That would be the ideal outcome, but it's far from assured.
    And it's not Barnier freelancing.

    http://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/35966/29-euco-art50-conclusions-en.pdf

    ...2. The European Council expresses its concern that no substantial progress has yet been achieved on agreeing a backstop solution for Ireland/Northern Ireland. It recalls the commitments undertaken by the UK in this respect in December 2017 and March 2018, and insists on the need for intensified efforts so that the Withdrawal Agreement, including its provisions on transition, can be concluded as soon as possible in order to come into effect on the date of withdrawal. It recalls that negotiations can only progress as long as all commitments undertaken so far are respected in full.

    3. Work must also be accelerated with a view to preparing a political declaration on the framework for the future relationship. This requires further clarity as well as realistic and workable proposals from the UK as regards its position on the future relationship. The European Council reconfirms the principles set out in its guidelines and the position defined in March 2018. The European Council recalls that if the UK positions were to evolve, the Union will be prepared to reconsider its offer in accordance with the principles stated in the guidelines of 29 April and 15 December 2017 as well as of 23 March 2018.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,983
    Meanwhile, in democratic (or not) news:
    https://twitter.com/Holbornlolz/status/1012641555759468544
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,926
    edited June 2018
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    The same way companies have to give you a cool off period, accept return of goods etc. If you offer online signup, you should also be required to ensure the customer can cancel online with similar ease.

    Aren't they very different things? One is a high-level legal framework. The other is specifying how something is implemented.

    You could ask companies to execute cancellation requests within 24hrs, but you really can't tell them how to do it.

    (note irony of Labour voter pointing out to Tory voter the trouble of regulating business)
    Erhhhh one time Tory voter as an anti-corbyn vote.

    Also, see EU digital vat rules for forcing businesses to do things. You have to check 3 different methods of location ID before allowing a purchase, the collect the VAT, provide paperwork for all 27 countries, yadda yadda.

    Forcing a company to have a cancel subscription button really is trivial compared to that.
    VAT regs are a nightmare. But again, companies will overcome that sort of thing, because they want cash. You are asking them to spend resources on losing revenue. In a world of infinite demand for new products and features, it ain't going to happen.
    If you can sign up for something online, you ought to be able to quit it online. I think legislation will come in, and a company far bigger than Sky (Amazon) allows Prime cancellation absolubtely hassle free (Though I remember logging on once and couldn't remember signing up so I quit !)
    Personally I don't bother with Sky.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,896
    Jonathan said:

    Sandpit said:


    They already have a user portal, adding a “cancel subscription” button, with an “are you sure” button after it is no effort at all. They’re deliberately being arseholes in making it as difficult as possible to cancel an arrangement.

    The Telegraph last year covered a number of stories about people trying to cancel Sky, that included people closing bank accounts, solicitors’ letters and small claims court cases. People got little or no response until journalists got involved.

    Adding the button is easy. You're right. A two minute job. Hooking that up to make changes into backend systems like SAP, covering all use cases, is never cheap - even for seemingly trivial things.

    Companies tend to like to bear that sort of integration cost for the things that make you money, not the things that cost you money.

    The web service is already interfaced to the back end, it’s very easy to change your channel package via the website already. Someone hitting a Cancel button provides a cancellation date in the system and alerts a human in accounts (and probably one in sales as well) to calculate the final bill.

    The point is that they make you jump through hoops to provide them with a notification of cancellation which they will accept, which is what’s wrong.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    Sandpit said:

    Jonathan said:

    Sandpit said:


    They already have a user portal, adding a “cancel subscription” button, with an “are you sure” button after it is no effort at all. They’re deliberately being arseholes in making it as difficult as possible to cancel an arrangement.

    The Telegraph last year covered a number of stories about people trying to cancel Sky, that included people closing bank accounts, solicitors’ letters and small claims court cases. People got little or no response until journalists got involved.

    Adding the button is easy. You're right. A two minute job. Hooking that up to make changes into backend systems like SAP, covering all use cases, is never cheap - even for seemingly trivial things.

