Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Labour’s Falkirk problems seem to be going over many voters

SystemSystem Posts: 12,215
edited November 2013 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Labour’s Falkirk problems seem to be going over many voters` heads

On the specific issue of Ed Miliband’s handling of Falkirk 19‰ say he is doing well while 36% say badly. The biggest grouping, are, however, the don’t knows at 45%.

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • Whoever would have thought it? I blame the BBC.
  • Whoever would have thought it? I blame the BBC.

    And the Guardian surely.

  • FregglesFreggles Posts: 3,486
    Stupid voters, worrying about non stories like the energy price freeze while the epic drama that is FALKIRK is taking place!

    Nothing rains on your parade like a poll
  • BenMBenM Posts: 1,795
    Tories blathering about Falkirk = Republicans blathering about Benghazi.
  • FregglesFreggles Posts: 3,486
    Ils ont toujours tort, et ils n'apprennent jamais
  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    FPT

    YouGov

    And do you think the events in Falkirk have or have not damaged the Labour party?

    Damaged: 39
    Not damaged: 23
    DK: 37

    Some people have suggested that the law should be changed so that a union can only go on strike if over 50% of its members back the strike, rather than 50% of those voting. Would you support or oppose this change?

    Support: 55
    Oppose: 21

    Would you support or oppose a ban on trade unions involved in a dispute protesting outside the private homes of company directors?

    Support:54
    Oppose: 24
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,975
    edited November 2013
    I think Carlotta makes up for the rest of us who have for one reason or another let this story pass us by.

    More disturbing to me is the IDS one linked to on the last thread and written by Nick Cohen. His treatment of that 24 year old girl who just wanted to be a librarian is Horrible and he's a government minister. What's more he was a Tory leader so he could have become PM. The thought makes me shiver
  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    FPT

    YouGov

    The Niqab is a veil used to cover the face except the eyes, worn by some Muslim women so they have can dress modestly in front of men who are not their close relatives. Would you support or oppose a ban on wearing the niqab in Britain?

    Support:63
    Oppose:24

    NB: LDs are only party to oppose a ban

    Current laws allow the government to impose "Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures" (Tpims) on people who they suspect pose a serious terrorist threat, but who they do not have evidence to prosecute. Tpims can restrict where suspects are allowed to go, require electronic tagging and a curfew and restrict internet and phone use. They do not require a trial and there are only limited rights of appeal. Do you think the government should or should not have these powers?

    Should:69
    Should not:16

    Until 2011 the government cound impose "control orders" on terrorist suspects. These were similar to the "Tpims" that replaced them, but had more extensive powers, including th ability to relocate suspects to a different part of the country, and greater powers to ban internet
    or phone use and who suspects could communicate with.
    Do you believe the government should reintroduce control orders?

    Should: 66
    Should not: 17

    Thinking about protecting Britain's national security and protecting the human rights of individual people who may be suspected of terrorist offences, which of the following best reflects your view?

    Too much consideration is paid to the human rights of terrorist suspects, and not enough to ensuring national security: 68%
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,636
    @Financier, I suspect the slight problems with the breakdowns is that Conservative voters think Falkirk has damaged the Labour Party. While Labour ones think "Where's Falkirk?"
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,471

    Whoever would have thought it? I blame the BBC.

    Is the problem that the scandal is not personalised enough? The scandals that gain the most traction seem to be the ones where an individual person can be seen to be blame, rather than an organisation.

    It's almost as if the media want to personalise any scandals, to have a face as a target, rather than a faceless organisation.

    At the moment this scandal is split between the Labour party and Unite. Although McCluskey is in charge of Unite, I'm not sure that there's anything directly linking him with what happened, and therefore he is somewhat insulated. The same is true for Miliband.

    That *may* change if more evidence comes out that points directly towards individuals (e.g. Watson, Miliband, McCluskey), if there is any such evidence.
  • EasterrossEasterross Posts: 1,915
    Good morning all. Falkirk will only become an election/polling issue if it blows up in Ed's face on the London TV news. I see today there are now allegations that Len McCluskey's election was suspect.

    The fear for Labour must be that Falkirk will become a "dripping tap". It will either fail to go away and keep plugging away or it will lead to questions about other constituencies where there are suggestions UNITE had more than a fair hand in the selection of the Labour candidate and it begins to sap the enthusiasm of party activists, particularly if good local candidates are beaten by Labour luvvies, parachuted in by Ed and Len's chums.
  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    rcs1000 said:

    @Financier, I suspect the slight problems with the breakdowns is that Conservative voters think Falkirk has damaged the Labour Party. While Labour ones think "Where's Falkirk?"

    Labour VI is split:

    26 has; 43 has not; 30 DK
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,975
    edited November 2013
    Financier

    I remember when Blair wanted to bring in draconian anti terror laws like 90 day detention and the Tories quite rightly led a very effective opposition on civil liberties grounds.

    Reading your poll it seems like a long time ago. So one seems to care less about civil liberties anymore. A majority even want to tell women what they have to wear.
  • Whoever would have thought it? I blame the BBC.

    Is the problem that the scandal is not personalised enough? The scandals that gain the most traction seem to be the ones where an individual person can be seen to be blame, rather than an organisation.

    It's almost as if the media want to personalise any scandals, to have a face as a target, rather than a faceless organisation.

    At the moment this scandal is split between the Labour party and Unite. Although McCluskey is in charge of Unite, I'm not sure that there's anything directly linking him with what happened, and therefore he is somewhat insulated. The same is true for Miliband.

    That *may* change if more evidence comes out that points directly towards individuals (e.g. Watson, Miliband, McCluskey), if there is any such evidence.

    It's more a case of it being a complex story based on process that you need to follow very carefully in order to form an opinion on. Most voters could not identify most members of the cabinet - they have other things to worry about - so it's highly unlikely they'll be that focused on events somewhere far away (for most). It may be playing differently in Scotland, but a national YouGov won't tell us that.

  • I love the complacent way London Labour and the English ignore where Falkirk has greatest salience - Scotland:

    How closely are you following Falkirk
    Scotland (OA)
    Closely: 43 (26)
    Not Closely: 24 (27)
    Not at all/DK: 24 (48)

    Miliband handled issue - net well: -28 (-18)

    Damaged Labour Party - net: +27 (+16)

    Unite undermine enquiry - net: +40 (+29)

    Labour should hold another enquiry - net : +20 (+12)

    It's not like the standing of the largest pro-UK political party in Scotland is of any import over the next 10 months is it?
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,706
    The Falkikrk story lacks bite for a number of reasons. Principally were not talking about a public election or public money. It's internal Labour/TU stuff, which at the best of times does not resonate with most Labour members let alone the public at large.

