Mr. Urquhart, there're sometimes similar reports of monkey dust in various Yorkshire cities in local news.
My understanding is the variant in stoke is particular strong / long lasting for just a few quid a bag, which is causing huge problems for the police and local hospitals.
I heard the idea yesterday - I think from Jeremy Vine - that Scots have been nudged into drugs by the alcohol minimum pricing law. No idea if it's true, but if it is it's a humdinger of an unintended consequence.
I'm doubtful about that. Drugs are ridiculously cheap anyway.
A bit of a non-sequitur. Drinkers might never have asked themselves the question of how else to get high. I'm not saying there is any evidence that actually happened, though.
I know someone who was continuously taking crystal meth for a fortnight last month. The crystal meth to do that cost him £50. At that price point, alcohol minimum pricing does not really feature.
£50 per dose, presumably? Heroin is horribly cheap at £10 a bag or even less but the cost per diem still exceeds alcohol.
No, £50 for his fortnight's supply.
Wow. Does there ever come a point when we admit that the war on drugs is over and we lost, comprehensively, utterly and completely?
We need to be realistic. Legalised and taxed may make it more expensive than illegal and untaxed.
I heard the idea yesterday - I think from Jeremy Vine - that Scots have been nudged into drugs by the alcohol minimum pricing law. No idea if it's true, but if it is it's a humdinger of an unintended consequence.
I'm doubtful about that. Drugs are ridiculously cheap anyway.
A bit of a non-sequitur. Drinkers might never have asked themselves the question of how else to get high. I'm not saying there is any evidence that actually happened, though.
I know someone who was continuously taking crystal meth for a fortnight last month. The crystal meth to do that cost him £50. At that price point, alcohol minimum pricing does not really feature.
£50 per dose, presumably? Heroin is horribly cheap at £10 a bag or even less but the cost per diem still exceeds alcohol.
No, £50 for his fortnight's supply.
So £3.51 per day?
Struggling to get smashed on alcohol at that price.
And that's my point. Minimum pricing is unlikely to have much to do with this.
“On Panorama tonight, Gavin Barwell admits that Theresa May decided against a no deal Brexit in February after being convinced it would lead to a united Ireland and independent Scotland.”
Oh. That is a must-watch.
For a long while it was unclear why she was backtracking on her Lancaster House speech. Now we know: wee Ruthie had got hold of her ear.
What the OBR needs to understand is that it was created to embarrass Labour, not the Conservatives. Like all of George Osborne's rules and targets, its strictures don't apply to the blue team.
Conversely, they have their excuse for not acting if they do not find against the party. They can moan on Twitter and off the record to journalists without acting to their hearts content, saying officially that while they are not super happy with the leader that the party was cleared, so no reason to do anything.
Genuine question: does the watchdog usually come up with an unambiguous report? I'd have thought it unlikely that they'd say "We had a good look and there's no problem, carry on" or "The party is riddled with racism from top to bottom and ought to be illegal", but rather that they'd do a 50-page analysis with a set of recommendations for improvement, and everyone will cherry-pick it for key sentences.
That rather depends on your expectations, doesn’t it.
For a proudly anti-racist party led, we are told, by someone who has been a campaigner against racism all his life, any finding that such a party has behaved badly towards a minority and has failed to set up an adequate method of dealing with complaints (which is hardly rocket science) should be a cause of deep shame. Any finding that places it in a position where it has legal obligations to do X, Y and Z likewise.
However, I expect a shameless attempt to claim that because the EHRC does not describe the Labour Party in 2019 as the equivalent of the Nazi Party it is all a fuss about nothing and Labour has been exonerated.
I heard the idea yesterday - I think from Jeremy Vine - that Scots have been nudged into drugs by the alcohol minimum pricing law. No idea if it's true, but if it is it's a humdinger of an unintended consequence.
I'm doubtful about that. Drugs are ridiculously cheap anyway.
A bit of a non-sequitur. Drinkers might never have asked themselves the question of how else to get high. I'm not saying there is any evidence that actually happened, though.
I know someone who was continuously taking crystal meth for a fortnight last month. The crystal meth to do that cost him £50. At that price point, alcohol minimum pricing does not really feature.
£50 per dose, presumably? Heroin is horribly cheap at £10 a bag or even less but the cost per diem still exceeds alcohol.
No, £50 for his fortnight's supply.
Wow. Does there ever come a point when we admit that the war on drugs is over and we lost, comprehensively, utterly and completely?
The latest YouGov poll for The Times shows we are still very much in four-way split territory.
As ever, look at the trend not the snapshot: The Tories are back up to 25 per cent, the highest since mid-May, while the
It suggests that some of the dramatic changes seen since the European elections at the end of May, particularly on the right, may have been reversed. Although the chart above shows how volatile things can be.
You can't say "reversed" when you compare April (just a few months back!) with now. Yes, there's been a bit of an unwind, as you'd expect, and principally driven by the BXP falling from the headlines as the Tory contenders talk hardball on Brexit.
B&R and likely rebellions and defections are coming.
The LDs are doing very well indeed to be holding at 20%. It all looks very set-up for tactical voting on an unprecedented scale.