    Companies tend to like to bear that sort of integration cost for the things that make you money, not the things that cost you money.

    The web service is already interfaced to the back end, it’s very easy to change your channel package via the website already. Someone hitting a Cancel button provides a cancellation date in the system and alerts a human in accounts (and probably one in sales as well) to calculate the final bill.

    The point is that they make you jump through hoops to provide them with a notification of cancellation which they will accept, which is what’s wrong.
    I am 100% certain with the complexity of sky’s operation their backend systems are extremely good and that when you phone all that is happening is the person on the phone is ultimately just clicking the cancel button.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,280

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    The same way companies have to give you a cool off period, accept return of goods etc. If you offer online signup, you should also be required to ensure the customer can cancel online with similar ease.

    Aren't they very different things? One is a high-level legal framework. The other is specifying how something is implemented.

    You could ask companies to execute cancellation requests within 24hrs, but you really can't tell them how to do it.

    (note irony of Labour voter pointing out to Tory voter the trouble of regulating business)
    Erhhhh one time Tory voter as an anti-corbyn vote.

    Also, see EU digital vat rules for forcing businesses to do things. You have to check 3 different methods of location ID before allowing a purchase, the collect the VAT, provide paperwork for all 27 countries, yadda yadda.

    Forcing a company to have a cancel subscription button really is trivial compared to that.
    VAT regs are a nightmare. But again, companies will overcome that sort of thing, because they want cash. You are asking them to spend resources on losing revenue. In a world of infinite demand for new products and features, it ain't going to happen.
    I don’t see how it is any different from a company having to offer a cooling off period. They would rather not do it, as people will cancel in that window. But it is good for the consumer and the right thing to do. Is that not what the state is for?

    One of my businesses have a subscription service and we only offer online sign-up and cancellation, and it is all pretty much automated.
    The difference is that a cooling off period relates to the formation of the contract in the first place. What we are concerned with here is the termination of a contract which is up and running. To my own knowledge there is very little specific regulation of that. If you could only cancel a contract by appearing in person at their branch office in Ulaanbaatar, this would fall foul of the general provisions against unfair contract terms but it is highly doubtful that requiring someone to phone a number is going to do the same, even if it is not answered as frequently as it might be.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901

    Jonathan said:

    Sandpit said:


    They already have a user portal, adding a “cancel subscription” button, with an “are you sure” button after it is no effort at all. They’re deliberately being arseholes in making it as difficult as possible to cancel an arrangement.

    The Telegraph last year covered a number of stories about people trying to cancel Sky, that included people closing bank accounts, solicitors’ letters and small claims court cases. People got little or no response until journalists got involved.

    Adding the button is easy. You're right. A two minute job. Hooking that up to make changes into backend systems like SAP, covering all use cases, is never cheap - even for seemingly trivial things.

    Companies tend to like to bear that sort of integration cost for the things that make you money, not the things that cost you money.

    How is it any different to GDPR?
    GDPR specified rules and standards, but didn't specify how you implement them. You can use pigeons if you want.
  • Options
    JonathanJonathan Posts: 20,901
    Sandpit said:

    Jonathan said:

    Sandpit said:


    They already have a user portal, adding a “cancel subscription” button, with an “are you sure” button after it is no effort at all. They’re deliberately being arseholes in making it as difficult as possible to cancel an arrangement.

    The Telegraph last year covered a number of stories about people trying to cancel Sky, that included people closing bank accounts, solicitors’ letters and small claims court cases. People got little or no response until journalists got involved.

    Adding the button is easy. You're right. A two minute job. Hooking that up to make changes into backend systems like SAP, covering all use cases, is never cheap - even for seemingly trivial things.

    Companies tend to like to bear that sort of integration cost for the things that make you money, not the things that cost you money.

    The web service is already interfaced to the back end, it’s very easy to change your channel package via the website already. Someone hitting a Cancel button provides a cancellation date in the system and alerts a human in accounts (and probably one in sales as well) to calculate the final bill.

