Some quick thoughts on the HS2 review. According to the BBC (1), the review will look into:
*) cost estimates so far *) opportunities for efficiency savings *) the environmental impact, focusing specifically on net zero carbon commitment *) whether the economic and business case made for HS2 is accurate *) the added costs of cancelling the project or changing its scope, such as combining phases 1 and 2a (Birmingham to Crewe), reducing the speed or building only phase 1
This seems to me as though they've decided on the answers to some fairly important questions before the review has even started. How would I structure the review?
I don’t think Boris is gonna cancel. He’s just doing the right thing and putting some critics of high speed rail on the review board, along with lots of enthusiasts. What kind of review would it be if it was only written by HS2 fanboys?
My hunch: they will seek very significant savings. Stop at Old Oak. Stop at Crewe. Etc
A classic bit of British fudge.
London to Brum to provide additional capacity where it is needed. Reduced maximum speed to save some cash. Nothing further north, since that is a vanity project. Divert the money to HS3.
That's what I reckon, anyway.
How do you build H3 without Crewe to Manc part of HS2?
Honeslty interested in how that happens?????
New line Manc to Leeds. Separate from HS2. Serving northerners, not Londoners visiting the north!
Line between just Manc and Leeds is hardly worthwhile, needs to extend to Hull and Liverpool, the part of Liverpool being over HS2.
Some quick thoughts on the HS2 review. According to the BBC (1), the review will look into:
*) cost estimates so far *) opportunities for efficiency savings *) the environmental impact, focusing specifically on net zero carbon commitment *) whether the economic and business case made for HS2 is accurate *) the added costs of cancelling the project or changing its scope, such as combining phases 1 and 2a (Birmingham to Crewe), reducing the speed or building only phase 1
This seems to me as though they've decided on the answers to some fairly important questions before the review has even started. How would I structure the review?
I don’t think Boris is gonna cancel. He’s just doing the right thing and putting some critics of high speed rail on the review board, along with lots of enthusiasts. What kind of review would it be if it was only written by HS2 fanboys?
My hunch: they will seek very significant savings. Stop at Old Oak. Stop at Crewe. Etc
A classic bit of British fudge.
London to Brum to provide additional capacity where it is needed. Reduced maximum speed to save some cash. Nothing further north, since that is a vanity project. Divert the money to HS3.
That's what I reckon, anyway.
How do you build H3 without Crewe to Manc part of HS2?
Honeslty interested in how that happens?????
New line Manc to Leeds. Separate from HS2. Serving northerners, not Londoners visiting the north!
If you want the biggest bang for the buck, you make them part of a contiguous network, planned as such.
And heaven forfend any northerners want to visit London or the south!
(Written from a B&B in Wigtown in Dumfries and Galloway, where Mrs J has been very happily buying books. It's a lovely part of the world.)
Hope your weather is better than Ayrshire, tipping it down here.
Some quick thoughts on the HS2 review. According to the BBC (1), the review will look into:
*) cost estimates so far *) opportunities for efficiency savings *) the environmental impact, focusing specifically on net zero carbon commitment *) whether the economic and business case made for HS2 is accurate *) the added costs of cancelling the project or changing its scope, such as combining phases 1 and 2a (Birmingham to Crewe), reducing the speed or building only phase 1
This seems to me as though they've decided on the answers to some fairly important questions before the review has even started. How would I structure the review?
I don’t think Boris is gonna cancel. He’s just doing the right thing and putting some critics of high speed rail on the review board, along with lots of enthusiasts. What kind of review would it be if it was only written by HS2 fanboys?
My hunch: they will seek very significant savings. Stop at Old Oak. Stop at Crewe. Etc
A classic bit of British fudge.
London to Brum to provide additional capacity where it is needed. Reduced maximum speed to save some cash. Nothing further north, since that is a vanity project. Divert the money to HS3.
That's what I reckon, anyway.
How do you build H3 without Crewe to Manc part of HS2?
Honeslty interested in how that happens?????
New line Manc to Leeds. Separate from HS2. Serving northerners, not Londoners visiting the north!
Line between just Manc and Leeds is hardly worthwhile, needs to extend to Hull and Liverpool, the part of Liverpool being over HS2.
I see the nature of HS3 as being somewhat different to HS2. The density of towns and cities that could be served are somewhat higher, and somewhat unhelpful to very high-speed running. Also, the point of a new line (as opposed to any upgrades) would be somewhat different: not just to aid capacity, but also to help the north's economy - which would demand more stops.
Personally, like you I'd like to see it going from Liverpool to Hull as a truly cross-country link, albeit with most of the extra capacity being on the core Leeds to Manchester part. Linking it and its stations with HS2 would be vital, and would create some interesting potential traffic flows.
It does seem there's more focus on mudslinging and trying to affix blame than find a solution.
The media's right to point out the PM's daftness, but seem curiously disinterested in the perversity of the EU refusing to acknowledge their withdrawal agreement cannot pass the Commons, and wanting the PM to come up with a backstop alternative whilst simultaneously promising to renegotiate nothing and reject whatever he says.
No Deal will be an enormous failure of statecraft on both sides, should it happen. Lots of Leavers will get the blame, and rightly, but Barnier, Juncker, Verhoefstadt et al will be publicly shamed, as well. Once they have all been pelted with rotten turnips, attention will turn to earlier culprits, like Cameron. And the madder europhiles.
It will be like the moral aftermath of the Iraq War.
Who said this and when?
The tragedy for British politics - for Britain - has been that politicians of both parties have consistently failed, not just in the 1950s but on up to the present day, to appreciate the emerging reality of European integration. And in doing so, they have failed Britain's interests.
Tony Blair and his "Britain at the heart of Europe" nonsense. That went well...
It was John Major who said he wanted to put Britain at the heart of Europe (though I am sure Blair agreed with him).
Be surprised about Major, even if he thought it. He spent most of his Premiership fighting off the bastards and would have been reluctant to provoke them unnecessarily.
Gentleman John certainty spoke about Britain being at the 'heart of Europe', though there's been some revisionism to suggest he meant 'at the heart of the debate about the future of Europe'.
The pillars approach of Maastricht was not the worst approach. Over time had we kept on at that I suspect we could have become a reasonably comfortable semi-detached member of the EU, still paying into the pot, with some control over freedom of movement and trading reasonably happily. Instead Blair tried to buy favour by giving up much of the rebate, by trying to bully his Chancellor into joining the Euro and gave unlimited access to the populations of the new Member States. The backlash from that is what has brought us here.
Some quick thoughts on the HS2 review. According to the BBC (1), the review will look into:
*) cost estimates so far *) opportunities for efficiency savings *) the environmental impact, focusing specifically on net zero carbon commitment *) whether the economic and business case made for HS2 is accurate *) the added costs of cancelling the project or changing its scope, such as combining phases 1 and 2a (Birmingham to Crewe), reducing the speed or building only phase 1
This seems to me as though they've decided on the answers to some fairly important questions before the review has even started. How would I structure the review?
I don’t think Boris is gonna cancel. He’s just doing the right thing and putting some critics of high speed rail on the review board, along with lots of enthusiasts. What kind of review would it be if it was only written by HS2 fanboys?
My hunch: they will seek very significant savings. Stop at Old Oak. Stop at Crewe. Etc
A classic bit of British fudge.
London to Brum to provide additional capacity where it is needed. Reduced maximum speed to save some cash. Nothing further north, since that is a vanity project. Divert the money to HS3.
That's what I reckon, anyway.
How do you build H3 without Crewe to Manc part of HS2?
Honeslty interested in how that happens?????
New line Manc to Leeds. Separate from HS2. Serving northerners, not Londoners visiting the north!
If you want the biggest bang for the buck, you make them part of a contiguous network, planned as such.
And heaven forfend any northerners want to visit London or the south!
(Written from a B&B in Wigtown in Dumfries and Galloway, where Mrs J has been very happily buying books. It's a lovely part of the world.)
Hope your weather is better than Ayrshire, tipping it down here.
Here too. I blame @SouthamObserver . I distinctly recall him muttering about a drought in early May and its hardly stopped raining since.
Some quick thoughts on the HS2 review. According to the BBC (1), the review will look into:
*) cost estimates so far *) opportunities for efficiency savings *) the environmental impact, focusing specifically on net zero carbon commitment *) whether the economic and business case made for HS2 is accurate *) the added costs of cancelling the project or changing its scope, such as combining phases 1 and 2a (Birmingham to Crewe), reducing the speed or building only phase 1
This seems to me as though they've decided on the answers to some fairly important questions before the review has even started. How would I structure the review?
I don’t think Boris is gonna cancel. He’s just doing the right thing and putting some critics of high speed rail on the review board, along with lots of enthusiasts. What kind of review would it be if it was only written by HS2 fanboys?
My hunch: they will seek very significant savings. Stop at Old Oak. Stop at Crewe. Etc
A classic bit of British fudge.
London to Brum to provide additional capacity where it is needed. Reduced maximum speed to save some cash. Nothing further north, since that is a vanity project. Divert the money to HS3.
That's what I reckon, anyway.
How do you build H3 without Crewe to Manc part of HS2?
Honeslty interested in how that happens?????
New line Manc to Leeds. Separate from HS2. Serving northerners, not Londoners visiting the north!
If you want the biggest bang for the buck, you make them part of a contiguous network, planned as such.
And heaven forfend any northerners want to visit London or the south!
(Written from a B&B in Wigtown in Dumfries and Galloway, where Mrs J has been very happily buying books. It's a lovely part of the world.)
Hope your weather is better than Ayrshire, tipping it down here.
Thanks. It's the same here, but I managed to get a jog in sunshine up to Newton Stewart this morning. This was along the route I took on my coastal walk, and Mrs J was somewhat concerned I might have kept running around the coast ...
Incidentally, I was going along a quiet country lane when I saw a large religious statue of a woman amidst the ferns and trees just off the road, gleaming white. It was rather disconcerting!
Some quick thoughts on the HS2 review. According to the BBC (1), the review will look into:
*) cost estimates so far *) opportunities for efficiency savings *) the environmental impact, focusing specifically on net zero carbon commitment *) whether the economic and business case made for HS2 is accurate *) the added costs of cancelling the project or changing its scope, such as combining phases 1 and 2a (Birmingham to Crewe), reducing the speed or building only phase 1
This seems to me as though they've decided on the answers to some fairly important questions before the review has even started. How would I structure the review?
I don’t think Boris is gonna cancel. He’s just doing the right thing and putting some critics of high speed rail on the review board, along with lots of enthusiasts. What kind of review would it be if it was only written by HS2 fanboys?