To defeat the Tories will need a big shift to the LDs in the South with Labour holding in its northern and South Wales strongholds (generalising horribly). It's why Labour not going full-on remain prior to an election is actually helpful.
The other big but nice problem they will have is if they are moping up targets and moving forward seats they will be into areas with little data and activist and it is hard to move activists from targets no matter how confident you are. The LD m/c is key and it will fall off a cliff edge once past a certain number of seats I suspect.
That's far more true for the Brexit party if targeting Northern Labour seats. Nigel just doesn't have the foot soldiers that may be required.
I have flipped my opinion on this several times. Initially I thought they just don't have a ground game so will fail. Then I saw the numbers they got out in Peterborough and thought they could do it. However by all accounts they didn't. I don't understand that. They complained they didn't have the data, but in a by election with that number of troops you can do it. It is also difficult to believe that they don't have anyone who knows how to run a by election. But by all accounts they didn't seem to have a clue. Translate that nationwide at a GE and I think you are completely correct.
About three days ago I outlined why I thought TBP would not sweep,the country but no one took any notice
Unless Scotland (or NI or Wales??) go for UDI, that seems unlikely. That is, of course, unless Brown expects Boris to be PM for a considerable amount of time.
Why is Scottish independence contingent upon PM Johnson being in office for a considerable amount of time?
In what way is the Union safer under PM Corbyn, PM Farage, PM McDonnell or PM Other?
Someone should offer Sturgeon the job. It would solve a lot of issues
PM Sturgeon’s Queen’s speech: the Act of Dissolution 2020.
England gets to have William and Scotland gets King Harry, who will become the northern monarch before his southern big brother (hopefully).
That we can do without. Lizzie maybe but we don't need the freeloaders.
It was the Norwegian settlement, after their successful independence referendum in 1905. They took the younger of the Danish princes as their monarch. His big brother only became monarch in Copenhagen long after his wee brother had been installed on the new throne in Oslo.
Harry strikes me as being more suited to the Scots than the über-English William.
As every English rugby supporter will tell you Prince William is not über-English. This is him celebrating Wales beating England in the World Cup.
Prince William is the next Prince of Wales and knows he will be King of Scotland, Canada and Australia and New Zealand too as it stands not just King of England.
He therefore can afford to let Harry favour England, while he is more flexible in his support
Mr. Divvie, you think it's legitimate to blame England for the sadly high rate of Scottish drug use?
Incidentally, why do you think the usage of drugs is higher than the rest of the UK?
I wonder also why the UK general average is above that of the European average.
MD , if Westminster rules make it nigh on impossible to change things then yes, not the whole issue but certainly does not help. The whole drugs strategy in UK is crap.
That article consists entirely of assertion, there is no analysis, and the only "authority" it quotes is Patrick Minford, the man who predicted that the introduction of the minimum wage would lead to 3m unemployed. Minford believes that we should abolish all tariffs and allow UK agriculture and manufacturing to collapse, a policy which is not likely to go down well electorally.
I heard the idea yesterday - I think from Jeremy Vine - that Scots have been nudged into drugs by the alcohol minimum pricing law. No idea if it's true, but if it is it's a humdinger of an unintended consequence.
Not that I'm doubting the expertise of some bloke, but that's a proposition for which I'd very much like to see the evidence.
As would I - but lets see the bigger picture. The number of chronic alcoholics in Scotland must surely outnumber the number of hard drug users by a factor of 50 or more.
I heard the idea yesterday - I think from Jeremy Vine - that Scots have been nudged into drugs by the alcohol minimum pricing law. No idea if it's true, but if it is it's a humdinger of an unintended consequence.
Not that I'm doubting the expertise of some bloke, but that's a proposition for which I'd very much like to see the evidence.
As would I - but lets see the bigger picture. The number of chronic alcoholics in Scotland must surely outnumber the number of hard drug users by a factor of 50 or more.
you mentally challenged
One of your more expansive and erudite posts Malcolm. There are a few parodies of Brexiters on this site. You are the SNP version, only worse. All insults and no argument, and even said insults are inarticulate, petty and without wit .
Comments
https://twitter.com/SkySportsGolf/status/1151764547436515328
Oh. That is a must-watch.
For a long while it was unclear why she was backtracking on her Lancaster House speech. Now we know: wee Ruthie had got hold of her ear.
For a proudly anti-racist party led, we are told, by someone who has been a campaigner against racism all his life, any finding that such a party has behaved badly towards a minority and has failed to set up an adequate method of dealing with complaints (which is hardly rocket science) should be a cause of deep shame. Any finding that places it in a position where it has legal obligations to do X, Y and Z likewise.
However, I expect a shameless attempt to claim that because the EHRC does not describe the Labour Party in 2019 as the equivalent of the Nazi Party it is all a fuss about nothing and Labour has been exonerated.
NEW THREAD 🧵
https://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2016/12/27/clean-brexit-is-the-way-to-go-saving-uk-24-billion-a-year-thank-you-goodbye-were-gone/
He therefore can afford to let Harry favour England, while he is more flexible in his support
Brexiters don’t “do” economics.