    The point is that they make you jump through hoops to provide them with a notification of cancellation which they will accept, which is what’s wrong.
    Never assume anything in IT is cheap.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,060
    TOPPING said:

    Talking of deals, this has just been published by the EU.

    Although I've no idea what it is actually saying. Must try harder, it sounds like.

    The significant thing is that all attempts to fudge the backstop have been rejected and they’re insisting we stick to the December agreement or there’s no deal.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Sandpit said:


    They already have a user portal, adding a “cancel subscription” button, with an “are you sure” button after it is no effort at all. They’re deliberately being arseholes in making it as difficult as possible to cancel an arrangement.

    The Telegraph last year covered a number of stories about people trying to cancel Sky, that included people closing bank accounts, solicitors’ letters and small claims court cases. People got little or no response until journalists got involved.

    Adding the button is easy. You're right. A two minute job. Hooking that up to make changes into backend systems like SAP, covering all use cases, is never cheap - even for seemingly trivial things.

    Companies tend to like to bear that sort of integration cost for the things that make you money, not the things that cost you money.

    How is it any different to GDPR?
    GDPR specified rules and standards, but didn't specify how you implement them. You can use pigeons if you want.
    I don't think that is right. In fact I believe a pre existing rule is that if you send an email it must have an unsubscribe link. No pigeons it has to be implemented online.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,896

    Sandpit said:

    Jonathan said:

    Sandpit said:


    They already have a user portal, adding a “cancel subscription” button, with an “are you sure” button after it is no effort at all. They’re deliberately being arseholes in making it as difficult as possible to cancel an arrangement.

    The Telegraph last year covered a number of stories about people trying to cancel Sky, that included people closing bank accounts, solicitors’ letters and small claims court cases. People got little or no response until journalists got involved.

    Adding the button is easy. You're right. A two minute job. Hooking that up to make changes into backend systems like SAP, covering all use cases, is never cheap - even for seemingly trivial things.

    Companies tend to like to bear that sort of integration cost for the things that make you money, not the things that cost you money.

    The web service is already interfaced to the back end, it’s very easy to change your channel package via the website already. Someone hitting a Cancel button provides a cancellation date in the system and alerts a human in accounts (and probably one in sales as well) to calculate the final bill.

    The point is that they make you jump through hoops to provide them with a notification of cancellation which they will accept, which is what’s wrong.
    I am 100% certain with the complexity of sky’s operation their backend systems are extremely good and that when you phone all that is happening is the person on the phone is ultimately just clicking the cancel button.
    Yes. Except for the sales people incentivised not to press the button.

    From a systems point of view, it’s as easy (or otherwise) as they want it to be.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,586
    Pulpstar said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    The same way companies have to give you a cool off period, accept return of goods etc. If you offer online signup, you should also be required to ensure the customer can cancel online with similar ease.

    Aren't they very different things? One is a high-level legal framework. The other is specifying how something is implemented.

    You could ask companies to execute cancellation requests within 24hrs, but you really can't tell them how to do it.

    (note irony of Labour voter pointing out to Tory voter the trouble of regulating business)
    Erhhhh one time Tory voter as an anti-corbyn vote.

    Also, see EU digital vat rules for forcing businesses to do things. You have to check 3 different methods of location ID before allowing a purchase, the collect the VAT, provide paperwork for all 27 countries, yadda yadda.

    Forcing a company to have a cancel subscription button really is trivial compared to that.
    VAT regs are a nightmare. But again, companies will overcome that sort of thing, because they want cash. You are asking them to spend resources on losing revenue. In a world of infinite demand for new products and features, it ain't going to happen.
    If you can sign up for something online, you ought to be able to quit it online...
    Now that is a principle which really ought to be enshrined in law.
    A standard (as with GDPR) which companies can choose how to implement...
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,280
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Sandpit said:


    They already have a user portal, adding a “cancel subscription” button, with an “are you sure” button after it is no effort at all. They’re deliberately being arseholes in making it as difficult as possible to cancel an arrangement.