My hunch: they will seek very significant savings. Stop at Old Oak. Stop at Crewe. Etc
A classic bit of British fudge.
London to Brum to provide additional capacity where it is needed. Reduced maximum speed to save some cash. Nothing further north, since that is a vanity project. Divert the money to HS3.
That's what I reckon, anyway.
How do you build H3 without Crewe to Manc part of HS2?
Honeslty interested in how that happens?????
New line Manc to Leeds. Separate from HS2. Serving northerners, not Londoners visiting the north!
If you want the biggest bang for the buck, you make them part of a contiguous network, planned as such.
And heaven forfend any northerners want to visit London or the south!
(Written from a B&B in Wigtown in Dumfries and Galloway, where Mrs J has been very happily buying books. It's a lovely part of the world.)
Hope your weather is better than Ayrshire, tipping it down here.
Here too. I blame @SouthamObserver . I distinctly recall him muttering about a drought in early May and its hardly stopped raining since.
I was thinking of getting a boat for the gardening
Look at the bollox from GERS, you would have thought they might have tried to make the numbers look like someone might believe them. As subtle as a brick Scotland deficit 🏴 - £12.6bn Wales deficit - £13.7bn N.I deficit - circa £9bn
Celtic total - £34.8bn UK deficit 🇬🇧 - £23.5bn
So England has a surplus of about £11bn & Scotland is creating 53% of UK deficit from 8-9% of population.
Why do you find that surprising Malcolm? Our private sector is in a parlous state and many of our financial companies moved south when threatened by Indyref 1. If you look at the FTSE 100 I think you will find SSE, Firstgroup, HBOS and Cairn Energy. I may have missed one but I think that's it.
Now you can make the case that some of these companies make quite a lot of their money in Scotland but have their registered offices in England. But the Scottish tax base is a real problem, not a fiction of the ONS.
Public expenditure in Scotland is significantly higher per head than in England. You can again argue that there are reasons for that but the numbers are indisputable.
As I said earlier today Scotland really needs to work at its economic viability before it starts looking at independence.
David, Scotland may well be in a technical deficit. But in terms of national income per head, labour productivity, employment etc. Scotland is pretty much on a par with Rest of U.K.. And public services are not exactly gold-plated here. GERS is a political exercise and numbers are plucked out of someones erchie. They have no clue how to split some of the numbers,. GERS uses "estimated " 167 times. Those numbers are just fake , otherwise Scotland would be Shangri La.
I think that is a mistake. The first step to addressing a problem is to acknowledge that you have one. Our Parliament should be doing all it can to encourage enterprise north of the border. This does not include creating differential taxes for the mobile higher paid, promising lots of "free" stuff that might be electorally popular in the short term, refusing to get to grips with how our excellent universities are going to compete given the level of funding available to them, claiming our school reforms have worked, etc, etc.
Ironically, malcolmg is at least half right. The one way to get Scotland to truly address these issues is probably independence. Then Scotland would have no choice but to cut the deficit, promote competition, slash services, get real growth. And no more free university.
The only problem is that before all this, an indy Scotland would go immediately and horrifyingly bankrupt, without a currency or a central bank to cushion the blow.
It would certainly be salutary. A Darien for our times.
Mad request. I have to buy an electric razor here in Thessaloniki, Greece. What shops in Greece might sell such a thing? Does PB have any previously hirsute Hellenics?
Some quick thoughts on the HS2 review. According to the BBC (1), the review will look into:
*) cost estimates so far *) opportunities for efficiency savings *) the environmental impact, focusing specifically on net zero carbon commitment *) whether the economic and business case made for HS2 is accurate *) the added costs of cancelling the project or changing its scope, such as combining phases 1 and 2a (Birmingham to Crewe), reducing the speed or building only phase 1
This seems to me as though they've decided on the answers to some fairly important questions before the review has even started. How would I structure the review?
I don’t think Boris is gonna cancel. He’s just doing the right thing and putting some critics of high speed rail on the review board, along with lots of enthusiasts. What kind of review would it be if it was only written by HS2 fanboys?
My hunch: they will seek very significant savings. Stop at Old Oak. Stop at Crewe. Etc
A classic bit of British fudge.
London to Brum to provide additional capacity where it is needed. Reduced maximum speed to save some cash. Nothing further north, since that is a vanity project. Divert the money to HS3.
That's what I reckon, anyway.
How do you build H3 without Crewe to Manc part of HS2?
Honeslty interested in how that happens?????
New line Manc to Leeds. Separate from HS2. Serving northerners, not Londoners visiting the north!
If you want the biggest bang for the buck, you make them part of a contiguous network, planned as such.
And heaven forfend any northerners want to visit London or the south!
(Written from a B&B in Wigtown in Dumfries and Galloway, where Mrs J has been very happily buying books. It's a lovely part of the world.)
Hope your weather is better than Ayrshire, tipping it down here.
Here too. I blame @SouthamObserver . I distinctly recall him muttering about a drought in early May and its hardly stopped raining since.
Southam is the Chris Grayling of weather forecasting
Some quick thoughts on the HS2 review. According to the BBC (1), the review will look into:
*) cost estimates so far *) opportunities for efficiency savings *) the environmental impact, focusing specifically on net zero carbon commitment *) whether the economic and business case made for HS2 is accurate *) the added costs of cancelling the project or changing its scope, such as combining phases 1 and 2a (Birmingham to Crewe), reducing the speed or building only phase 1
This seems to me as though they've decided on the answers to some fairly important questions before the review has even started. How would I structure the review?
I don’t think Boris is gonna cancel. He’s just doing the right thing and putting some critics of high speed rail on the review board, along with lots of enthusiasts. What kind of review would it be if it was only written by HS2 fanboys?
My hunch: they will seek very significant savings. Stop at Old Oak. Stop at Crewe. Etc
A classic bit of British fudge.
London to Brum to provide additional capacity where it is needed. Reduced maximum speed to save some cash. Nothing further north, since that is a vanity project. Divert the money to HS3.
That's what I reckon, anyway.
How do you build H3 without Crewe to Manc part of HS2?
Honeslty interested in how that happens?????
New line Manc to Leeds. Separate from HS2. Serving northerners, not Londoners visiting the north!
If you want the biggest bang for the buck, you make them part of a contiguous network, planned as such.
And heaven forfend any northerners want to visit London or the south!
(Written from a B&B in Wigtown in Dumfries and Galloway, where Mrs J has been very happily buying books. It's a lovely part of the world.)
Hope your weather is better than Ayrshire, tipping it down here.
Here too. I blame @SouthamObserver . I distinctly recall him muttering about a drought in early May and its hardly stopped raining since.
I was thinking of getting a boat for the gardening
Look at the bollox from GERS, you would have thought they might have tried to make the numbers look like someone might believe them. As subtle as a brick Scotland deficit 🏴 - £12.6bn Wales deficit - £13.7bn N.I deficit - circa £9bn
Celtic total - £34.8bn UK deficit 🇬🇧 - £23.5bn
So England has a surplus of about £11bn & Scotland is creating 53% of UK deficit from 8-9% of population.
SNIP
David, Scotland may well be in a technical deficit. But in terms of national income per head, labour productivity, employment etc. Scotland is pretty much on a par with Rest of U.K.. And public services are not exactly gold-plated here. GERS is a political exercise and numbers are plucked out of someones erchie. They have no clue how to split some of the numbers,. GERS uses "estimated " 167 times. Those numbers are just fake , otherwise Scotland would be Shangri La.
I think that is a mistake. The first step to addressing a problem is to acknowledge that you have one. Our Parliament should be doing all it can to encourage enterprise north of the border. This does not include creating differential taxes for the mobile higher paid, promising lots of "free" stuff that might be electorally popular in the short term, refusing to get to grips with how our excellent universities are going to compete given the level of funding available to them, claiming our school reforms have worked, etc, etc.
Ironically, malcolmg is at least half right. The one way to get Scotland to truly address these issues is probably independence. Then Scotland would have no choice but to cut the deficit, promote competition, slash services, get real growth. And no more free university.
The only problem is that before all this, an indy Scotland would go immediately and horrifyingly bankrupt, without a currency or a central bank to cushion the blow.
It would certainly be salutary. A Darien for our times.
Yes just like all those other poor similar sized countries that are much better off and have higher living standards than the much vaunted UK basket case. How would we manage with all that growth and income, would be terrible. Imagine the only country in the world that cannot have a central bank and a currency. What a bellend.
Look at the bollox from GERS, you would have thought they might have tried to make the numbers look like someone might believe them. As subtle as a brick Scotland deficit 🏴 - £12.6bn Wales deficit - £13.7bn N.I deficit - circa £9bn
Celtic total - £34.8bn UK deficit 🇬🇧 - £23.5bn
So England has a surplus of about £11bn & Scotland is creating 53% of UK deficit from 8-9% of population.
SNIP
David, Scotland may well be in a technical deficit. But in terms of national income per head, labour productivity, employment etc. Scotland is pretty much on a par with Rest of U.K.. And public services are not exactly gold-plated here. GERS is a political exercise and numbers are plucked out of someones erchie. They have no clue how to split some of the numbers,. GERS uses "estimated " 167 times. Those numbers are just fake , otherwise Scotland would be Shangri La.
I think that is a mistake. The first step to addressing a problem is to acknowledge that you have one. Our Parliament should be doing all it can to encourage enterprise north of the border. This does not include creating differential taxes for the mobile higher paid, promising lots of "free" stuff that might be electorally popular in the short term, refusing to get to grips with how our excellent universities are going to compete given the level of funding available to them, claiming our school reforms have worked, etc, etc.
Ironically, malcolmg is at least half right. The one way to get Scotland to truly address these issues is probably independence. Then Scotland would have no choice but to cut the deficit, promote competition, slash services, get real growth. And no more free university.
The only problem is that before all this, an indy Scotland would go immediately and horrifyingly bankrupt, without a currency or a central bank to cushion the blow.
It would certainly be salutary. A Darien for our times.
Yes just like all those other poor similar sized countries that are much better off and have higher living standards than the much vaunted UK basket case. How would we manage with all that growth and income, would be terrible. Imagine the only country in the world that cannot have a central bank and a currency. What a bellend.
so do I take it Wee Mrs McTurnip is now going out the back door like Boris ?
Is he going to support Ken Clarke or Harriet otherwise he may as well go as he would not be missed
He needs his Remainer momentum kids to see that he is doing something, whilst all the while behind the scenes he is implementing the Seamus Tory No Deal Chaos Strategy.
