I would hope so in the same way Irish can have dual British/Irish nationality
Northern Irish people are entitled to Irish citizenship but people born in the Republic of Ireland arent generally entitled to British nationality.
But they can live here without restriction and presumably apply for naturalisation after the appropriate period? I have several Eire friends with UK passports with no connection other than long term residence.
@RichardNabavi. "Roger, given the number of posts you've made on this thread about Sir Mark Thatcher, who is not active in politics and doesn't even live in the UK."
He is significant in that he is the first and only person since 1964 who has been given a baronetcy and the first person in centuries to be given such a title by his mother the Prime Minister for doing nothing. On the basis that he's a convicted crook when looking at Thatcher's legacy and indeed sanity I'd say he was very relevant.
@Jonny_Jimmy. Why don't you write something interesting? Six posts and at least two about Plato and who's left and who's right. It's just f*cking boring.
He is significant in that he is the first and only person since 1964 who has been given a baronetcy and the first person in centuries to be given such a title by his mother the Prime Minister for doing nothing.
The baronetcy was conferred on Sir Dennis Thatcher, not Sir Mark, who assumed the title on his father's death. It is ipso facto true of any hereditary honour that (save in relation to the person upon whom it was originally conferred) that the person holding it "did nothing" to receive it.
"Thatcher is entitled the usage of the pre-nominal style "The Honourable" following the elevation of his mother to the peerage as a baroness in 1992; he shares this courtesy with his twin sister, Carol. He inherited the Thatcher baronetcy on the death of his father, Sir Denis, in 2003. The baronetcy, created in 1991 for Sir Denis, was the first (and so far only) baronetcy created since 1964."
@Roger "it's just f*cking boring" - exactly how I feel about you complaining about Plato. Especially when she's not here and you bring her up because of a change in the page format. Give it a f*cking rest.
@Roger you're really telling me that you can't see that all the attacks (many of them quite personal) on Plato come from the left on here? That's ridiculous; any fool could see it. Just like even a fool could see that all the attacks on Tim for his irritating repetition come from the right, but I doubt any of us on the right would be ridiculous enough to deny it.
A general comment unrelated to either - I recently signed up for a discussion forum on translation software. Half the posts I received on the first day were about what members on the forum thought of each other (in unflattering terms). I shan't go back - perhaps many of the comments were justified but they screamed BORING IN-GROUP.
I'm sure we're all wonderful people, and if we're not, who cares? Let's talk about politics and betting.
A general comment unrelated to either - I recently signed up for a discussion forum on translation software. Half the posts I received on the first day were about what members on the forum thought of each other (in unflattering terms). I shan't go back - perhaps many of the comments were justified but they screamed BORING IN-GROUP.
I'm sure we're all wonderful people, and if we're not, who cares? Let's talk about politics and betting.
I think is an effect of the internet Nick. A while ago I was looking for tips on making pizza. I found a pizza-making forum. You might think that their shared common interest would bring the forum-users together. Not so. The bile on display was staggering.
Listening to Any Answers today would suggest that Thatcher's death will remind people of the past and so might prove to be a toxic element which will stop the Tories getting elected next time. It doesn't matter about the gender of the Prime Minister , what matters is that policies are enacted upon in a competent and humane manner. the slash and burn methods employed by Thatcher ruined so many lives.
On BBC 2 in a few minutes (19.00) is a program called 'Margaret - death of a revolutionary'.
Martin Durkin presents a personal view of the late former prime minister Margaret Thatcher, arguing she was a working-class revolutionary who believed that capitalism was in the interests of `ordinary people'. Including interviews with Norman Tebbit, Nigel Lawson, Cecil Parkinson, Neil Kinnock and Bernard Ingham.
Sounds as if it could keep the arguments going on here for the rest of the weekend... ;-)
Prime Ministers, by custom and practice, are offered an hereditary earldom on or after resignation from office.
Macmillan was the last to accept the offer, made by Thatcher in 1984. He was understood to have earlier declined the same offer. Eden also accepted an Earldom in 1961.