    Whereas An MP spending public money warming up his horses has bite.
  • rcs1000 said:

    @Financier, I suspect the slight problems with the breakdowns is that Conservative voters think Falkirk has damaged the Labour Party. While Labour ones think "Where's Falkirk?"

    Thinking it has is not the same as it having done - if you see what I mean.

    For most non-anoraks I suspect it boils down to: argument over candidate selection in safe Labour seat. That's if they have noticed the story at all.

  • FinancierFinancier Posts: 3,916
    A sense of entitlement at the top has damaged the BBC
    To restore lost trust, the BBC needs a dose of austerity, argues Martin Bell as he writes about "The Ministry of Truth".

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/10437720/A-sense-of-entitlement-at-the-top-has-damaged-the-BBC.html
  • JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,291
    I'm rather pleasantly surprised that over 50% of those polled are following the Falkirk imbroglio at all, and even more so that the supplementaries make even less palatable reading for Ed and Labour.

    Drip, drip, drip.....

    YouGov down to 5% (yeah, it's MoE 5-8%), but 18 months to go.

    Drip, drip, drip.
  • Roger said:

    I think Carlotta makes up for the rest of us who have for one reason or another let this story pass us by.

    Some of us are concerned about the fate of the UK - and seeing the largest (by orders of magnitude) pro-UK party in Scotland shoot itself in the foot 10 months out from the referendum is causing concern.....of course, from a purely selfish point of view, the departure of Scotland from the Union would make the Conservatives job a lot easier in rUK.....
  • Roger said:

    I think Carlotta makes up for the rest of us who have for one reason or another let this story pass us by.

    Some of us are concerned about the fate of the UK - and seeing the largest (by orders of magnitude) pro-UK party in Scotland shoot itself in the foot 10 months out from the referendum is causing concern.....of course, from a purely selfish point of view, the departure of Scotland from the Union would make the Conservatives job a lot easier in rUK.....

    Why would what is happening in Falkirk make someone vote for independence if they are otherwise in favour of the union? Is there any polling evidence that it has shifted opinions in favour of separation?

  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,366

    Many people who see the headlines, such as they are, think, so what? The unions trying to get their men as candidates. Is that meant to be news?

    Despite all the guff about voting for the MP, people generally vote for the party. And the candidate tends to come from a select few anyway, often chosen by the party. That's why people vote for posh fops when they represent Labour, but complain when the same sort of people represent the Tories
  • Good morning, everyone.

    I'd take the exact opposite view. Yes, 3/4 are disinterested, but most people are disinterested in most aspects of politics. Having a quarter of people reportedly closely following a story that could be hugely damaging to Labour is significant.

    Also, the little graph is excellent. I had a furkle, and it's interesting that the Lib Dems are following this least, with Labour and UKIP most intrigued. Of course, it depends what sort of 'voter' these are, as a voter can be anyone from a die-hard activist to a floating voter.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,975
    edited November 2013
    Carlotta

    "Some of us are concerned about the fate of the UK...."

    No need to get on your high horse...........

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/millionaire-conservative-mp-nadhim-zahawi-2715379
  • Poor UKIP supporters - the world is just so mean!

    UKIP (OA)
    In past month have you seen a bicycle go through a red light:
    Net yes: +23 (+1)

    Generally, how common is it for cyclists to go through red lights:
    Net common: +66 (+38)

    Have you cycled through a red light (small base)
    Net no: +96 (+62)

    Should cyclists who go thru red be prosecuted:
    Net yes: +84 (+66)

    What are the chances of cyclists going through red lights just to annoy UKIP supporters?

    And how can the cyclists tell?
  • I love the complacent way London Labour and the English ignore where Falkirk has greatest salience - Scotland:

    ...It's not like the standing of the largest pro-UK political party in Scotland is of any import over the next 10 months is it?

    I've snipped the actual figures for the sake of brevity, but I think you make a really good point, @CarlottaVance. Maybe there'll be a follow-through effect on the independence polling, or is a shift in favour of independence already being seen? I haven't really been following but I wasn't aware of any significant movement in the polls.
  • Roger said:

    I think Carlotta makes up for the rest of us who have for one reason or another let this story pass us by.

    Some of us are concerned about the fate of the UK - and seeing the largest (by orders of magnitude) pro-UK party in Scotland shoot itself in the foot 10 months out from the referendum is causing concern.....of course, from a purely selfish point of view, the departure of Scotland from the Union would make the Conservatives job a lot easier in rUK.....

    Why would what is happening in Falkirk make someone vote for independence if they are otherwise in favour of the union? Is there any polling evidence that it has shifted opinions in favour of separation?

    Why should the sight of the "Scottish" Labour Party dancing to London Labour's tune, having its candidate selected from London to avoid embarrassing a London based Union leader have any impact on the independence debate? You think its irrelevant? Brave.
  • @Roger - no high horse, just bemusement at the apparent indifference and complacency in London!
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,366

    Does it actually matter who Labour (or Unite) choose?

    When Shaun Woodward left Witney to become a Labour MP in St Helens, the red majority there was still large. He's standing down in 2015, but Jimmy Saville would get in with a red rosette.

    Jeremy Corbyn or Frank Field? Most vote for the rosette - they're generally only voting fodder anyway.
  • I love the complacent way London Labour and the English ignore where Falkirk has greatest salience - Scotland:

    ...It's not like the standing of the largest pro-UK political party in Scotland is of any import over the next 10 months is it?

    I've snipped the actual figures for the sake of brevity, but I think you make a really good point, @CarlottaVance. Maybe there'll be a follow-through effect on the independence polling, or is a shift in favour of independence already being seen? I haven't really been following but I wasn't aware of any significant movement in the polls.
    No, the polls are flat at the moment (despite what our nationalist friends may say) - but none have been taken since Grangemouth - the other event London Labour were deathly silent on......