Look at the bollox from GERS, you would have thought they might have tried to make the numbers look like someone might believe them. As subtle as a brick Scotland deficit 🏴 - £12.6bn Wales deficit - £13.7bn N.I deficit - circa £9bn
Celtic total - £34.8bn UK deficit 🇬🇧 - £23.5bn
So England has a surplus of about £11bn & Scotland is creating 53% of UK deficit from 8-9% of population.
Why do you find that surprising Malcolm? Our private sector is in a parlous state and many of our financial companies moved south when threatened by Indyref 1. If you look at the FTSE 100 I think you will find SSE, Firstgroup, HBOS and Cairn Energy. I may have missed one but I think that's it.
Now you can make the case that some of these companies make quite a lot of their money in Scotland but have their registered offices in England. But the Scottish tax base is a real problem, not a fiction of the ONS.
Public expenditure in Scotland is significantly higher per head than in England. You can again argue that there are reasons for that but the numbers are indisputable.
As I said earlier today Scotland really needs to work at its economic viability before it starts looking at independence.
David, Scotland may well be in a technical deficit. But in terms of national income per head, labour productivity, employment etc. Scotland is pretty much on a par with Rest of U.K.. And public services are not exactly gold-plated here. GERS is a political exercise and numbers are plucked out of someones erchie. They have no clue how to split some of the numbers,. GERS uses "estimated " 167 times. Those numbers are just fake , otherwise Scotland would be Shangri La.
I think that is a mistake. The first step to addressing a problem is to acknowledge that you have one. Our Parliament should be doing all it can to encourage enterprise north of the border. This does not include creating differential taxes for the mobile higher paid, promising lots of "free" stuff that might be electorally popular in the short term, refusing to get to grips with how our excellent universities are going to compete given the level of funding available to them, claiming our school reforms have worked, etc, etc.
David, they cannot do that whilst shackled by Westminster. If they improve anything then Westminster just cuts the pocket money. They need real powers on taxation, powers to decide how our money is spent and then they can try to improve things. Having to mitigate the horrible Tory impacts on the poor is about all they can do at present. Westminster control the majority of Scotland's money and are making a right hash of it, deliberately.
Given that the Brexit Party is a one policy party, am I the only one baffled by the 2% of Brexit Party supporters who think that it was wrong to leave the EU?
Look at the bollox from GERS, you would have thought they might have tried to make the numbers look like someone might believe them. As subtle as a brick Scotland deficit 🏴 - £12.6bn Wales deficit - £13.7bn N.I deficit - circa £9bn
Celtic total - £34.8bn UK deficit 🇬🇧 - £23.5bn
So England has a surplus of about £11bn & Scotland is creating 53% of UK deficit from 8-9% of population.
SNIP
David, Scotland may well be in a technical deficit. But in terms of national income per head, labour productivity, employment etc. Scotland is pretty much on a par with Rest of U.K.. And public services are not exactly gold-plated here. GERS is a political exercise and numbers are plucked out of someones erchie. They have no clue how to split some of the numbers,. GERS uses "estimated " 167 times. Those numbers are just fake , otherwise Scotland would be Shangri La.
I think that is a mistake. The first step to addressing a problem is to acknowledge that you have one. Our Parliament should be doing all it can to encourage enterprise north of the border. This does not include creating differential taxes for the mobile higher paid, promising lots of "free" stuff that might be electorally popular in the short term, refusing to get to grips with how our excellent universities are going to compete given the level of funding available to them, claiming our school reforms have worked, etc, etc.
Ironically, malcolmg is at least half right. The one way to get Scotland to truly address these issues is probably independence. Then Scotland would have no choice but to cut the deficit, promote competition, slash services, get real growth. And no more free university.
The only problem is that before all this, an indy Scotland would go immediately and horrifyingly bankrupt, without a currency or a central bank to cushion the blow.
It would certainly be salutary. A Darien for our times.
Yes just like all those other poor similar sized countries that are much better off and have higher living standards than the much vaunted UK basket case. How would we manage with all that growth and income, would be terrible. Imagine the only country in the world that cannot have a central bank and a currency. What a bellend.
so do I take it Wee Mrs McTurnip is now going out the back door like Boris ?
She has bigger cojones than Boris Alan, front door and looking for trouble. PS: Not so wee, specsavers for you my boy.
Those numbers are just fake , otherwise Scotland would be Shangri La.
I think that is a mistake. The first step to addressing a problem is to acknowledge that you have one. Our Parliament should be doing all it can to encourage enterprise north of the border. This does not include creating differential taxes for the mobile higher paid, promising lots of "free" stuff that might be electorally popular in the short term, refusing to get to grips with how our excellent universities are going to compete given the level of funding available to them, claiming our school reforms have worked, etc, etc.
David, they cannot do that whilst shackled by Westminster. If they improve anything then Westminster just cuts the pocket money. They need real powers on taxation, powers to decide how our money is spent and then they can try to improve things. Having to mitigate the horrible Tory impacts on the poor is about all they can do at present. Westminster control the majority of Scotland's money and are making a right hash of it, deliberately.
Malcolm, I don't think Westminster are making a hash of anything deliberately. That would be to mistake stupidity for strategy.
Yes just like all those other poor similar sized countries that are much better off and have higher living standards than the much vaunted UK basket case. How would we manage with all that growth and income, would be terrible. Imagine the only country in the world that cannot have a central bank and a currency. What a bellend.
+++
Ah, dear malc. You do know I was kind of agreeing with you? Of course Scotland would be fine, in the long term, as an independent country. Scotland is a resource rich nation with lots of smart people. It is also arguable (tho I disagree) that independence would - eventually - make you considerably richer than staying in the Union. That was my point.
However it is inarguable that indy right now would be horrifically painful and probably tip Scotland into a Greek style depression for a decade. You can’t just wish these deficit figures away.
Mad request. I have to buy an electric razor here in Thessaloniki, Greece. What shops in Greece might sell such a thing? Does PB have any previously hirsute Hellenics?
I think that is a mistake. The first step to addressing a problem is to acknowledge that you have one. Our Parliament should be doing all it can to encourage enterprise north of the border. This does not include creating differential taxes for the mobile higher paid, promising lots of "free" stuff that might be electorally popular in the short term, refusing to get to grips with how our excellent universities are going to compete given the level of funding available to them, claiming our school reforms have worked, etc, etc.
Ironically, malcolmg is at least half right. The one way to get Scotland to truly address these issues is probably independence. Then Scotland would have no choice but to cut the deficit, promote competition, slash services, get real growth. And no more free university.
The only problem is that before all this, an indy Scotland would go immediately and horrifyingly bankrupt, without a currency or a central bank to cushion the blow.
It would certainly be salutary. A Darien for our times.
There is a lot we could do short of independence. There are some exciting tech companies in Edinburgh and Lothian. We should focus our education resources on what they need from a labour force. Edinburgh has got some serious money from Microsoft. The Scottish government needs to build on this and make sure the graduates have opportunities to go to. We clearly have significant wind resources, albeit the remoteness is an issue. We have fracking opportunities that would help keep Grangemouth going. We can probably do more with tidal and wave power. We need to coax some of our financial services companies back with better tax deals. We need to reverse the disaster that is curriculum for excellence. We need to fight to make sure any new immigration system fits Scotland's needs. We need to see if we can rebuild some of the infrastructure of our fishing industry on the back of Brexit. We need to stop promising free health care and education to EU citizens after Brexit. We need to focus our limited capital spend on infrastructure that generates growth. That means 3 lanes on the M8 and dual-ling the A1 instead of the A9. So much to do but if we sit back and claim we don't have a problem we are deluding ourselves.
Look at the bollox from GERS, you would have thought they might have tried to make the numbers look like someone might believe them. As subtle as a brick Scotland deficit 🏴 - £12.6bn Wales deficit - £13.7bn N.I deficit - circa £9bn
Celtic total - £34.8bn UK deficit 🇬🇧 - £23.5bn
So England has a surplus of about £11bn & Scotland is creating 53% of UK deficit from 8-9% of population.
SNIP
David, Scotland may well be in a technical deficit. But in terms of national income per head, labour productivity, employment etc. Scotland is pretty much on a par with Rest of U.K.. And public services are not exactly gold-plated here. GERS is a political exercise and numbers are plucked out of someones erchie. They have no clue how to split some of the numbers,. GERS uses "estimated " 167 times. Those numbers are just fake , otherwise Scotland would be Shangri La.
I think that is a mistake. The first step to addressing a problem is to acknowledge that you have one. Our Parliament should be doing all it can to encourage enterprise north of the border. This does not include creating differential taxes for the mobile higher paid, promising lots of "free" stuff that might be electorally popular in the short term, refusing to get to grips with how our excellent universities are going to compete given the level of funding available to them, claiming our school reforms have worked, etc, etc.
Ironically, malcolmg is at least half right. The one way to get Scotland to truly address these issues is probably independence. Then Scotland would have no choice but to cut the deficit, promote competition, slash services, get real growth. And no more free university.
The only problem is that before all this, an indy Scotland would go immediately and horrifyingly bankrupt, without a currency or a central bank to cushion the blow.
It would certainly be salutary. A Darien for our times.
Yes just like all those othe bank and a currency. What a bellend.
so do I take it Wee Mrs McTurnip is now going out the back door like Boris ?
She has bigger cojones than Boris Alan, front door and looking for trouble. PS: Not so wee, specsavers for you my boy.
Id be worried about that malc.
The last FM started wheeling his cojones all over the place and got in to all sorts of trouble. :-)
Some quick thoughts on the HS2 review. According to the BBC (1), the review will look into:
*) cost estimates so far *) opportunities for efficiency savings *) the environmental impact, focusing specifically on net zero carbon commitment *) whether the economic and business case made for HS2 is accurate *) the added costs of cancelling the project or changing its scope, such as combining phases 1 and 2a (Birmingham to Crewe), reducing the speed or building only phase 1
This seems to me as though they've decided on the answers to some fairly important questions before the review has even started. How would I structure the review?
I don’t think Boris is gonna cancel. He’s just doing the right thing and putting some critics of high speed rail on the review board, along with lots of enthusiasts. What kind of review would it be if it was only written by HS2 fanboys?
My hunch: they will seek very significant savings. Stop at Old Oak. Stop at Crewe. Etc
A classic bit of British fudge.
London to Brum to provide additional capacity where it is needed. Reduced maximum speed to save some cash. Nothing further north, since that is a vanity project. Divert the money to HS3.
That's what I reckon, anyway.
How do you build H3 without Crewe to Manc part of HS2?
Honeslty interested in how that happens?????
New line Manc to Leeds. Separate from HS2. Serving northerners, not Londoners visiting the north!