Churchill was offered an hereditary Dukedom (of London) but declined.
Those declining have been asked if they wished to accept an alternative lesser title. Churchill was happy with his already granted Knight of the Garter. Wilson and Callaghan agreed to become life peers. Major so far has declined, content subsequently to become a Garter Knight. Both Wilson and Callaghan also subsequently became Garter Knights. Douglas-Home became a Knight of the Thistle.
No one would offer Blair and Brown a pocket torch in sturdy plastic let alone an honour.
Margaret declined an hereditary peerage and opted to be a life peer, but asked that Denis be granted a baronetcy.
A hereditary peerage or baronetcy is created for the person originally honoured. The qualification of their heirs is irrelevant and, in most cases, not known.
I think both May and Cooper are serious heavyweights. I could see both potentially doing better than their current leaders (particularly May, as Miliband continues to develop into a figure of some stature and Cameron fades).
Off topic, please don't have the wretched 'likes' on here.
As for when we'll see the next Thatcher - never, hopefully.
On BBC 2 in a few minutes (19.00) is a program called 'Margaret - death of a revolutionary'.
Martin Durkin presents a personal view of the late former prime minister Margaret Thatcher, arguing she was a working-class revolutionary who believed that capitalism was in the interests of `ordinary people'. Including interviews with Norman Tebbit, Nigel Lawson, Cecil Parkinson, Neil Kinnock and Bernard Ingham.
Sounds as if it could keep the arguments going on here for the rest of the weekend... ;-)
On BBC 2 in a few minutes (19.00) is a program called 'Margaret - death of a revolutionary'.
Martin Durkin presents a personal view of the late former prime minister Margaret Thatcher, arguing she was a working-class revolutionary who believed that capitalism was in the interests of `ordinary people'. Including interviews with Norman Tebbit, Nigel Lawson, Cecil Parkinson, Neil Kinnock and Bernard Ingham.
Sounds as if it could keep the arguments going on here for the rest of the weekend... ;-)
There is a link to Denis Thatcher and the baronetcy that long predates his own title.
Denis Thatcher was married twice. In 1948 after six years of marriage he divorced and his now former wife married Sir Alfred Hickman Bt. Incidently neither Mark or Carol knew of their fathers previous marriage until revealed by the press in 1976.
Dunno about Millwall fans making it into the West End for a punch up, they've just lost at Wembley and are beating one another up. Disgraceful and pathetic scenes.
Not quite true as to Alec Douglas Home. He was made a Knight of the Thistle in 1962, two years before his 1964 GE defeat. He did accept a life barony after retiring from the HoC in 1974.
Sorry everyone, it was Channel 4 as so many people have pointed out. I didn't realise it was on until the last moment, and thought I would get a message out. Sadly, I got it wrong.
So far it's been quite interesting, with some information that I didn't know, and it is well presented.
For Roger et al: try to approach it with as open a mind as you can. Sometimes you can learn from opposing positions, even if you do not agree with them. That's why I married a Liberal vegetarian feminist. ;-)
I can't see Maggie appearing in a pop video. I can see J Major, T Blair (he of course appeared with Catherine Tate). Perhaps not Gordon. Definitely Ed. Which is not a tick in the "plus" box.
Janet Daley Lord Tebbit Martin Durkin.....at least no one is pretending it's a rounded look at the Lady. One of the reasons the BBC is so admired. They wouldn't be allowed to spend their money on this sort of political hero worship.
@Roger not looking at it at the moment but...do you think she is worthy of a documentary on C4. Is it the editorial decisions of the doc-makers that is irritating you?
Not quite true as to Alec Douglas Home. He was made a Knight of the Thistle in 1962, two years before his 1964 GE defeat. He did accept a life barony after retiring from the HoC in 1974.
And Home had the novelty of his life peerage becoming extinct but being succeeded in his disclaimed hereditary peerage by his son.
Janet Daley Lord Tebbit Martin Durkin.....at least no one is pretending it's a rounded look at the Lady. One of the reasons the BBC is so admired. They wouldn't be allowed to spend their money on this sort of political hero worship.