    The Telegraph last year covered a number of stories about people trying to cancel Sky, that included people closing bank accounts, solicitors’ letters and small claims court cases. People got little or no response until journalists got involved.

    Adding the button is easy. You're right. A two minute job. Hooking that up to make changes into backend systems like SAP, covering all use cases, is never cheap - even for seemingly trivial things.

    Companies tend to like to bear that sort of integration cost for the things that make you money, not the things that cost you money.

    How is it any different to GDPR?
    GDPR specified rules and standards, but didn't specify how you implement them. You can use pigeons if you want.
    Not entirely sure that pigeon post would meet the reasonable steps to ensure security of the information requirements of GDPR...possibly if the messages were encrypted.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,896
    Jonathan said:

    Sandpit said:

    Jonathan said:

    Sandpit said:


    They already have a user portal, adding a “cancel subscription” button, with an “are you sure” button after it is no effort at all. They’re deliberately being arseholes in making it as difficult as possible to cancel an arrangement.

    The Telegraph last year covered a number of stories about people trying to cancel Sky, that included people closing bank accounts, solicitors’ letters and small claims court cases. People got little or no response until journalists got involved.

    Adding the button is easy. You're right. A two minute job. Hooking that up to make changes into backend systems like SAP, covering all use cases, is never cheap - even for seemingly trivial things.

    Companies tend to like to bear that sort of integration cost for the things that make you money, not the things that cost you money.

    The web service is already interfaced to the back end, it’s very easy to change your channel package via the website already. Someone hitting a Cancel button provides a cancellation date in the system and alerts a human in accounts (and probably one in sales as well) to calculate the final bill.

    The point is that they make you jump through hoops to provide them with a notification of cancellation which they will accept, which is what’s wrong.
    Never assume anything in IT is cheap.
    I’m expensive ;)
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    TOPPING said:

    Talking of deals, this has just been published by the EU.

    Although I've no idea what it is actually saying. Must try harder, it sounds like.

    Isn't it fairly clear?

    1. There's far too much stuff outstanding for comfort. Gibraltar, for starters.

    2. Northern Ireland is stuck.

    3. The EU is waiting for British proposals. It will look again at its own ideas if Britain stops draping itself in union jacks and starts engaging what the EU thinks of as "sensibly".

    4. There's a real risk this is all going pear-shaped. Plan accordingly.
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,419
    "It was, as we are all aware, the upheaval in politics north of the border in the aftermath of the 2014 independence referendum that changed everything"

    I'm not sure I agree with that. In some ways, the referendum just jolted Westminster VI into line with Scotland's voting for other bodies. These are the SNP/Lab shares (plus others, where SNP/Lab was third) for the major elections in Scotland from 2005GE onwards (for Scottish Parliament elections (SP), I've used the regional vote; for local elections, I've used first preferences):

    2005 GE Lab 39.5 SNP 17.7 (LD 22.6)
    2007 LE Lab 28.1 SNP 27.9
    2007 SP Lab 29.2 SNP 31.0
    2009 EP Lab 20.8 SNP 29.1
    2010 GE Lab 42.0 SNP 19.9
    2011 SP Lab 26.3 SNP 44.0
    2012 LE Lab 31.4 SNP 32.3
    2014 EP Lab 25.9 SNP 29.0
    2015 GE Lab 24.3 SNP 50.0
    2016 SP Lab 19.1 SNP 41.7 (Con 22.9)
    2017 LE Lab 20.2 SNP 32.3 (Con 25.3)
    2017 GE Lab 27.1 SNP 36.9 (Con 28.6)

    So while there was a spike to an unprecedented level for the SNP after the referendum, and while it certainly shifted Westminster voting in a way it had never gone before, it didn't 'change everything'. In particular, the 2011 Holyrood election gave a good foretaste of the 2015 Westminster vote, and looking at the 2005-14 results, it's really the Westminster votes which stand out as exceptional, both with Labour doing so well and the SNP so badly (the contrast between 2009 and 2010 is particularly striking and a measure of how brittle Labour's vote had become).
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,586
    Sandpit said:

    F1: only first practice but right now the top 6 are separated by about a quarter of a second. 'tis rather close.