Line between just Manc and Leeds is hardly worthwhile, needs to extend to Hull and Liverpool, the part of Liverpool being over HS2.
People want to go to Liverpool? Why?
I went a couple of years ago. It is smart around the Albert Dock. The slavery museum and other museums are worth a visit. Also the Beatles tour was good. I was surprised by the amount of foreign tourists there.
Look at the bollox from GERS, you would have thought they might have tried to make the numbers look like someone might believe them. As subtle as a brick Scotland deficit 🏴 - £12.6bn Wales deficit - £13.7bn N.I deficit - circa £9bn
Celtic total - £34.8bn UK deficit 🇬🇧 - £23.5bn
So England has a surplus of about £11bn & Scotland is creating 53% of UK deficit from 8-9% of population.
SNIP
SNIP
Ironically, malcolmg is at least half right. The one way to get Scotland to truly address these issues is probably independence. Then Scotland would have no choice but to cut the deficit, promote competition, slash services, get real growth. And no more free university.
The only problem is that before all this, an indy Scotland would go immediately and horrifyingly bankrupt, without a currency or a central bank to cushion the blow.
It would certainly be salutary. A Darien for our times.
Yes just like all those other poor similar sized countries that are much better off and have higher living standards than the much vaunted UK basket case. How would we manage with all that growth and income, would be terrible. Imagine the only country in the world that cannot have a central bank and a currency. What a bellend.
Ah, dear malc. You do know I was kind of agreeing with you? Of course Scotland would be fine, in the long term, as an independent country. Scotland is a resource rich nation with lots of smart people. It is also arguable (tho I disagree) that independence would - eventually - make you considerably richer than staying in the Union. That was my point.
However it is inarguable that indy right now would be horrifically painful and probably tip Scotland into a Greek style depression for a decade. You can’t just wish these deficit figures away.
Ok I’m gonna buy my razor. Epharisto.
Yes , that was why I was nice to you. However the currency and central bank bit was hogwash. Our share of the spoils of the Bank of UK will set us up very nicely, we already have our own currency and notes in circulation, nothing to see here move along. PS , worst case America Trump is always on the lookout for Real Estate and my cash is all invested in GBP and USD so I would likely be a very rich man as well, what is there not to like.
Some quick thoughts on the HS2 review. According to the BBC (1), the review will look into:
*) cost estimates so far *) opportunities for efficiency savings *) the environmental impact, focusing specifically on net zero carbon commitment *) whether the economic and business case made for HS2 is accurate *) the added costs of cancelling the project or changing its scope, such as combining phases 1 and 2a (Birmingham to Crewe), reducing the speed or building only phase 1
This seems to me as though they've decided on the answers to some fairly important questions before the review has even started. How would I structure the review?
I don’t think Boris is gonna cancel. He’s just doing the right thing and putting some critics of high speed rail on the review board, along with lots of enthusiasts. What kind of review would it be if it was only written by HS2 fanboys?
My hunch: they will seek very significant savings. Stop at Old Oak. Stop at Crewe. Etc
A classic bit of British fudge.
London to Brum to provide additional capacity where it is needed. Reduced maximum speed to save some cash. Nothing further north, since that is a vanity project. Divert the money to HS3.
That's what I reckon, anyway.
How do you build H3 without Crewe to Manc part of HS2?
Honeslty interested in how that happens?????
New line Manc to Leeds. Separate from HS2. Serving northerners, not Londoners visiting the north!
If you want the biggest bang for the buck, you make them part of a contiguous network, planned as such.
And heaven forfend any northerners want to visit London or the south!
(Written from a B&B in Wigtown in Dumfries and Galloway, where Mrs J has been very happily buying books. It's a lovely part of the world.)
Hope your weather is better than Ayrshire, tipping it down here.
Here too. I blame @SouthamObserver . I distinctly recall him muttering about a drought in early May and its hardly stopped raining since.
Southam is the Chris Grayling of weather forecasting
Some quick thoughts on the HS2 review. According to the BBC (1), the review will look into:
*) cost estimates so far *) opportunities for efficiency savings *) the environmental impact, focusing specifically on net zero carbon commitment *) whether the economic and business case made for HS2 is accurate *) the added costs of cancelling the project or changing its scope, such as combining phases 1 and 2a (Birmingham to Crewe), reducing the speed or building only phase 1
This seems to me as though they've decided on the answers to some fairly important questions before the review has even started. How would I structure the review?
I don’t think Boris is gonna cancel. He’s just doing the right thing and putting some critics of high speed rail on the review board, along with lots of enthusiasts. What kind of review would it be if it was only written by HS2 fanboys?
My hunch: they will seek very significant savings. Stop at Old Oak. Stop at Crewe. Etc
A classic bit of British fudge.
London to Brum to provide additional capacity where it is needed. Reduced maximum speed to save some cash. Nothing further north, since that is a vanity project. Divert the money to HS3.
That's what I reckon, anyway.
How do you build H3 without Crewe to Manc part of HS2?
Honeslty interested in how that happens?????
New line Manc to Leeds. Separate from HS2. Serving northerners, not Londoners visiting the north!
If you want the biggest bang for the buck, you make them part of a contiguous network, planned as such.
And heaven forfend any northerners want to visit London or the south!
(Written from a B&B in Wigtown in Dumfries and Galloway, where Mrs J has been very happily buying books. It's a lovely part of the world.)
Hope your weather is better than Ayrshire, tipping it down here.
Here too. I blame @SouthamObserver . I distinctly recall him muttering about a drought in early May and its hardly stopped raining since.
Southam is the Chris Grayling of weather forecasting
Ironically, malcolmg is at least half right. The one way to get Scotland to truly address these issues is probably independence. Then Scotland would have no choice but to cut the deficit, promote competition, slash services, get real growth. And no more free university.
The only problem is that before all this, an indy Scotland would go immediately and horrifyingly bankrupt, without a currency or a central bank to cushion the blow.
It would certainly be salutary. A Darien for our times.
Some quick thoughts on the HS2 review. According to the BBC (1), the review will look into:
*) cost estimates so far *) opportunities for efficiency savings *) the environmental impact, focusing specifically on net zero carbon commitment *) whether the economic and business case made for HS2 is accurate *) the added costs of cancelling the project or changing its scope, such as combining phases 1 and 2a (Birmingham to Crewe), reducing the speed or building only phase 1
This seems to me as though they've decided on the answers to some fairly important questions before the review has even started. How would I structure the review?
I don’t think Boris is gonna cancel. He’s just doing the right thing and putting some critics of high speed rail on the review board, along with lots of enthusiasts. What kind of review would it be if it was only written by HS2 fanboys?
My hunch: they will seek very significant savings. Stop at Old Oak. Stop at Crewe. Etc
A classic bit of British fudge.
London to Brum to provide additional capacity where it is needed. Reduced maximum speed to save some cash. Nothing further north, since that is a vanity project. Divert the money to HS3.
That's what I reckon, anyway.
How do you build H3 without Crewe to Manc part of HS2?
Honeslty interested in how that happens?????
New line Manc to Leeds. Separate from HS2. Serving northerners, not Londoners visiting the north!
If you want the biggest bang for the buck, you make them part of a contiguous network, planned as such.
And heaven forfend any northerners want to visit London or the south!
(Written from a B&B in Wigtown in Dumfries and Galloway, where Mrs J has been very happily buying books. It's a lovely part of the world.)
Hope your weather is better than Ayrshire, tipping it down here.
Here too. I blame @SouthamObserver . I distinctly recall him muttering about a drought in early May and its hardly stopped raining since.
Southam is the Chris Grayling of weather forecasting
Unlike Grayling, I do it on purpose ;-)
In fairness there is a reservoir quite near our house that was weirdly empty in April, the lowest I had ever seen it. Its not now.
Some quick thoughts on the HS2 review. According to the BBC (1), the review will look into:
*) cost estimates so far *) opportunities for efficiency savings *) the environmental impact, focusing specifically on net zero carbon commitment *) whether the economic and business case made for HS2 is accurate *) the added costs of cancelling the project or changing its scope, such as combining phases 1 and 2a (Birmingham to Crewe), reducing the speed or building only phase 1
This seems to me as though they've decided on the answers to some fairly important questions before the review has even started. How would I structure the review?
I don’t think Boris is gonna cancel. He’s just doing the right thing and putting some critics of high speed rail on the review board, along with lots of enthusiasts. What kind of review would it be if it was only written by HS2 fanboys?
My hunch: they will seek very significant savings. Stop at Old Oak. Stop at Crewe. Etc
A classic bit of British fudge.
London to Brum to provide additional capacity where it is needed. Reduced maximum speed to save some cash. Nothing further north, since that is a vanity project. Divert the money to HS3.
That's what I reckon, anyway.
How do you build H3 without Crewe to Manc part of HS2?
Honeslty interested in how that happens?????
New line Manc to Leeds. Separate from HS2. Serving northerners, not Londoners visiting the north!
Line between just Manc and Leeds is hardly worthwhile, needs to extend to Hull and Liverpool, the part of Liverpool being over HS2.
People want to go to Liverpool? Why?
I had an amazing weekend in Liverpool, including a tour of Lennon and McCartney’s childhood homes. It is one of the unmissable British cities to visit in my view, up there with Edinburgh as one of the most interesting places outside London.
Ironically, malcolmg is at least half right. The one way to get Scotland to truly address these issues is probably independence. Then Scotland would have no choice but to cut the deficit, promote competition, slash services, get real growth. And no more free university.
The only problem is that before all this, an indy Scotland would go immediately and horrifyingly bankrupt, without a currency or a central bank to cushion the blow.
It would certainly be salutary. A Darien for our times.
There is a lot we could do short of independence. There are some exciting tech companies in Edinburgh and Lothian. We should focus our education resources on what they need from a labour force. Edinburgh has got some serious money from Microsoft. The Scottish government needs to build on this and make sure the graduates have opportunities to go to. We clearly have significant wind resources, albeit the remoteness is an issue. We have fracking opportunities that would help keep Grangemouth going. We can probably do more with tidal and wave power. We need to coax some of our financial services companies back with better tax deals. We need to reverse the disaster that is curriculum for excellence. We need to fight to make sure any new immigration system fits Scotland's needs. We need to see if we can rebuild some of the infrastructure of our fishing industry on the back of Brexit. We need to stop promising free health care and education to EU citizens after Brexit. We need to focus our limited capital spend on infrastructure that generates growth. That means 3 lanes on the M8 and dual-ling the A1 instead of the A9. So much to do but if we sit back and claim we don't have a problem we are deluding ourselves.