Polly Toynbee...Lord Kinnock...yep, righties all!
Tho I do agree we wouldn't see this on the BBC - but not for the reasons you suggest.
We've now had both Kinnock & Toynbee condescending to the "NCOs of the working class"
Thatcher was the most radical British PM of her century. The true equaliser, the true emancipator.
IFS
the record on youth unemployment was no better, and on poverty and inequality considerably worse, in the Thatcher and Major administrations than under Blair and Brown.
first off, please don't disappoint those of us who see you as infallible - "less people"???
slightly more on-topic:
I like the story that Churchill was asked, in so many words: "would you like an honour, a dukedom, or anything?" which I think is very sweet.
He refused, apparently (?) because he believed he couldn't afford to, nor had the land to be a duke. Is that something you heard also?
There are much better historians on PB than me, Topping. The one with the long neck from West Sussex for example, among many others.
I have heard various anecdotes about Churchill declining the offer of a Duchy.
One is that his son Randolph didn't want it (sometimes expressed as Winston believing he didn't deserve it but don't tell this to tim).
Far more likely, in my humble and completely unresearched opinion, is that Churchill realised he had already established a reputation for himself and place in history that didn't need any further enhancement. Also as a scion but not heir of the Dukes of Malborough, he will have both enjoyed and seen the limits of the title. Sometimes an individual can achieve such greatness that even self-deprecation and denial cannot be tainted by the accusation of false motive.
On the use of "less" for "fewer", I am not a militant semanticist. Language and meaning changes with usage and "less" will already be defined as a variant of "fewer" in today's dictionaries. Fewer is still preferable but I lose no sleep over the occasional 'misuse'. I worry more about using "that" in place of "which", for example. As Churchill might have said it is a usage "up with which he would not put".
But they can live here without restriction and presumably apply for naturalisation after the appropriate period? I have several Eire friends with UK passports with no connection other than long term residence.
As can anyone in the EU (and probably others). I dont know anyone who has been here the required length of time who has taken a UK passport though.
Comments
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-22125412
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/seanthomas/100211496/heroin-for-pensioners-incredibly-some-people-think-its-the-best-solution-to-the-suffering-of-old-age/
He is significant in that he is the first and only person since 1964 who has been given a baronetcy and the first person in centuries to be given such a title by his mother the Prime Minister for doing nothing. On the basis that he's a convicted crook when looking at Thatcher's legacy and indeed sanity I'd say he was very relevant.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Thatcher
"Thatcher is entitled the usage of the pre-nominal style "The Honourable" following the elevation of his mother to the peerage as a baroness in 1992; he shares this courtesy with his twin sister, Carol. He inherited the Thatcher baronetcy on the death of his father, Sir Denis, in 2003. The baronetcy, created in 1991 for Sir Denis, was the first (and so far only) baronetcy created since 1964."
Did you read it?
I think most protestors have decided to wait for Nelson Mandela rather than brave the cold weather.
Either that or sit it out in a Soho Cafe Valerie.
I'm sure we're all wonderful people, and if we're not, who cares? Let's talk about politics and betting.
Perhaps he was talking about Sir Mark? Greedy.... tax dodger..... ruthless....amoral......self regarding.....rude
A while ago I was looking for tips on making pizza. I found a pizza-making forum. You might think that their shared common interest would bring the forum-users together. Not so. The bile on display was staggering.
Do these Thatcher's have no self awareness at all?
It doesn't matter about the gender of the Prime Minister , what matters is that policies are enacted upon in a competent and humane manner. the slash and burn methods employed by Thatcher ruined so many lives.
On BBC 2 in a few minutes (19.00) is a program called 'Margaret - death of a revolutionary'. Sounds as if it could keep the arguments going on here for the rest of the weekend... ;-)
http://www.radiotimes.com/episode/wbnmg/margaret-death-of-a-revolutionary
Macmillan was the last to accept the offer, made by Thatcher in 1984. He was understood to have earlier declined the same offer. Eden also accepted an Earldom in 1961.