    Yes, all quite tight at the top.

    Also good to see Kubica in the Williams, dare I suggest that he’s going to be a lot more useful in providing feedback to the engineers than a couple of young pay drivers.
    Autosport:
    Have to say the Mercedes looks stunning through Turn 1. Hard on the brakes, carrying good mid-corner speed and really stable on exit. Looks a cut above the rest.
    Edd Straw...

    Bet accordingly.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,298

    TOPPING said:

    Talking of deals, this has just been published by the EU.

    Although I've no idea what it is actually saying. Must try harder, it sounds like.

    Isn't it fairly clear?

    1. There's far too much stuff outstanding for comfort. Gibraltar, for starters.

    2. Northern Ireland is stuck.

    3. The EU is waiting for British proposals. It will look again at its own ideas if Britain stops draping itself in union jacks and starts engaging what the EU thinks of as "sensibly".

    4. There's a real risk this is all going pear-shaped. Plan accordingly.
    Well it is certainly holding the UK's feet to the fire and goes against an intuitive, back channel progress assumption. Unless the EU is really playing a diamond-hard game of poker with us.

    But yes, as you say, it is telling us, in effect that Brexit (ie our papers and agreements on Brexit) means Brexit.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,586

    TOPPING said:

    Talking of deals, this has just been published by the EU.

    Although I've no idea what it is actually saying. Must try harder, it sounds like.

    Isn't it fairly clear?

    1. There's far too much stuff outstanding for comfort. Gibraltar, for starters.

    2. Northern Ireland is stuck.

    3. The EU is waiting for British proposals. It will look again at its own ideas if Britain stops draping itself in union jacks and starts engaging what the EU thinks of as "sensibly".

    4. There's a real risk this is all going pear-shaped. Plan accordingly.
    How significant is "insist" ?
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,896
    edited June 2018
    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    F1: only first practice but right now the top 6 are separated by about a quarter of a second. 'tis rather close.

    Yes, all quite tight at the top.

    Also good to see Kubica in the Williams, dare I suggest that he’s going to be a lot more useful in providing feedback to the engineers than a couple of young pay drivers.
    Autosport:
    Have to say the Mercedes looks stunning through Turn 1. Hard on the brakes, carrying good mid-corner speed and really stable on exit. Looks a cut above the rest.
    Edd Straw...

    Bet accordingly.
    Yes. Bottas e/w for pole might be good value.

    A pile of upgrades to the German cars this weekend.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,896
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Talking of deals, this has just been published by the EU.

    Although I've no idea what it is actually saying. Must try harder, it sounds like.

    Isn't it fairly clear?

    1. There's far too much stuff outstanding for comfort. Gibraltar, for starters.

    2. Northern Ireland is stuck.

    3. The EU is waiting for British proposals. It will look again at its own ideas if Britain stops draping itself in union jacks and starts engaging what the EU thinks of as "sensibly".

    4. There's a real risk this is all going pear-shaped. Plan accordingly.
    Well it is certainly holding the UK's feet to the fire and goes against an intuitive, back channel progress assumption. Unless the EU is really playing a diamond-hard game of poker with us.

    But yes, as you say, it is telling us, in effect that Brexit (ie our papers and agreements on Brexit) means Brexit.
    Surely there’s an actual negotiation going on behind all the posturing politicians on all sides?

    Right now it looks like a 20-25% chance of a crash out based on the utter failure of the two sides to understand each other.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,926
    edited June 2018

    TOPPING said:

    Talking of deals, this has just been published by the EU.

    Although I've no idea what it is actually saying. Must try harder, it sounds like.

    Isn't it fairly clear?

    1. There's far too much stuff outstanding for comfort. Gibraltar, for starters.

    2. Northern Ireland is stuck.

    3. The EU is waiting for British proposals. It will look again at its own ideas if Britain stops draping itself in union jacks and starts engaging what the EU thinks of as "sensibly".