David, They have limited pocket money , we are too busy paying for Crossrail , HS2 etc to be able to have any cash to spend in Scotland. We have no say on immigration and are just ignored, same fishing industry that Tories gave away. There are plenty of problems, people understand that but we need our own money to decide which ones we want rather than bombs and missiles, HS2, Crossrail , bribes for DUP. Hard to do much with both hands tied behind your back. No way we could be any worse off on our own.
Look at the bollox from GERS, you would have thought they might have tried to make the numbers look like someone might believe them. As subtle as a brick Scotland deficit 🏴 - £12.6bn Wales deficit - £13.7bn N.I deficit - circa £9bn
Celtic total - £34.8bn UK deficit 🇬🇧 - £23.5bn
So England has a surplus of about £11bn & Scotland is creating 53% of UK deficit from 8-9% of population.
SNIP
David, Scotland may well be in a technical deficit. But in terms of national income per head, labour productivity, employment etc. Scotland is pretty much on a par with Rest of U.K.. And public services are not exactly gold-plated here. GERS is a political exercise and numbers are plucked out of someones erchie. They have no clue how to split some of the numbers,. GERS uses "estimated " 167 times. Those numbers are just fake , otherwise Scotland would be Shangri La.
I think that is a mistake. The first step to addressing a problem is to acknowledge that you have one. Our Parliament should be doing all it can to encourage enterprise north of the border. This does not include creating differential taxes for the mobile higher paid, promising lots of "free" stuff that might be electorally popular in the short term, refusing to get to grips with how our excellent universities are going to compete given the level of funding available to them, claiming our school reforms have worked, etc, etc.
Ironically, malcolmg is at least half right. The one way to get Scotland to truly address these issues is probably independence. Then Scotland would have no choice but to cut the deficit, promote competition, slash services, get real growth. And no more free university.
The only problem is that before all this, an indy Scotland would go immediately and horrifyingly bankrupt, without a currency or a central bank to cushion the blow.
It would certainly be salutary. A Darien for our times.
Yes just like all those othe bank and a currency. What a bellend.
so do I take it Wee Mrs McTurnip is now going out the back door like Boris ?
She has bigger cojones than Boris Alan, front door and looking for trouble. PS: Not so wee, specsavers for you my boy.
Id be worried about that malc.
The last FM started wheeling his cojones all over the place and got in to all sorts of trouble. :-)
Alan, Lies and innuendo at this point! Be a while before we know the reality, will be around time of next referendum for sure.
Some quick thoughts on the HS2 review. According to the BBC (1), the review will look into:
*) cost estimates so far *) opportunities for efficiency savings *) the environmental impact, focusing specifically on net zero carbon commitment *) whether the economic and business case made for HS2 is accurate *) the added costs of cancelling the project or changing its scope, such as combining phases 1 and 2a (Birmingham to Crewe), reducing the speed or building only phase 1
This seems to me as though they've decided on the answers to some fairly important questions before the review has even started. How would I structure the review?
I don’t think Boris is gonna cancel. He’s just doing the right thing and putting some critics of high speed rail on the review board, along with lots of enthusiasts. What kind of review would it be if it was only written by HS2 fanboys?
My hunch: they will seek very significant savings. Stop at Old Oak. Stop at Crewe. Etc
A classic bit of British fudge.
London to Brum to provide additional capacity where it is needed. Reduced maximum speed to save some cash. Nothing further north, since that is a vanity project. Divert the money to HS3.
That's what I reckon, anyway.
How do you build H3 without Crewe to Manc part of HS2?
Honeslty interested in how that happens?????
New line Manc to Leeds. Separate from HS2. Serving northerners, not Londoners visiting the north!
Line between just Manc and Leeds is hardly worthwhile, needs to extend to Hull and Liverpool, the part of Liverpool being over HS2.
People want to go to Liverpool? Why?
I had an amazing weekend in Liverpool, including a tour of Lennon and McCartney’s childhood homes. It is one of the unmissable British cities to visit in my view, up there with Edinburgh as one of the most interesting places outside London.
I was not being entirely serious. I was hoping to get a rise out of TSE.
Given that the Brexit Party is a one policy party, am I the only one baffled by the 2% of Brexit Party supporters who think that it was wrong to leave the EU?
They obviously polled Byronic, one of the few Remainers for Farage.
I know there are a lot of crazy Corbynites on Twitter, but is this screenshot genuine?
I ask because this certainly wasn't 50:50 Parliament's tweet (they tweeted the tribute to Mowlam with no mention of Corbyn), and Keith Kahn-Harris' tweet gives no indication of who originated the words at the top about Corbyn's role.
Some quick thoughts on the HS2 review. According to the BBC (1), the review will look into:
*) cost estimates so far *) opportunities for efficiency savings *) the environmental impact, focusing specifically on net zero carbon commitment *) whether the economic and business case made for HS2 is accurate *) the added costs of cancelling the project or changing its scope, such as combining phases 1 and 2a (Birmingham to Crewe), reducing the speed or building only phase 1
This seems to me as though they've decided on the answers to some fairly important questions before the review has even started. How would I structure the review?
I don’t think Boris is gonna cancel. He’s just doing the right thing and putting some critics of high speed rail on the review board, along with lots of enthusiasts. What kind of review would it be if it was only written by HS2 fanboys?
My hunch: they will seek very significant savings. Stop at Old Oak. Stop at Crewe. Etc
A classic bit of British fudge.
London to Brum to provide additional capacity where it is needed. Reduced maximum speed to save some cash. Nothing further north, since that is a vanity project. Divert the money to HS3.
That's what I reckon, anyway.
How do you build H3 without Crewe to Manc part of HS2?
Honeslty interested in how that happens?????
New line Manc to Leeds. Separate from HS2. Serving northerners, not Londoners visiting the north!
Line between just Manc and Leeds is hardly worthwhile, needs to extend to Hull and Liverpool, the part of Liverpool being over HS2.
People want to go to Liverpool? Why?
I had an amazing weekend in Liverpool, including a tour of Lennon and McCartney’s childhood homes. It is one of the unmissable British cities to visit in my view, up there with Edinburgh as one of the most interesting places outside London.
Some quick thoughts on the HS2 review. According to the BBC (1), the review will look into:
*) cost estimates so far *) opportunities for efficiency savings *) the environmental impact, focusing specifically on net zero carbon commitment *) whether the economic and business case made for HS2 is accurate *) the added costs of cancelling the project or changing its scope, such as combining phases 1 and 2a (Birmingham to Crewe), reducing the speed or building only phase 1
This seems to me as though they've decided on the answers to some fairly important questions before the review has even started. How would I structure the review?
I don’t think Boris is gonna cancel. He’s just doing the right thing and putting some critics of high speed rail on the review board, along with lots of enthusiasts. What kind of review would it be if it was only written by HS2 fanboys?
My hunch: they will seek very significant savings. Stop at Old Oak. Stop at Crewe. Etc
A classic bit of British fudge.
London to Brum to provide additional capacity where it is needed. Reduced maximum speed to save some cash. Nothing further north, since that is a vanity project. Divert the money to HS3.
That's what I reckon, anyway.
How do you build H3 without Crewe to Manc part of HS2?
Honeslty interested in how that happens?????
New line Manc to Leeds. Separate from HS2. Serving northerners, not Londoners visiting the north!
Line between just Manc and Leeds is hardly worthwhile, needs to extend to Hull and Liverpool, the part of Liverpool being over HS2.
People want to go to Liverpool? Why?
I had an amazing weekend in Liverpool, including a tour of Lennon and McCartney’s childhood homes. It is one of the unmissable British cities to visit in my view, up there with Edinburgh as one of the most interesting places outside London.
I was not being entirely serious. I was hoping to get a rise out of TSE.
That's the trouble with PB, you can't be sure who you're going to get a rise out of.
Some quick thoughts on the HS2 review. According to the BBC (1), the review will look into:
*) cost estimates so far *) opportunities for efficiency savings *) the environmental impact, focusing specifically on net zero carbon commitment *) whether the economic and business case made for HS2 is accurate *) the added costs of cancelling the project or changing its scope, such as combining phases 1 and 2a (Birmingham to Crewe), reducing the speed or building only phase 1
This seems to me as though they've decided on the answers to some fairly important questions before the review has even started. How would I structure the review?
I don’t think Boris is gonna cancel. He’s just doing the right thing and putting some critics of high speed rail on the review board, along with lots of enthusiasts. What kind of review would it be if it was only written by HS2 fanboys?
My hunch: they will seek very significant savings. Stop at Old Oak. Stop at Crewe. Etc
A classic bit of British fudge.
London to Brum to provide additional capacity where it is needed. Reduced maximum speed to save some cash. Nothing further north, since that is a vanity project. Divert the money to HS3.
That's what I reckon, anyway.
How do you build H3 without Crewe to Manc part of HS2?
Honeslty interested in how that happens?????
New line Manc to Leeds. Separate from HS2. Serving northerners, not Londoners visiting the north!
Line between just Manc and Leeds is hardly worthwhile, needs to extend to Hull and Liverpool, the part of Liverpool being over HS2.
People want to go to Liverpool? Why?
I had an amazing weekend in Liverpool, including a tour of Lennon and McCartney’s childhood homes. It is one of the unmissable British cities to visit in my view, up there with Edinburgh as one of the most interesting places outside London.
I was not being entirely serious. I was hoping to get a rise out of TSE.
Some quick thoughts on the HS2 review. According to the BBC (1), the review will look into:
*) cost estimates so far *) opportunities for efficiency savings *) the environmental impact, focusing specifically on net zero carbon commitment *) whether the economic and business case made for HS2 is accurate *) the added costs of cancelling the project or changing its scope, such as combining phases 1 and 2a (Birmingham to Crewe), reducing the speed or building only phase 1
This seems to me as though they've decided on the answers to some fairly important questions before the review has even started. How would I structure the review?
I don’t think Boris is gonna cancel. He’s just doing the right thing and putting some critics of high speed rail on the review board, along with lots of enthusiasts. What kind of review would it be if it was only written by HS2 fanboys?
My hunch: they will seek very significant savings. Stop at Old Oak. Stop at Crewe. Etc
A classic bit of British fudge.
London to Brum to provide additional capacity where it is needed. Reduced maximum speed to save some cash. Nothing further north, since that is a vanity project. Divert the money to HS3.
That's what I reckon, anyway.
How do you build H3 without Crewe to Manc part of HS2?
Honeslty interested in how that happens?????
New line Manc to Leeds. Separate from HS2. Serving northerners, not Londoners visiting the north!
Line between just Manc and Leeds is hardly worthwhile, needs to extend to Hull and Liverpool, the part of Liverpool being over HS2.