  • Some polling Uncle Len won't like:

    OA (Lab VIA)
    Strike only if 50% of members vote or 50% of those taking part?
    Members: 55 (45)
    Taking part: 21 (35)

    Union "Leverage" (demo outside director homes) - net:
    Acceptable: -46 (-21)
    Should be banned: +30 (-)
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,975
    @Carlotta

    @Roger - no high HORSE, just bemusement at the apparent indifference and complacency in London!

    I agree and then it'll be a case of shutting the farmyard gate after the HORSE has bolted

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/millionaire-conservative-mp-nadhim-zahawi-2715379
  • CarolaCarola Posts: 1,805
    I guess the important questions is 'If you are following/mildly interested in/aware (but not interested in)/think ED has handled Falkirk badly, and you were going to vote/were thinking of voting for Labour, will you change your vote?'
  • JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548
    Roger said:

    A majority even want to tell women what they have to wear.

    I'm quite sure you're not stupid enough to believe that that's what the poll question asks, so I have to conclude that you're cynically twisting it. Banning people from wearing "religious" balaclavas is NOT the same as "telling women what they have to wear". But you stating that it says that means you're dishonest or thick; which are you?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    How are those stats calculated / do you have the "others" column. Otherwise the "all" category seems a little odd..

    Following closely: Con 37/Lab 26/LD19/UKIP32/ but all=26

    Let's say that the Con and the LD more or less even out to make 26 the average between just those too (it will be higher as there are more Con voters and the average of 37+19 is 28 anyway). That means that the "others" must be sufficiently disinterested to outweigh UKIP - i.e. assuming equal numbers of UKIP vs others (again roughly) they would need to be on just 20%. Based on the reaction of our Nat friends, presumably the SNP supporters have been following more closely than average?

    Is there something going on with the don't knows, for instance?
  • @Carola - my concern is with the biggest pro-UK party in Scotland making itself look like a pliant tool of London interests - not smart 10 months from the Indie ref. Labour voters will decide the a Indie referendum.
  • CarolaCarola Posts: 1,805

    Poor UKIP supporters - the world is just so mean!

    UKIP (OA)
    In past month have you seen a bicycle go through a red light:
    Net yes: +23 (+1)

    Generally, how common is it for cyclists to go through red lights:
    Net common: +66 (+38)

    Have you cycled through a red light (small base)
    Net no: +96 (+62)

    Should cyclists who go thru red be prosecuted:
    Net yes: +84 (+66)

    What are the chances of cyclists going through red lights just to annoy UKIP supporters?

    And how can the cyclists tell?

    Funnily enough this just popped up in my timeline:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/10/opinion/sunday/is-it-ok-to-kill-cyclists.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&

  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,975
    @JJ

    I can't remember a post from you to me where you haven't referred to me as stupid and dishonest.

    Do you think I'm being paranoid?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    JohnO said:

    I'm rather pleasantly surprised that over 50% of those polled are following the Falkirk imbroglio at all, and even more so that the supplementaries make even less palatable reading for Ed and Labour.

    Drip, drip, drip.....

    YouGov down to 5% (yeah, it's MoE 5-8%), but 18 months to go.

    Drip, drip, drip.

    I actually thought over 50% was pretty high for a political process story. (Is there any data on other political stories to see how comparable this is?)

    I suppose there could be some inbuilt bias (like that poll a year or so ago 'do you disapprove of this made-up scandal').

    I don't think that it will have much direct impact on voting behaviour though, because I doubt it has much salience. Where it could have an impact is *if* people begin to reassociate (subliminally) bad behaviour by the unions and Labour. But you'd need more examples, more high profile situations, and - forgot who said it - personalisation in a way that you don't have at the moment
  • CarolaCarola Posts: 1,805

    @Carola - my concern is with the biggest pro-UK party in Scotland making itself look like a pliant tool of London interests - not smart 10 months from the Indie ref. Labour voters will decide the a Indie referendum.

    I guess it will depend on what they care about most.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    On topic Falkirk is some way from being over.
  • JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548
    Roger said:

    @JJ

    I can't remember a post from you to me where you haven't referred to me as stupid and dishonest.

    Do you think I'm being paranoid?

    You've managed it again! I ask if you're thick OR dishonest, and you reply that I call you stupid AND dishonest. Are you twisting my words or misunderstanding them?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Carola said:

    Poor UKIP supporters - the world is just so mean!

    UKIP (OA)
    In past month have you seen a bicycle go through a red light:
    Net yes: +23 (+1)

    Generally, how common is it for cyclists to go through red lights:
    Net common: +66 (+38)

    Have you cycled through a red light (small base)
    Net no: +96 (+62)

    Should cyclists who go thru red be prosecuted:
    Net yes: +84 (+66)

    What are the chances of cyclists going through red lights just to annoy UKIP supporters?

    And how can the cyclists tell?

    Funnily enough this just popped up in my timeline:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/10/opinion/sunday/is-it-ok-to-kill-cyclists.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&

    Rod Liddle has a good rant at them in this week's Spectator. Has the wheel turned?

    (I'll get my coat)
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,975
    @Carola

    "Funnily enough this just popped up in my timeline:"

    That's funny! When I did my driving test the examiner asked 'under what circumstances is it OK to hit a pedestrian'?

    I foolishly gave him a list and failed
  • Carola said:

    I guess the important questions is 'If you are following/mildly interested in/aware (but not interested in)/think ED has handled Falkirk badly, and you were going to vote/were thinking of voting for Labour, will you change your vote?'

    Not necessarily.

    How about "If you were previously not planning to vote, would this incident (and others like it) change your mind"?
  • Mr. Roger, surely it's ok if you're playing Grand Theft Auto?
  • Here is Labour columnist Kevin McKenna writing in The Observer:

    Independence is not about burning Scotland's boats
    - Unionist factions are engaged in a race to the bottom of the barrel for fresh ways to scare Scotland off independence
    ... The reaction of some Scottish politicians over the loss of 850 jobs on the Clyde was quite sickening. The new Lib Dem Scottish secretary, Alistair Carmichael, and the Glasgow Labour MP Ian Davidson, both of whom will lose their highly paid Westminster jobs if Scotland votes Yes, are obviously feeling the heat. Carmichael, one of the most obscure figures in the world's most obscure political party, stated that an independent Scotland would not be awarded any future UK defence contracts. The Glasgow Labour MP John Robertson said baldly: "No yard, no ships" in an independent Scotland.