Churchill was offered an hereditary Dukedom (of London) but declined.
Those declining have been asked if they wished to accept an alternative lesser title. Churchill was happy with his already granted Knight of the Garter. Wilson and Callaghan agreed to become life peers. Major so far has declined, content subsequently to become a Garter Knight. Both Wilson and Callaghan also subsequently became Garter Knights. Douglas-Home became a Knight of the Thistle.
No one would offer Blair and Brown a pocket torch in sturdy plastic let alone an honour.
Margaret declined an hereditary peerage and opted to be a life peer, but asked that Denis be granted a baronetcy.
A hereditary peerage or baronetcy is created for the person originally honoured. The qualification of their heirs is irrelevant and, in most cases, not known.
Off topic, please don't have the wretched 'likes' on here.
As for when we'll see the next Thatcher - never, hopefully.
http://www.radiotimes.com/episode/wbnmg/margaret-death-of-a-revolutionary
It is on Channel 4
http://www.ustream.tv/channel/occupynewsnetwork?utm_campaign=t.co&utm_source=11808409&utm_medium=social
http://www.radiotimes.com/episode/wbnmg/margaret-death-of-a-revolutionary
Channel 4
Denis Thatcher was married twice. In 1948 after six years of marriage he divorced and his now former wife married Sir Alfred Hickman Bt. Incidently neither Mark or Carol knew of their fathers previous marriage until revealed by the press in 1976.
This looks like fun!
Interviewer: "But you wouldn't reimpose exchange controls or reverse privatisation"?
Lord Kinnock: "Where there is no rationale to change things no, we wouldn't "
Interviewer : "So she was right?"
Lord Kinnock: "No."
And if you watched it Roger you might understand better why some admire her...and explain some of Cameron's problems..
first off, please don't disappoint those of us who see you as infallible - "less people"???
slightly more on-topic:
I like the story that Churchill was asked, in so many words: "would you like an honour, a dukedom, or anything?" which I think is very sweet.
He refused, apparently (?) because he believed he couldn't afford to, nor had the land to be a duke. Is that something you heard also?
Not quite true as to Alec Douglas Home. He was made a Knight of the Thistle in 1962, two years before his 1964 GE defeat. He did accept a life barony after retiring from the HoC in 1974.
So far it's been quite interesting, with some information that I didn't know, and it is well presented.
For Roger et al: try to approach it with as open a mind as you can. Sometimes you can learn from opposing positions, even if you do not agree with them. That's why I married a Liberal vegetarian feminist. ;-)
not looking at it at the moment but...do you think she is worthy of a documentary on C4. Is it the editorial decisions of the doc-makers that is irritating you?
Or am I misinterpreting your thoughts?
I think only John Major knows whether she was involved and, judging by this (Q872 on), it doesn't look like he's going to tell anyone http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200304/cmselect/cmpubadm/212/4052005.htm
Tho I do agree we wouldn't see this on the BBC - but not for the reasons you suggest.
We've now had both Kinnock & Toynbee condescending to the "NCOs of the working class"
the record on youth unemployment was no better, and on poverty and inequality considerably worse, in the Thatcher and Major administrations than under Blair and Brown.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/7273
I have heard various anecdotes about Churchill declining the offer of a Duchy.
One is that his son Randolph didn't want it (sometimes expressed as Winston believing he didn't deserve it but don't tell this to tim).
Far more likely, in my humble and completely unresearched opinion, is that Churchill realised he had already established a reputation for himself and place in history that didn't need any further enhancement. Also as a scion but not heir of the Dukes of Malborough, he will have both enjoyed and seen the limits of the title. Sometimes an individual can achieve such greatness that even self-deprecation and denial cannot be tainted by the accusation of false motive.
On the use of "less" for "fewer", I am not a militant semanticist. Language and meaning changes with usage and "less" will already be defined as a variant of "fewer" in today's dictionaries. Fewer is still preferable but I lose no sleep over the occasional 'misuse'. I worry more about using "that" in place of "which", for example. As Churchill might have said it is a usage "up with which he would not put".