People want to go to Liverpool? Why?
I had an amazing weekend in Liverpool, including a tour of Lennon and McCartney’s childhood homes. It is one of the unmissable British cities to visit in my view, up there with Edinburgh as one of the most interesting places outside London.
Some quick thoughts on the HS2 review. According to the BBC (1), the review will look into:
*) cost estimates so far *) opportunities for efficiency savings *) the environmental impact, focusing specifically on net zero carbon commitment *) whether the economic and business case made for HS2 is accurate *) the added costs of cancelling the project or changing its scope, such as combining phases 1 and 2a (Birmingham to Crewe), reducing the speed or building only phase 1
This seems to me as though they've decided on the answers to some fairly important questions before the review has even started. How would I structure the review?
I don’t think Boris is gonna cancel. He’s just doing the right thing and putting some critics of high speed rail on the review board, along with lots of enthusiasts. What kind of review would it be if it was only written by HS2 fanboys?
My hunch: they will seek very significant savings. Stop at Old Oak. Stop at Crewe. Etc
A classic bit of British fudge.
London to Brum to provide additional capacity where it is needed. Reduced maximum speed to save some cash. Nothing further north, since that is a vanity project. Divert the money to HS3.
That's what I reckon, anyway.
How do you build H3 without Crewe to Manc part of HS2?
Honeslty interested in how that happens?????
New line Manc to Leeds. Separate from HS2. Serving northerners, not Londoners visiting the north!
Line between just Manc and Leeds is hardly worthwhile, needs to extend to Hull and Liverpool, the part of Liverpool being over HS2.
People want to go to Liverpool? Why?
I had an amazing weekend in Liverpool, including a tour of Lennon and McCartney’s childhood homes. It is one of the unmissable British cities to visit in my view, up there with Edinburgh as one of the most interesting places outside London.
I agree , as I wrote below. It is definitely worth a visit for a couple of days.
That is seriously worrying. We know Trump loves those who flatter him. There is a significant section of the Evangelical base who consider Trump to be the literal fulfilment of prophecy signifying the final battle of the End Times leading to the Second Coming and Judgment Day. He seems to be buying into this. And I am quite serious here.
There is a lot we could do short of independence. There are some exciting tech companies in Edinburgh and Lothian. We should focus our education resources on what they need from a labour force. Edinburgh has got some serious money from Microsoft. The Scottish government needs to build on this and make sure the graduates have opportunities to go to. We clearly have significant wind resources, albeit the remoteness is an issue. We have fracking opportunities that would help keep Grangemouth going. We can probably do more with tidal and wave power. We need to coax some of our financial services companies back with better tax deals. We need to reverse the disaster that is curriculum for excellence. We need to fight to make sure any new immigration system fits Scotland's needs. We need to see if we can rebuild some of the infrastructure of our fishing industry on the back of Brexit. We need to stop promising free health care and education to EU citizens after Brexit. We need to focus our limited capital spend on infrastructure that generates growth. That means 3 lanes on the M8 and dual-ling the A1 instead of the A9. So much to do but if we sit back and claim we don't have a problem we are deluding ourselves.
David, They have limited pocket money , we are too busy paying for Crossrail , HS2 etc to be able to have any cash to spend in Scotland. We have no say on immigration and are just ignored, same fishing industry that Tories gave away. There are plenty of problems, people understand that but we need our own money to decide which ones we want rather than bombs and missiles, HS2, Crossrail , bribes for DUP. Hard to do much with both hands tied behind your back. No way we could be any worse off on our own.
The Scottish government budget is over £42bn. That's a lot of pocket money. And there are opportunities for Scotland (as well as threats) in respect of Brexit, principally in fishing but our government is so opposed to the idea that they think it better to continue to offer free education to EU citizens and free access to our hospitals than work out what can be done. Why are so few of the fish from Scottish waters landed and processed at Scottish ports? Outside the CFP we can do something about that.
ON topic, I had breakfast next to comedian Paul Whitehouse this morning (in a Thessaloniki hotel). He was telling his little daughter the history of Turkey under Kemal Ataturk (a son of the town). His daughter must be about seven years old so she just stared at him in total bewilderment.
It was like a comic sketch from The Fast Show, in which he starred, “Over-informative dad”. I couldn’t work out if he was doing it to amuse himself or this is just how he interacts with his kids. Fascinating to watch.
Kids vary. I was discussing politics in detail with my (Tory) dad at age six, and it gave me a lifelong interest. Why not? (Opening door for joke about not changing my views since then.) We do kids a disservice if we assume they only want to talk about Santa Claus.
There is a lot we could do short of independence. There are some exciting tech companies in Edinburgh and Lothian. We should focus our education resources on what they need from a labour force. Edinburgh has got some serious money from Microsoft. The Scottish government needs to build on this and make sure the graduates have opportunities to go to. We clearly have significant wind resources, albeit the remoteness is an issue. We have fracking opportunities that would help keep Grangemouth going. We can probably do more with tidal and wave power. We need to coax some of our financial services companies back with better tax deals. We need to reverse the disaster that is curriculum for excellence. We need to fight to make sure any new immigration system fits Scotland's needs. We need to see if we can rebuild some of the infrastructure of our fishing industry on the back of Brexit. We need to stop promising free health care and education to EU citizens after Brexit. We need to focus our limited capital spend on infrastructure that generates growth. That means 3 lanes on the M8 and dual-ling the A1 instead of the A9. So much to do but if we sit back and claim we don't have a problem we are deluding ourselves.
David, They have limited pocket money , we are too busy paying for Crossrail , HS2 etc to be able to have any cash to spend in Scotland. We have no say on immigration and are just ignored, same fishing industry that Tories gave away. There are plenty of problems, people understand that but we need our own money to decide which ones we want rather than bombs and missiles, HS2, Crossrail , bribes for DUP. Hard to do much with both hands tied behind your back. No way we could be any worse off on our own.
The Scottish government budget is over £42bn. That's a lot of pocket money. And there are opportunities for Scotland (as well as threats) in respect of Brexit, principally in fishing but our government is so opposed to the idea that they think it better to continue to offer free education to EU citizens and free access to our hospitals than work out what can be done. Why are so few of the fish from Scottish waters landed and processed at Scottish ports? Outside the CFP we can do something about that.
young Brooke lives in Edinburgh with his girlfriend who is French. She's doing a masters. Iwas amazed at how little the tuition cost because she's a European anyone from E\W\NI would be paying 5 times more
Some quick thoughts on the HS2 review. According to the BBC (1), the review will look into:
*) cost estimates so far *) opportunities for efficiency savings *) the environmental impact, focusing specifically on net zero carbon commitment *) whether the economic and business case made for HS2 is accurate *) the added costs of cancelling the project or changing its scope, such as combining phases 1 and 2a (Birmingham to Crewe), reducing the speed or building only phase 1
This seems to me as though they've decided on the answers to some fairly important questions before the review has even started. How would I structure the review?
I don’t think Boris is gonna cancel. He’s just doing the right thing and putting some critics of high speed rail on the review board, along with lots of enthusiasts. What kind of review would it be if it was only written by HS2 fanboys?
My hunch: they will seek very significant savings. Stop at Old Oak. Stop at Crewe. Etc
A classic bit of British fudge.
London to Brum to provide additional capacity where it is needed. Reduced maximum speed to save some cash. Nothing further north, since that is a vanity project. Divert the money to HS3.
That's what I reckon, anyway.
How do you build H3 without Crewe to Manc part of HS2?
Honeslty interested in how that happens?????
New line Manc to Leeds. Separate from HS2. Serving northerners, not Londoners visiting the north!
Line between just Manc and Leeds is hardly worthwhile, needs to extend to Hull and Liverpool, the part of Liverpool being over HS2.
People want to go to Liverpool? Why?
I had an amazing weekend in Liverpool, including a tour of Lennon and McCartney’s childhood homes. It is one of the unmissable British cities to visit in my view, up there with Edinburgh as one of the most interesting places outside London.
Some quick thoughts on the HS2 review. According to the BBC (1), the review will look into:
*) cost estimates so far *) opportunities for efficiency savings *) the environmental impact, focusing specifically on net zero carbon commitment *) whether the economic and business case made for HS2 is accurate *) the added costs of cancelling the project or changing its scope, such as combining phases 1 and 2a (Birmingham to Crewe), reducing the speed or building only phase 1
This seems to me as though they've decided on the answers to some fairly important questions before the review has even started. How would I structure the review?
I don’t think Boris is gonna cancel. He’s just doing the right thing and putting some critics of high speed rail on the review board, along with lots of enthusiasts. What kind of review would it be if it was only written by HS2 fanboys?
My hunch: they will seek very significant savings. Stop at Old Oak. Stop at Crewe. Etc
A classic bit of British fudge.
London to Brum to provide additional capacity where it is needed. Reduced maximum speed to save some cash. Nothing further north, since that is a vanity project. Divert the money to HS3.
That's what I reckon, anyway.
How do you build H3 without Crewe to Manc part of HS2?
Honeslty interested in how that happens?????
New line Manc to Leeds. Separate from HS2. Serving northerners, not Londoners visiting the north!
Line between just Manc and Leeds is hardly worthwhile, needs to extend to Hull and Liverpool, the part of Liverpool being over HS2.
People want to go to Liverpool? Why?
I had an amazing weekend in Liverpool, including a tour of Lennon and McCartney’s childhood homes. It is one of the unmissable British cities to visit in my view, up there with Edinburgh as one of the most interesting places outside London.
I was not being entirely serious. I was hoping to get a rise out of TSE.
That's the trouble with PB, you can't be sure who you're going to get a rise out of.
True and there are usually people who know a hell of a lot more about pretty much anything than I do!
David, They have limited pocket money , we are too busy paying for Crossrail , HS2 etc to be able to have any cash to spend in Scotland. We have no say on immigration and are just ignored, same fishing industry that Tories gave away. There are plenty of problems, people understand that but we need our own money to decide which ones we want rather than bombs and missiles, HS2, Crossrail , bribes for DUP. Hard to do much with both hands tied behind your back. No way we could be any worse off on our own.
The Scottish government budget is over £42bn. That's a lot of pocket money. And there are opportunities for Scotland (as well as threats) in respect of Brexit, principally in fishing but our government is so opposed to the idea that they think it better to continue to offer free education to EU citizens and free access to our hospitals than work out what can be done. Why are so few of the fish from Scottish waters landed and processed at Scottish ports? Outside the CFP we can do something about that.