    All of them seemed to be inviting the UK government to kill shipbuilding on the Clyde as a punishment for Scotland exercising its democratic right to say Yes. Davidson actually stated that the loss of "only" 850 jobs on the Clyde – 20% of its workforce – was a cause for celebration.

    These three wretched, wretched men have put their own soiled political careers above the needs of those whom they are supposed to represent. It is all about hanging on to their fat Westminster salaries after September 2014.
    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/10/independence-not-burning-scotland-boats

    Meanwhile, here in the PB goldfish bowl, Alistair Carmichael is the leader-elect of the Lib Dems.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,975
    @JJ

    " You've managed it again! I ask if you're thick OR dishonest, and you reply that I call you stupid AND dishonest. Are you twisting my words or misunderstanding them? "

    You're right. I must be paranoid.
  • Jonathan said:

    The Falkikrk story lacks bite for a number of reasons. Principally were not talking about a public election or public money. It's internal Labour/TU stuff, which at the best of times does not resonate with most Labour members let alone the public at large.

    Whereas An MP spending public money warming up his horses has bite.

    There's also an assumption from Labour that working class / trade unions are two sides of the same coin. They're not. Where is the TU representation for my mother, my gardener, my plumber? Just because they aren't employed in an organisation employing lots of people doesn't mean they should be ignored.
  • CarolaCarola Posts: 1,805

    Roger said:

    @Carola

    "Funnily enough this just popped up in my timeline:"

    That's funny! When I did my driving test the examiner asked 'under what circumstances is it OK to hit a pedestrian'?

    I foolishly gave him a list and failed

    I passed my test despite an 'atrocious' corner reverse manoeuvre (too fast) because at one point the car in front of me knocked a motorcyclist off his bike and I did a spectacular swerve/brake combo to avoid him. The examiner squealed like a stuck pig.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    @Stuart_Dickson

    Imagine you were PM of England and Wales, with an election coming up.

    Under what circumstances would you give a major shipbuilding contract to an independent Scotland as compared to, say, a marginal seat in the South of England?

    I'm genuinely interested - even if it is cheaper, say, I struggle to see a politician not finding an excuse to keep the contract at home
  • CarolaCarola Posts: 1,805

    Carola said:

    I guess the important questions is 'If you are following/mildly interested in/aware (but not interested in)/think ED has handled Falkirk badly, and you were going to vote/were thinking of voting for Labour, will you change your vote?'

    Not necessarily.

    How about "If you were previously not planning to vote, would this incident (and others like it) change your mind"?
    Anything is possible.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Carola said:




    Roger said:

    @Carola

    "Funnily enough this just popped up in my timeline:"

    That's funny! When I did my driving test the examiner asked 'under what circumstances is it OK to hit a pedestrian'?

    I foolishly gave him a list and failed

    I passed my test despite an 'atrocious' corner reverse manoeuvre (too fast) because at one point the car in front of me knocked a motorcyclist off his bike and I did a spectacular swerve/brake combo to avoid him. The examiner squealed like a stuck pig.
    I rammed a police car on my first test...
  • TGOHF said:

    On topic Falkirk is some way from being over.

    Agreed.

    However, the biggest effect of the Falkirk/Grangemouth/Unite scandal is not on overall Westminster VI, it is on local VI and on internal SLab factionalism.

    Believe you me, SLab is undergoing a vicious civil war. Everybody is involved, from Darling, Murphy, Alexander, Lamont and Sarwar downwards. We are only getting occasional tasters in the mainstream media, but there have been heavy casualties behind the scenes.

    And the ordinary SLab membership and ordinary trade unionists are sick to the back teeth of the mismanagement and petty corruption.

    That is the true legacy of Falkirk. It will not affect voting intention in Surrey or Salford one jot, but it is tearing the once all-conquering Scottish Labour Party apart at the seams, from the inside.

    My advice is just to get the popcorn out, put your feet up, and enjoy a fine bloodsport being played out. Console yourself with the fact that none of the victims are innocent.
  • CarolaCarola Posts: 1,805
    'The failure of the Swedish free school system has been at the forefront of this debate.

    Sweden used to have one of the most equitable and high performing education systems in the OECD. This is no longer the case. Standards are falling and the whole system is perceived as chaotic and out of control. One of the biggest free school companies JB Education went bankrupt this spring and left parents stranded. Anger is mounting against greedy private equity groups making easy money off Swedish children. Recent revelations by the media also showed how these for profit schools turn away children with special needs.'

    http://www.policy-network.net/pno_detail.aspx?ID=4514&title=The-spell-cast-by-Swedens-Conservatives-is-breaking
  • Y0kelY0kel Posts: 2,307
    Iranian Nuclear Deal - Non

    Some may be following this and hearing about how close the combined worthy nations of the World and the Iranians were to some kind of deal. Then, suddenly, it needed more talks.

    For this delay apparently the world has the French to thank. Seeing it as too weak and nowhere near comprehensive enough, they reportedly threw the proposal out leaving the US with the possibility that one major ally would disown the whole show before it got signed.

    Stories have it that the US Secretary of State John Kerry didn't much like the deal either for the same reasons but was told by his boss to carry on.

    Its possibly essential. As things stand, the Israelis are willing to bomb, the Saudis are willing to go nuclear (though the reports about a bunch of nukes sitting in Pakistan awaiting delivery are not quite what they seem) and the Iranians already have a crude nuclear weapons capability that isn't too far short of being refined & expanded with the proposed deal leaving enough in place for it to carry on.

    Syria: There are persistent rumours that The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, a comparative late comer to events and one of the most radical Jihadist outfits fighting in Syria are at some level co-operating with Assad's forces. This is one reason why the Al Qaeda leader Al Zawahiri has stated that it will be dissolved, though he has no power to do so. It may explain why some serious radical fighters in Syrian prisons were mysteriously released.

    ISIS have the reputation of spending more time fighting against other insurgents over territory than fighting Assad's forces.
  • JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548
    Roger said:

    @JJ

    " You've managed it again! I ask if you're thick OR dishonest, and you reply that I call you stupid AND dishonest. Are you twisting my words or misunderstanding them? "

    You're right. I must be paranoid.

    Why don't you try actually dealing with the point for once? You said that the poll tells us that the majority of people want to tell women what they have to wear. The poll asked if the Niqab should be banned.