    4. There's a real risk this is all going pear-shaped. Plan accordingly.
    On point 3, I don't think our proposals have been 'Union Jack' wrapped up at all recently; I think it is more the EU that is refusing to engage on a sensible basis. Currently it looks to me like the EU is interested in either a humiliating deal for Britain, or no deal..
    Now that assesment might be borne of mischaracterisations of Barnier's utter inflexibility/requirement for Britain to be on bended knee in the press, and I hope the EU is being more reasonable than it appears.
    Clearly with point 4, the EU is well prepared preparing for there to be no deal - and we are not.
    If it's to be Brexit humiliation for Britain then so be it but I'm not sure that is the best footing for the EU to be starting off with with their largest export partner heading forward.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    No football today...going to be like a junkie without their fix.
  • Options
    david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 17,419



    You should read the paper I linked. It does not work like that. The Bundesbank actually owe all the Target2 balances to the German commercial banks - see pages 52 and 53 of the paper. And what you are suggesting, which is the compulsory theft of Euros in depositors accounts in Germany and replacement with a less valuable asset, is so obviously illegal that even the ECJ might blush.

    Almost nothing is illegal that is properly legislated for. The principle of enforced removal of assets by the state is well established: it's called tax.
    That is not what is being talked about here. Taking your money out of your bank and replacing it with something worth less is theft. It is also illegal under all current laws, since the bank in question is still solvent - in this scenario it is the Bundesbank, not the commercial bank, that has the solvency problem. If you went to your bank tomorrow and they had switched all your pounds for Turkish Lira you might in fact consider this theft, especially if the bank intended to carry on trading as if nothing had happened.

    And if any bank in Europe tried such a trick, every deposit holder in Europe would instantly take their money out and put it in the bank of a country with a functioning legal system (eg the UK hopefully). So no more EU banking system.

    Apart from this, how would the bank know which deposit holders to steal from? They have an Italian sounding name?

    The point is that pro-EU people like to pretend that Target2 is not a problem. It is a problem, as this nonsensical suggestion shows.
    You are mixing up all sorts of things here.

    Whether something is legal or not depends on (1) whether appropriate domestic legislation entitles the state to act as it has and, in extreme cases, (2) whether the act infringes very basic human rights. Whether the act is sensible or practicable are different questions - and, I'd suggest, a more fruitful line of opposition.

    I'd argue that legally the state has the powers needed to act as suggested, which are twofold: the right to tax - i.e. to require payment based on an identifiable asset or action - and the right to compulsorily purchase, subject to appropriate compensation. In this case, it'd be effectively a savings tax followed by the compulsory purchase of residual balances, paid for in Turkish Lira. Such an act would, of course, be hugely unpopular and damaging - but it wouldn't be illegal providing the proper processes had been followed.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,426
    Sandpit said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    Talking of deals, this has just been published by the EU.

    Although I've no idea what it is actually saying. Must try harder, it sounds like.

    Isn't it fairly clear?

    1. There's far too much stuff outstanding for comfort. Gibraltar, for starters.

    2. Northern Ireland is stuck.

    3. The EU is waiting for British proposals. It will look again at its own ideas if Britain stops draping itself in union jacks and starts engaging what the EU thinks of as "sensibly".

    4. There's a real risk this is all going pear-shaped. Plan accordingly.
    Well it is certainly holding the UK's feet to the fire and goes against an intuitive, back channel progress assumption. Unless the EU is really playing a diamond-hard game of poker with us.

    But yes, as you say, it is telling us, in effect that Brexit (ie our papers and agreements on Brexit) means Brexit.
    Surely there’s an actual negotiation going on behind all the posturing politicians on all sides?

    Right now it looks like a 20-25% chance of a crash out based on the utter failure of the two sides to understand each other.
    The biggest problem is that nearly two years on from the referendum the UK still hasn't worked out want it wants, that's why the government is still negotiating with itself.

    Oh and the UK govt have realised the EU have their red lines too.
This discussion has been closed.