They are almost all foreign owned now David, apart from a few greedy gits. Brexit will not help fishing industry. We need control of the levers of power to make changes that can change things rather than having most of our budget dictated, the huge lump stolen supposedly to fund UK and the ring fenced huge amounts in the pocket money, leaves little to make major differences with. WE will never get a deal where the major party is more than 10 times the size of the small party, they will always favour themselves to our detriment as you would expect. Far better we take what we have and make our own decisions based on our needs , not the needs of the 80%+
On the Kantar poll it does seem an outlier but since Boris was elected there has only been 1 poll with a labour lead and that at only 1%
Furthermore from media interviews with the public there does seem to be a view to get it finished and Boris optimism contrasts sharply with labour's misery and all doom and gloom
As I have commented a couple of times recently this forum is at times aggressive, intolerant, and nasty coming from both sides and for those of us who voted remain but want to leave because of democracy we despair.
I think Boris is following a strategy of being reasonable with the EU, publishing his correspondence, and generally his expectations of a deal are very much a part of showing the EU as the bad guys and it may just be working.
However, it is clear that he either hopes the HOC prevents a no deal or he is gambling on a last minute deal when the clock ticks towards 11.00pm on the 31st October.
If we arrive a day or two before deadlocked, I expect him to seek an extension and that will be the biggest danger to his poll ratings and premiership
I agree. I have contacts in the EU Commission and they are definitely assuming and planning for No Deal (as is France apparently). I suspect that Johnson will get the same message from Merkel. They are not going to blink. The EU27 are much better prepared than the UK for No Deal and less at risk anyway. Why on earth would they blink?
I suspect that Johnson will come back from his trip thinking "Crikey. My big bluff is not going to work." He'll try to blame Hammond et al for undermining the UK position and reluctantly extend to allow time for a GE.
That is seriously worrying. We know Trump loves those who flatter him. There is a significant section of the Evangelical base who consider Trump to be the literal fulfilment of prophecy signifying the final battle of the End Times leading to the Second Coming and Judgment Day. He seems to be buying into this. And I am quite serious here.
In the past few days, he has tried to buy Greenland, and declared himself the King of Israel and now the Chosen One. Anybody else and there would be a psychiatric intervention. I do not agree with diagnosing others with deteriorating mental health. But there are surely red flags for those who are qualified to do so.
She's changed her position. She's said she's willing to discuss alternatives to the backstop. What more do you think Johnson wants at this point?
Edit: trade deal signed in principle inside 30 days sounds impossible but would be an unbelievable result for everyone involved if it happens. Liam Fox may turn out to be right about the "easiest deal in history" after all.
Wish Rod was still about to hear you guys drone on about bloody Liverpool.
All we need now is Antifrank boring us to death about flippin Norwich.
Antifrank is still amongst us.
Oh, I know. He’s one of the few reasons this blog is still worth reading. I miss the good old days. Like when Yellow Submarine was voted Poster of the Year, then... er... wasn’t.
That is seriously worrying. We know Trump loves those who flatter him. There is a significant section of the Evangelical base who consider Trump to be the literal fulfilment of prophecy signifying the final battle of the End Times leading to the Second Coming and Judgment Day. He seems to be buying into this. And I am quite serious here.
In the past few days, he has tried to buy Greenland, and declared himself the King of Israel and now the Chosen One. Anybody else and there would be a psychiatric intervention. I do not agree with diagnosing others with deteriorating mental health. But there are surely red flags for those who are qualified to do so.
once again the narcissist has you all talking about him and not his policies.
David, They have limited pocket money , we are too busy paying for Crossrail , HS2 etc to be able to have any cash to spend in Scotland. We have no say on immigration and are just ignored, same fishing industry that Tories gave away. There are plenty of problems, people understand that but we need our own money to decide which ones we want rather than bombs and missiles, HS2, Crossrail , bribes for DUP. Hard to do much with both hands tied behind your back. No way we could be any worse off on our own.
The Scottish government budget is over £42bn. That's a lot of pocket money. And there are opportunities for Scotland (as well as threats) in respect of Brexit, principally in fishing but our government is so opposed to the idea that they think it better to continue to offer free education to EU citizens and free access to our hospitals than work out what can be done. Why are so few of the fish from Scottish waters landed and processed at Scottish ports? Outside the CFP we can do something about that.
young Brooke lives in Edinburgh with his girlfriend who is French. She's doing a masters. Iwas amazed at how little the tuition cost because she's a European anyone from E\W\NI would be paying 5 times more
Its bizarre and even more bizarre is Nicola's determination to continue it after Brexit to make some political point. At Edinburgh, in round terms there are 10k Scots, 10k rUK, 5K non Europeans (mainly Chinese) and 5K EU citizens. That means nearly half as much as is spent on funding Scots is being spent on EU citizens. I accept that Edinburgh is probably the extreme of that but if we are to have skilled Scottish workers in the future those 5k places have a better home.
Of course at the moment the 5K non Europeans and the 10k English are keeping the whole funding model going.
On the Kantar poll it does seem an outlier but since Boris was elected there has only been 1 poll with a labour lead and that at only 1%
Furthermore from media interviews with the public there does seem to be a view to get it finished and Boris optimism contrasts sharply with labour's misery and all doom and gloom
As I have commented a couple of times recently this forum is at times aggressive, intolerant, and nasty coming from both sides and for those of us who voted remain but want to leave because of democracy we despair.
I think Boris is following a strategy of being reasonable with the EU, publishing his correspondence, and generally his expectations of a deal are very much a part of showing the EU as the bad guys and it may just be working.
However, it is clear that he either hopes the HOC prevents a no deal or he is gambling on a last minute deal when the clock ticks towards 11.00pm on the 31st October.
If we arrive a day or two before deadlocked, I expect him to seek an extension and that will be the biggest danger to his poll ratings and premiership
I agree. I have contacts in the EU Commission and they are definitely assuming and planning for No Deal (as is France apparently). I suspect that Johnson will get the same message from Merkel. They are not going to blink. The EU27 are much better prepared than the UK for No Deal and less at risk anyway. Why on earth would they blink?
I suspect that Johnson will come back from his trip thinking "Crikey. My big bluff is not going to work." He'll try to blame Hammond et al for undermining the UK position and reluctantly extend to allow time for a GE.
If you were to write an instruction manual for Johnson on how to destroy his Premiership from this position it would consist of these two steps.
1. Request an Article 50 extension. 2. Then hold a general election.
Sometimes people do end up acting contrary to their best personal interests, but my guess is that this will not be an example.
Johnson will either lead us into no deal, or fight an election after a caretaker government has prevented him from doing so.
That is seriously worrying. We know Trump loves those who flatter him. There is a significant section of the Evangelical base who consider Trump to be the literal fulfilment of prophecy signifying the final battle of the End Times leading to the Second Coming and Judgment Day. He seems to be buying into this. And I am quite serious here.
In the past few days, he has tried to buy Greenland, and declared himself the King of Israel and now the Chosen One. Anybody else and there would be a psychiatric intervention. I do not agree with diagnosing others with deteriorating mental health. But there are surely red flags for those who are qualified to do so.
once again the narcissist has you all talking about him and not his policies.
at this rate hes a cert for Prez in 2020
Nah. It's far more serious and worrying than that.
On the Kantar poll it does seem an outlier but since Boris was elected there has only been 1 poll with a labour lead and that at only 1%
Furthermore from media interviews with the public there does seem to be a view to get it finished and Boris optimism contrasts sharply with labour's misery and all doom and gloom
As I have commented a couple of times recently this forum is at times aggressive, intolerant, and nasty coming from both sides and for those of us who voted remain but want to leave because of democracy we despair.
I think Boris is following a strategy of being reasonable with the EU, publishing his correspondence, and generally his expectations of a deal are very much a part of showing the EU as the bad guys and it may just be working.
However, it is clear that he either hopes the HOC prevents a no deal or he is gambling on a last minute deal when the clock ticks towards 11.00pm on the 31st October.
If we arrive a day or two before deadlocked, I expect him to seek an extension and that will be the biggest danger to his poll ratings and premiership
I agree. I have contacts in the EU Commission and they are definitely assuming and planning for No Deal (as is France apparently). I suspect that Johnson will get the same message from Merkel. They are not going to blink. The EU27 are much better prepared than the UK for No Deal and less at risk anyway. Why on earth would they blink?
I suspect that Johnson will come back from his trip thinking "Crikey. My big bluff is not going to work." He'll try to blame Hammond et al for undermining the UK position and reluctantly extend to allow time for a GE.
What makes you think the ROEU is better prepared than we are? Lazy assumption it seems to me.
On HS2: it was pointed out on here the other day that for obscure reasons, opposition to HS2 is a core belief for the Ukip/Guido fraternity; it's like freemasons and handshakes. So it doesn't take Bismarckian genius to see that a good plan is to brandish your HS2scepticism by setting up an inquiry, if you expect shortly to be bidding for Ukip votes in a GE. You can always throttle the inquiry immediately afterwards.
When you declare at 481-6, setting the other side 263 to win off 49 overs, you probably don't expect to see them waltz home by eight wickets with time to spare.
Billy Godleman is probably most displeased at the moment, but every Gloucestershire fan is laughing all the way back to the First Division.
On the Kantar poll it does seem an outlier but since Boris was elected there has only been 1 poll with a labour lead and that at only 1%
Furthermore from media interviews with the public there does seem to be a view to get it finished and Boris optimism contrasts sharply with labour's misery and all doom and gloom
As I have commented a couple of times recently this forum is at times aggressive, intolerant, and nasty coming from both sides and for those of us who voted remain but want to leave because of democracy we despair.
I think Boris is following a strategy of being reasonable with the EU, publishing his correspondence, and generally his expectations of a deal are very much a part of showing the EU as the bad guys and it may just be working.
However, it is clear that he either hopes the HOC prevents a no deal or he is gambling on a last minute deal when the clock ticks towards 11.00pm on the 31st October.
If we arrive a day or two before deadlocked, I expect him to seek an extension and that will be the biggest danger to his poll ratings and premiership
I agree. I have contacts in the EU Commission and they are definitely assuming and planning for No Deal (as is France apparently). I suspect that Johnson will get the same message from Merkel. They are not going to blink. The EU27 are much better prepared than the UK for No Deal and less at risk anyway. Why on earth would they blink?
I suspect that Johnson will come back from his trip thinking "Crikey. My big bluff is not going to work." He'll try to blame Hammond et al for undermining the UK position and reluctantly extend to allow time for a GE.
If you were to write an instruction manual for Johnson on how to destroy his Premiership from this position it would consist of these two steps.