    Do you believe that banning a specific garment is telling women what they have to wear, or not?

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,500

    I love the complacent way London Labour and the English ignore where Falkirk has greatest salience - Scotland:

    ...It's not like the standing of the largest pro-UK political party in Scotland is of any import over the next 10 months is it?

    I've snipped the actual figures for the sake of brevity, but I think you make a really good point, @CarlottaVance. Maybe there'll be a follow-through effect on the independence polling, or is a shift in favour of independence already being seen? I haven't really been following but I wasn't aware of any significant movement in the polls.
    Most of the polls are weighted based on Westminster so you rarely see the real story. When you look at the real numbers it is a different story. Also when you see local meetings up here and they have any kind of indication or vote it is not often that NO are in the lead.
    The better Together mob have no story to tell other than negativity.
  • EasterrossEasterross Posts: 1,915
    An observation for those of you who live in Englandshire. On the BBC we get the UK news at 6pm and the Scottish news at 6.30pm. Both last for roughly 30 minutes. On STV we get them the other way round with the Scottish news at 6pm and Alistair Stewart and chums at 6.30pm.

    Other than when the London news features a Scottish item we rarely see in Scotland the same news items headlining because so much of what happens in the daily lives of Scots is determined by Eck and chums at Holyrood not by Dave, Nick and chums at Westminster.

    Issues like Falkirk may have basically slipped off the radar in Englandshire but this week we had an entire Newsnight Scotland on Falkirk. Grangemouth was THE issue in Scotland over the past month.

    The question for political anoraks like the PB community is how long will such issues remain in the minds of the typical Scottish voter (if it ever entered their minds in the first place) and what effect, if any will it have?

    My tuppence worth is I doubt it will have registered much with the typical Scottish punter who is far more interested in some talentless bimbo getting her kit off to win the X Factor or such like. However among those interested in politics, it will entrench their views and as I said earlier, it may cause some internal dissent among the activists Labour needs to plod up and down the streets at election time.

    Scottish Labour is currently engaged in various succession wars due to the end of the Brown 30-year reign of terror which totally dominated Scottish politics. Old tensions and rivalries are appearing the length and breadth of Scotland.

    I still believe the London chatterati could waken up on the 20th September 2014 and find that on conclusion of the count, the Scots didn't do what they were told was good for them and had voted Yes two days earlier. I cannot forget Tony Blair was assured by all the experts that the Holyrood voting system they had stitched us up with could not ever produce a majority government. Eck took only 4 attempts to prove them wrong.
  • The Scottish subsample on Falkirk is grim reading for Miliband.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    If it is cheaper, then it is likely to be cheaper still in Poland, which is a NATO country.

    But the sort of independent Scotland on offer seems to be one with the same monarchy, same currency, and possibly the same navy. It doesn't sound much like independence to me, but if that is the model then building frigates there may be reasonable.
    Charles said:

    @Stuart_Dickson

    Imagine you were PM of England and Wales, with an election coming up.

    Under what circumstances would you give a major shipbuilding contract to an independent Scotland as compared to, say, a marginal seat in the South of England?

    I'm genuinely interested - even if it is cheaper, say, I struggle to see a politician not finding an excuse to keep the contract at home

  • CarolaCarola Posts: 1,805
    Charles said:

    Carola said:




    Roger said:

    @Carola

    "Funnily enough this just popped up in my timeline:"

    That's funny! When I did my driving test the examiner asked 'under what circumstances is it OK to hit a pedestrian'?

    I foolishly gave him a list and failed

    I passed my test despite an 'atrocious' corner reverse manoeuvre (too fast) because at one point the car in front of me knocked a motorcyclist off his bike and I did a spectacular swerve/brake combo to avoid him. The examiner squealed like a stuck pig.
    I rammed a police car on my first test...
    Blimey. Was it a chase?
  • Charles said:

    I'm genuinely interested - even if it is cheaper, say, I struggle to see a politician not finding an excuse to keep the contract at home

    AFAIK EU rules allow you to say "we're building warships at home" - but as soon as it goes outside home you've got to submit it to open tender under competition rules - will the Scots win the orders in an open market?
  • Great piece from Nick Cohen on IDS
    http://goo.gl/FwWPSL
  • Mr. Charles, was Fingers McThief your instructor?

    Mr. Y0kel, as ever, a very interesting post on matters Middle Eastern
  • tim said:

    On topic

    The PB Tories are always wrong, the PB Tories never learn

    It's amazing how "Man cries at Funeral" has not been out of the headlines, isn't it?
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,500

    Here is Labour columnist Kevin McKenna writing in The Observer:

    Independence is not about burning Scotland's boats
    - Unionist factions are engaged in a race to the bottom of the barrel for fresh ways to scare Scotland off independence

    ... The reaction of some Scottish politicians over the loss of 850 jobs on the Clyde was quite sickening. The new Lib Dem Scottish secretary, Alistair Carmichael, and the Glasgow Labour MP Ian Davidson, both of whom will lose their highly paid Westminster jobs if Scotland votes Yes, are obviously feeling the heat. Carmichael, one of the most obscure figures in the world's most obscure political party, stated that an independent Scotland would not be awarded any future UK defence contracts. The Glasgow Labour MP John Robertson said baldly: "No yard, no ships" in an independent Scotland.

    All of them seemed to be inviting the UK government to kill shipbuilding on the Clyde as a punishment for Scotland exercising its democratic right to say Yes. Davidson actually stated that the loss of "only" 850 jobs on the Clyde – 20% of its workforce – was a cause for celebration.

    These three wretched, wretched men have put their own soiled political careers above the needs of those whom they are supposed to represent. It is all about hanging on to their fat Westminster salaries after September 2014.
    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/10/independence-not-burning-scotland-boats

    Meanwhile, here in the PB goldfish bowl, Alistair Carmichael is the leader-elect of the Lib Dems.

    Excellent article and describes the unionist troughers perfectly. They will happily lay waste to Scotland if it can keep them their fat salaries.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,500
    Charles said:

    @Stuart_Dickson

    Imagine you were PM of England and Wales, with an election coming up.

    Under what circumstances would you give a major shipbuilding contract to an independent Scotland as compared to, say, a marginal seat in the South of England?

    I'm genuinely interested - even if it is cheaper, say, I struggle to see a politician not finding an excuse to keep the contract at home

    Maybe someone sensible that realised the amount of trade they had with Scotland and the fact that it would be obvious it was just being done out of spite and could possibly lead to major boycott of rUK products would possibly give it a moments thought.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,963
    edited November 2013
    Mr. G, it's illegitimate for the SNP and pro-Yes sorts to state they'll happily take back all government jobs from England and Wales, but then complain that the government-given jobs in defence ship-building might end up being done in Portsmouth rather than on the Clyde.

    Mr. G (2), didn't bilateral trade with Ireland significantly decline after it became (largely) independent? I wonder if the same occurred with the Czech Republic and Slovakia when they had the velvet divorce.
  • If it is cheaper, then it is likely to be cheaper still in Poland, which is a NATO country.

    Charles said:

    @Stuart_Dickson

    Imagine you were PM of England and Wales, with an election coming up.

    Under what circumstances would you give a major shipbuilding contract to an independent Scotland as compared to, say, a marginal seat in the South of England?

    I'm genuinely interested - even if it is cheaper, say, I struggle to see a politician not finding an excuse to keep the contract at home

    Poland is also in the EU. If Poland is cheaper it would be very tough for rUK to give the contract to Scotland......

  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Are you really suggesting that an independent Scotland will have an export focused warship building industry on the Clyde?
    malcolmg said:

    Here is Labour columnist Kevin McKenna writing in The Observer:

    Independence is not about burning Scotland's boats
    - Unionist factions are engaged in a race to the bottom of the barrel for fresh ways to scare Scotland off independence

    ... The reaction of some Scottish politicians over the loss of 850 jobs on the Clyde was quite sickening. The new Lib Dem Scottish secretary, Alistair Carmichael, and the Glasgow Labour MP Ian Davidson, both of whom will lose their highly paid Westminster jobs if Scotland votes Yes, are obviously feeling the heat. Carmichael, one of the most obscure figures in the world's most obscure political party, stated that an independent Scotland would not be awarded any future UK defence contracts. The Glasgow Labour MP John Robertson said baldly: "No yard, no ships" in an independent Scotland.

    All of them seemed to be inviting the UK government to kill shipbuilding on the Clyde as a punishment for Scotland exercising its democratic right to say Yes. Davidson actually stated that the loss of "only" 850 jobs on the Clyde – 20% of its workforce – was a cause for celebration.

    These three wretched, wretched men have put their own soiled political careers above the needs of those whom they are supposed to represent. It is all about hanging on to their fat Westminster salaries after September 2014.
    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/10/independence-not-burning-scotland-boats

    Meanwhile, here in the PB goldfish bowl, Alistair Carmichael is the leader-elect of the Lib Dems.
    Excellent article and describes the unionist troughers perfectly. They will happily lay waste to Scotland if it can keep them their fat salaries.

  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,975
    edited November 2013
    @Stuart

    "These three wretched, wretched men have put their own soiled political careers above the needs of those whom they are supposed to represent. It is all about hanging on to their fat Westminster salaries after September 2014."

    It's a very deliberate policy of the unionists to counteract the 'Braveheart' tendency of the separatists to show that in fact they're completely depenent on the union. Why would you expect them to do anything else? It's exactly the counter to the sales ploy of the separatists and any other strategy wouldn't make sense
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,538

    Roger said:

    I think Carlotta makes up for the rest of us who have for one reason or another let this story pass us by.

    Some of us are concerned about the fate of the UK - and seeing the largest (by orders of magnitude) pro-UK party in Scotland shoot itself in the foot 10 months out from the referendum is causing concern.....of course, from a purely selfish point of view, the departure of Scotland from the Union would make the Conservatives job a lot easier in rUK.....

    Why would what is happening in Falkirk make someone vote for independence if they are otherwise in favour of the union? Is there any polling evidence that it has shifted opinions in favour of separation?

    I think it could damage the pro-Union cause if Scots see them as corrupt.
  • The Scottish subsample on Falkirk is grim reading for Miliband.

    That same Scottish subsample shows an 11% lead by LAB over SNP.

    If it was grim for LAB north of the border then you'd think that it would show up from the same group of people.

    This is, of course, the point I am making.

  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,500

    Charles said:

    I'm genuinely interested - even if it is cheaper, say, I struggle to see a politician not finding an excuse to keep the contract at home

    AFAIK EU rules allow you to say "we're building warships at home" - but as soon as it goes outside home you've got to submit it to open tender under competition rules - will the Scots win the orders in an open market?
    The great rule they spout about 346 or whatever means they can specify exactly where it is built if strategic, so they could specify that it had to be in Scotland and not fall foul of EU rules.
    Also who is to say that Poland would be cheaper?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453


    It's amazing how "Man cries at Funeral" has not been out of the headlines, isn't it?

    The PB Kinnocks assured us that Falkirk was a fight between Ed and Len that "would only be good news for Ed"

    When does that show up in the polling?
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,538

    Poor UKIP supporters - the world is just so mean!

    UKIP (OA)
    In past month have you seen a bicycle go through a red light:
    Net yes: +23 (+1)

    Generally, how common is it for cyclists to go through red lights:
    Net common: +66 (+38)

    Have you cycled through a red light (small base)
    Net no: +96 (+62)

    Should cyclists who go thru red be prosecuted:
    Net yes: +84 (+66)

    What are the chances of cyclists going through red lights just to annoy UKIP supporters?

    And how can the cyclists tell?

    Matthew Parris once suggested stringing piano wire across country lanes to catch cyclists.

    I have a certain sympathy.

  • malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    I'm genuinely interested - even if it is cheaper, say, I struggle to see a politician not finding an excuse to keep the contract at home

    AFAIK EU rules allow you to say "we're building warships at home" - but as soon as it goes outside home you've got to submit it to open tender under competition rules - will the Scots win the orders in an open market?
    Also who is to say that Poland would be cheaper?
    Yes, Poles have come to the UK in the hundreds of thousands for the lower wages......

  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Why would rUK want to strategically build warships in a country forcing the Royal Navy to relocate its Faslane base?
    malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    I'm genuinely interested - even if it is cheaper, say, I struggle to see a politician not finding an excuse to keep the contract at home

    AFAIK EU rules allow you to say "we're building warships at home" - but as soon as it goes outside home you've got to submit it to open tender under competition rules - will the Scots win the orders in an open market?
    The great rule they spout about 346 or whatever means they can specify exactly where it is built if strategic, so they could specify that it had to be in Scotland and not fall foul of EU rules.
    Also who is to say that Poland would be cheaper?
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,500

    Mr. G, it's illegitimate for the SNP and pro-Yes sorts to state they'll happily take back all government jobs from England and Wales, but then complain that the government-given jobs in defence ship-building might end up being done in Portsmouth rather than on the Clyde.

    Mr. G (2), didn't bilateral trade with Ireland significantly decline after it became (largely) independent? I wonder if the same occurred with the Czech Republic and Slovakia when they had the velvet divorce.

    Morris, personal viewpoint is they can build their ships where they want. If the best place is the Clyde and they prefer to pay more for a poorer job that is their choice.
    I believe the yards in Scotland should not be sitting with a begging bowl waiting on Westminster making a decision.
    Portsmouth still has 12000 jobs in other areas, whereas Govan is now down to just over 2000 and it is a one trick pony outfit waiting on major warships.
    They are dying a slow death in any case , workforce halved in recent years and what they need to do is diversify. In Norway they build between 100 and 200 ships in 42 shipyards.
    Westminster has killed ( almost ) shipbuilding in Scotland .
  • Charles said:

    @Stuart_Dickson

    Imagine you were PM of England and Wales, with an election coming up.

    Under what circumstances would you give a major shipbuilding contract to an independent Scotland as compared to, say, a marginal seat in the South of England?

    I'm genuinely interested - even if it is cheaper, say, I struggle to see a politician not finding an excuse to keep the contract at home

    Just to clarify - as it is obvious that most people are unaware - the UK can only allocate contracts to foreign shipyards if there is an open bidding process. Scotland got make-work with the three new River-class OPVs just to cover them until after the Referendum because it is a domestic supplier.

    If Scotland votes "Yes", and please do not slam the door when you leave, then BAe Systems will become a foreign supplier (of warships) under EU law. At that point they compete with the Europeans (especially the Poles and Romanians) and our friends in South Korea. Scottish warship-building will die without the life-blood of England's taxes....
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    malcolmg said:


    Westminster has killed ( almost ) shipbuilding in Scotland .

    The unions played their part in killing shipbuilding throughout the UK
  • "Westminster has killed ( almost ) shipbuilding in Scotland . "

    Mr. G, assuming No wins then it is true to say Westminster has killed (actually) shipbuilding in England.

    I've long been an advocate of greater defence spending, but the idea the evil English have deliberately done down Scottish industry by reducing ship-building is entirely wrong.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,500

    Are you really suggesting that an independent Scotland will have an export focused warship building industry on the Clyde?


    malcolmg said:

    Here is Labour columnist Kevin McKenna writing in The Observer:

    Independence is not about burning Scotland's boats
    - Unionist factions are engaged in a race to the bottom of the barrel for fresh ways to scare Scotland off independence

    ... The reaction of some Scottish politicians over the loss of 850 jobs on the Clyde was quite sickening. The new Lib Dem Scottish secretary, Alistair Carmichael, and the Glasgow Labour MP Ian Davidson, both of whom will lose their highly paid Westminster jobs if Scotland votes Yes, are obviously feeling the heat. Carmichael, one of the most obscure figures in the world's most obscure political party, stated that an independent Scotland would not be awarded any future UK defence contracts. The Glasgow Labour MP John Robertson said baldly: "No yard, no ships" in an independent Scotland.

    All of them seemed to be inviting the UK government to kill shipbuilding on the Clyde as a punishment for Scotland exercising its democratic right to say Yes. Davidson actually stated that the loss of "only" 850 jobs on the Clyde – 20% of its workforce – was a cause for celebration.

    These three wretched, wretched men have put their own soiled political careers above the needs of those whom they are supposed to represent. It is all about hanging on to their fat Westminster salaries after September 2014.
    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/10/independence-not-burning-scotland-boats

    Meanwhile, here in the PB goldfish bowl, Alistair Carmichael is the leader-elect of the Lib Dems.
    Excellent article and describes the unionist troughers perfectly. They will happily lay waste to Scotland if it can keep them their fat salaries.


    No the stupidity of that will hopefully be gone and they will diversify rather than die following the crap Westminster strategy. These yards will shut in the short term if we do not get independence, it has been a lingering death so far and they are down to only a couple of thousand workers sitting waiting on Westminster deciding if they will build a few more ships..
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,500
    Scott_P said:

    malcolmg said:


    Westminster has killed ( almost ) shipbuilding in Scotland .

    The unions played their part in killing shipbuilding throughout the UK
    very true, by the way I took your recommendation and got the RBS book, will let you know if it was worth the princely sum of 49p.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,500

    "Westminster has killed ( almost ) shipbuilding in Scotland . "

    Mr. G, assuming No wins then it is true to say Westminster has killed (actually) shipbuilding in England.

    I've long been an advocate of greater defence spending, but the idea the evil English have deliberately done down Scottish industry by reducing ship-building is entirely wrong.

    Morris, you are correct in that they also do the same to English industry. The country is run to only suit financial services in London. Whilst I comment on the crap job they do in Scotland, I do appreciate that for most of England they do exactly the same.
    Scotland has a chance to get out of the dead hand of Westminster, rest of England is not so lucky.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,975
    @Mike

    "Great piece from Nick Cohen on IDS"

    Isn't it. The story of the 24 year old librarian and his treatment of her is really sickening.

    What a C***!
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,500
    edited November 2013

    Charles said:

    @Stuart_Dickson

    Imagine you were PM of England and Wales, with an election coming up.

    Under what circumstances would you give a major shipbuilding contract to an independent Scotland as compared to, say, a marginal seat in the South of England?

    I'm genuinely interested - even if it is cheaper, say, I struggle to see a politician not finding an excuse to keep the contract at home

    Just to clarify - as it is obvious that most people are unaware - the UK can only allocate contracts to foreign shipyards if there is an open bidding process. Scotland got make-work with the three new River-class OPVs just to cover them until after the Referendum because it is a domestic supplier.

    If Scotland votes "Yes", and please do not slam the door when you leave, then BAe Systems will become a foreign supplier (of warships) under EU law. At that point they compete with the Europeans (especially the Poles and Romanians) and our friends in South Korea. Scottish warship-building will die without the life-blood of England's taxes....
    Bollocks

    From 346 : The directive contains an important exclusion in that cooperative programmes with an R&D phase
    conducted by at least two member states are excluded from the directive
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    malcolmg said:

    I took your recommendation and got the RBS book, will let you know if it was worth the princely sum of 49p.

    Fair enough. Apparently Amazon pay the author the same, regardless of the sale price, so if you don't like the book you can think of it as your contribution to the reduction of Amazon's profit this year...
  • Scott_P said:

    malcolmg said:


    Westminster has killed ( almost ) shipbuilding in Scotland .

    The unions played their part in killing shipbuilding throughout the UK
    As did the owners - demarcation suited them fine when it involved laying off workers as ships progressed - it came back to bite them in the bum with a vengeance. Of Owners/Unions/Government I'd say governments were the least culpable.....

  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    So you agree with Carmichael that a yes vote would be the end of major warship building on the Clyde?

    It is interesting that despite high costs Norway has a shipbuilding industry, it seems to have developed specialist expertise in specific sectors. Scottish yards have failed to do the same.
    malcolmg said:

    Are you really suggesting that an independent Scotland will have an export focused warship building industry on the Clyde?


    malcolmg said:

    Here is Labour columnist Kevin McKenna writing in The Observer:

    Independence is not about burning Scotland's boats
    - Unionist factions are engaged in a race to the bottom of the barrel for fresh ways to scare Scotland off independence

    ... The reaction of some Scottish politicians over the loss of 850 jobs on the Clyde was quite sickening. The new Lib Dem Scottish secretary, Alistair Carmichael, and the Glasgowe twretched, wretched men have put their own soiled political careers above the needs of those whom they are supposed to represent. It is all about hanging on to their fat Westminster salaries after September 2014.
    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/10/independence-not-burning-scotland-boats

    Meanwhile, here in the PB goldfish bowl, Alistair Carmichael is the leader-elect of the Lib Dems.
    Excellent article and describes the unionist troughers perfectly. They will happily lay waste to Scotland if it can keep them their fat salaries.
    No the stupidity of that will hopefully be gone and they will diversify rather than die following the crap Westminster strategy. These yards will shut in the short term if we do not get independence, it has been a lingering death so far and they are down to only a couple of thousand workers sitting waiting on Westminster deciding if they will build a few more ships..

  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @tnewtondunn: Att Gen Dominic Grieve will decide on criminal charges over #Snowden leaks, @WilliamJHague reveals. That's new - and sounds like underway.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    Roger said:

    @Mike

    "Great piece from Nick Cohen on IDS"

    Isn't it. The story of the 24 year old librarian and his treatment of her is really sickening.

    What a C***!

    Jeremy or Tristam ?
  • Mr. P, could be wrong (and it may be different for traditionally and self-published authors) but my understanding was that royalties were a percentage of the sale price.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,500

    So you agree with Carmichael that a yes vote would be the end of major warship building on the Clyde?



    ... The reaction of some Scottish politicians over the loss of 850 jobs on the Clyde was quite sickening. The new Lib Dem Scottish secretary, Alistair Carmichael, and the Glasgowe twretched, wretched men have put their own soiled political careers above the needs of those whom they are supposed to represent. It is all about hanging on to their fat Westminster salaries after September 2014.
    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/10/independence-not-burning-scotland-boats

    Meanwhile, here in the PB goldfish bowl, Alistair Carmichael is the leader-elect of the Lib Dems.

    Excellent article and describes the unionist troughers perfectly. They will happily lay waste to Scotland if it can keep them their fat salaries.



    No the stupidity of that will hopefully be gone and they will diversify rather than die following the crap Westminster strategy. These yards will shut in the short term if we do not get independence, it has been a lingering death so far and they are down to only a couple of thousand workers sitting waiting on Westminster deciding if they will build a few more ships..



    No I certainly do not. I believe that the countries will co-operate on many things after independence and one of those will be building ships on the Clyde. However they still need to diversify and they will be required to build ships for any Scottish navy.
    Carmichael is a talentless buffoon , only interested in personal gain, a disgrace of a politician but a normal Lib Dem, no principles, no morals and would sell their granny for personal aggrandisement.
  • Don't know if this was posted yesterday, but since Nic Cohen articles from a week ago are getting a fresh outing, why not?

    "BRITISH AMONGST LEAST GENEROUS ON OVERSEAS AID"

    http://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/11/09/British-amongst-least-generous-overseas-aid/
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    Mr. P, could be wrong (and it may be different for traditionally and self-published authors) but my understanding was that royalties were a percentage of the sale price.

    @iainmartin1: @EmploymentBar Feel no guilt. Amazingly the publisher and I get full price because it is part of an Amazon/Apple discount war.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,975
    Forgive me using these two paragraphs of Nick Cohen's piece but for Tories who still don't know why so many have low opinion of them and don't believe Christian Barnard could have found a heart if he'd spent a lifetime looking-this is worth reading. There are worse cases but this is so archetypally Tory it's worth hearing.........

    "As Duncan Smith realised he was losing the case, he went on the BBC to denounce Cait Reilly, one of the claimants who was challenging him in court. Despite receiving benefits, the 24-year old had refused to work for nothing in Poundland, he claimed. She was part of "a group of people out there who think they are too good for this kind of stuff". A "job snob", in other words; a scrounger, who was not prepared to get off her backside and put in the hours necessary to secure remunerative employment.

    If he had checked his facts, a task that seems beyond him, Duncan Smith would have discovered that Ms Reilly had been a volunteer at a Birmingham museum. She worked there gratis because she hoped one day to be taken on by a museum or gallery. Reilly objected to Duncan Smith's minions taking her out of the museum and sending her to Poundland instead because they were stopping her fulfilling her ambition for no reason at all."


  • That same Scottish subsample shows an 11% lead by LAB over SNP.

    If it was grim for LAB north of the border then you'd think that it would show up from the same group of people.

    This is, of course, the point I am making.

    Their lead in 2010 was 22-23 points. They're averaging just over 10 over the last 10 days.

    Scope for some losses?
  • The Scottish subsample on Falkirk is grim reading for Miliband.

    Indeed.

    Latest Betfair prices:

    Yes 5.7
    No 1.18

    Madness. Complete madness.
This discussion has been closed.