1. Request an Article 50 extension. 2. Then hold a general election.
Sometimes people do end up acting contrary to their best personal interests, but my guess is that this will not be an example.
Johnson will either lead us into no deal, or fight an election after a caretaker government has prevented him from doing so.
Totally agree. There is no way on earth that Johnson will volunteer to ask for an extension to Article 50. It would be the end of him. There is also now no conceivable deal that can be agreed between the EU and the UK. There will be a No Deal Brexit unless MPs find a way to prevent one, which is extremely unlikely.
That is seriously worrying. We know Trump loves those who flatter him. There is a significant section of the Evangelical base who consider Trump to be the literal fulfilment of prophecy signifying the final battle of the End Times leading to the Second Coming and Judgment Day. He seems to be buying into this. And I am quite serious here.
In the past few days, he has tried to buy Greenland, and declared himself the King of Israel and now the Chosen One. Anybody else and there would be a psychiatric intervention. I do not agree with diagnosing others with deteriorating mental health. But there are surely red flags for those who are qualified to do so.
once again the narcissist has you all talking about him and not his policies.
at this rate hes a cert for Prez in 2020
Nah. It's far more serious and worrying than that.
people have been making wild accusations against Trump for years, he hasnt started world war three, or sold his soul to Putin or started mass ethnic cleansing despite all the shouting.
He plays the opposition by letting fly at their sacred cows and they drool like Pavlovian dogs every time he does.
If the same calculation was done for the regions of England I would not be surprised if London and the South East were the only regions in surplus with deficits in all other regions.
It is not Scotland which is the odd one out, it is London and the tax receipts generated from high earners.
David, They have limited pocket money , we are too busy paying for Crossrail , HS2 etc to be able to have any cash to spend in Scotland. We have no say on immigration and are just ignored, same fishing industry that Tories gave away. There are plenty of problems, people understand that but we need our own money to decide which ones we want rather than bombs and missiles, HS2, Crossrail , bribes for DUP. Hard to do much with both hands tied behind your back. No way we could be any worse off on our own.
The Scottish government budget is over £42bn. That's a lot of pocket money. And there are opportunities for Scotland (as well as threats) in respect of Brexit, principally in fishing but our government is so opposed to the idea that they think it better to continue to offer free education to EU citizens and free access to our hospitals than work out what can be done. Why are so few of the fish from Scottish waters landed and processed at Scottish ports? Outside the CFP we can do something about that.
young Brooke lives in Edinburgh with his girlfriend who is French. She's doing a masters. Iwas amazed at how little the tuition cost because she's a European anyone from E\W\NI would be paying 5 times more
Its bizarre and even more bizarre is Nicola's determination to continue it after Brexit to make some political point. At Edinburgh, in round terms there are 10k Scots, 10k rUK, 5K non Europeans (mainly Chinese) and 5K EU citizens. That means nearly half as much as is spent on funding Scots is being spent on EU citizens. I accept that Edinburgh is probably the extreme of that but if we are to have skilled Scottish workers in the future those 5k places have a better home.
Of course at the moment the 5K non Europeans and the 10k English are keeping the whole funding model going.
You could hardly have chosen more extreme right enough David , and think of all the money those students are bringing to the economy and how many will stay behind and get jobs and improve our economy. Scotland is outward looking , trying to be progressive despite the chains of the UK and their xenophobic isolationist mantras. Mixing with these non Scottish people is also great for the Scottish students and the dating scene as well, stop being an old curmudgeon.
If the same calculation was done for the regions of England I would not be surprised if London and the South East were the only regions in surplus with deficits in all other regions.
It is not Scotland which is the odd one out, it is London and the tax receipts generated from high earners.
Also the HQ plates where they register all the taxes earned in the regions
As I always say when HS2 comes up, I want two storey trains instead. I am always told we don't have the right gage, but there's plenty of room if we use the space below the platform as with this Australian beauty:
They could come in red like London buses. It could be something you do when you come to the UK. Get on the red train and go somewhere exciting. Imagine the sleeper cars you could do.
If the same calculation was done for the regions of England I would not be surprised if London and the South East were the only regions in surplus with deficits in all other regions.
It is not Scotland which is the odd one out, it is London and the tax receipts generated from high earners.
Well, possibly. But if you calculated only London (population 7,000) or all of Greater London except the Square Mile...would you get a different result?
Similarly, in some of the other regions - the South West probably breaks about even, but if you just calculated for Bristol and Bath it would be a surplus.
Or perhaps, in the case of Scotland, the deficit would be less if you got rid of Ayrshire (sorry Malcolm!) and the Western Isles, while it would surely be a surplus for Fife and Aberdeen.
The point I am making here is that at some level, all regions are artificial constructs. There will be places in deficit and in surplus within all of them. The reason why Scotland and Northern Ireland are important at this moment is because of the independence/separation movements within them for those tax gathering areas which have to address issues around funding if they are to advance their agenda.
That's not to say they couldn't address those problems, just that they pose questions that need answering.
On the Kantar poll it does seem an outlier but since Boris was elected there has only been 1 poll with a labour lead and that at only 1%
Furthermore from media interviews with the public there does seem to be a view to get it finished and Boris optimism contrasts sharply with labour's misery and all doom and gloom
As I have commented a couple of times recently this forum is at times aggressive, intolerant, and nasty coming from both sides and for those of us who voted remain but want to leave because of democracy we despair.
I think Boris is following a strategy of being reasonable with the EU, publishing his correspondence, and generally his expectations of a deal are very much a part of showing the EU as the bad guys and it may just be working.
However, it is clear that he either hopes the HOC prevents a no deal or he is gambling on a last minute deal when the clock ticks towards 11.00pm on the 31st October.
If we arrive a day or two before deadlocked, I expect him to seek an extension and that will be the biggest danger to his poll ratings and premiership
I agree. I have contacts in the EU Commission and they are definitely assuming and planning for No Deal (as is France apparently). I suspect that Johnson will get the same message from Merkel. They are not going to blink. The EU27 are much better prepared than the UK for No Deal and less at risk anyway. Why on earth would they blink?
I suspect that Johnson will come back from his trip thinking "Crikey. My big bluff is not going to work." He'll try to blame Hammond et al for undermining the UK position and reluctantly extend to allow time for a GE.
What makes you think the ROEU is better prepared than we are? Lazy assumption it seems to me.
The nature of what they're preparing for is several orders of magnitude more straightforward, so even if neither side had done any preparation, the EU27 would still be better prepared.
As I always say when HS2 comes up, I want two storey trains instead. I am always told we don't have the right gage, but there's plenty of room if we use the space below the platform as with this Australian beauty:
They could come in red like London buses. It could be something you do when you come to the UK. Get on the red train and go somewhere exciting. Imagine the sleeper cars you could do.
Isn't there a problem with low bridges, even for trains like this?
Comments
that just cost you another £1bn
Personally, like you I'd like to see it going from Liverpool to Hull as a truly cross-country link, albeit with most of the extra capacity being on the core Leeds to Manchester part. Linking it and its stations with HS2 would be vital, and would create some interesting potential traffic flows.
Incidentally, I was going along a quiet country lane when I saw a large religious statue of a woman amidst the ferns and trees just off the road, gleaming white. It was rather disconcerting!
Ironically, malcolmg is at least half right. The one way to get Scotland to truly address these issues is probably independence. Then Scotland would have no choice but to cut the deficit, promote competition, slash services, get real growth. And no more free university.
The only problem is that before all this, an indy Scotland would go immediately and horrifyingly bankrupt, without a currency or a central bank to cushion the blow.
It would certainly be salutary. A Darien for our times.
https://twitter.com/paul__johnson/status/1164208269285625857
Imagine the only country in the world that cannot have a central bank and a currency.
What a bellend.
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/britain-brexit-failed-state-by-chris-patten-2019-08
Westminster control the majority of Scotland's money and are making a right hash of it, deliberately.
PS: Not so wee, specsavers for you my boy.
+++
Yes just like all those other poor similar sized countries that are much better off and have higher living standards than the much vaunted UK basket case. How would we manage with all that growth and income, would be terrible.
Imagine the only country in the world that cannot have a central bank and a currency.
What a bellend.
+++
Ah, dear malc. You do know I was kind of agreeing with you? Of course Scotland would be fine, in the long term, as an independent country. Scotland is a resource rich nation with lots of smart people. It is also arguable (tho I disagree) that independence would - eventually - make you considerably richer than staying in the Union. That was my point.
However it is inarguable that indy right now would be horrifically painful and probably tip Scotland into a Greek style depression for a decade. You can’t just wish these deficit figures away.
Ok I’m gonna buy my razor. Epharisto.
The last FM started wheeling his cojones all over the place and got in to all sorts of trouble. :-)
It is smart around the Albert Dock.
The slavery museum and other museums are worth a visit.
Also the Beatles tour was good.
I was surprised by the amount of foreign tourists there.
There are plenty of problems, people understand that but we need our own money to decide which ones we want rather than bombs and missiles, HS2, Crossrail , bribes for DUP. Hard to do much with both hands tied behind your back. No way we could be any worse off on our own.
I ask because this certainly wasn't 50:50 Parliament's tweet (they tweeted the tribute to Mowlam with no mention of Corbyn), and Keith Kahn-Harris' tweet gives no indication of who originated the words at the top about Corbyn's role.
SNP 47%
SCon 20%
SLD 13%
SLab 11%
Bxp 8%
Grn 2%
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/g82fatejnj/TheTimes_190814_VI_Trackers_w.pdf
BoZo the Clown is a genius.
It is definitely worth a visit for a couple of days.
Polls normally underestimate Scottish Tories.
All we need now is Antifrank boring us to death about flippin Norwich.
That little adjustment would still result in:
SNP 51 seats (+16)
SLD 4 seats (no change)
SCon 3 seats (-10)
SLab 1 seat (-6)
WE will never get a deal where the major party is more than 10 times the size of the small party, they will always favour themselves to our detriment as you would expect. Far better we take what we have and make our own decisions based on our needs , not the needs of the 80%+
http://www.lefigaro.fr/international/la-russie-prete-a-examiner-un-eventuel-retour-au-g8-20190821
I suspect that Johnson will come back from his trip thinking "Crikey. My big bluff is not going to work." He'll try to blame Hammond et al for undermining the UK position and reluctantly extend to allow time for a GE.
(Actually, Norwich is on my To Do list
Anybody else and there would be a psychiatric intervention. I do not agree with diagnosing others with deteriorating mental health. But there are surely red flags for those who are qualified to do so.
at this rate hes a cert for Prez in 2020
Of course at the moment the 5K non Europeans and the 10k English are keeping the whole funding model going.
1. Request an Article 50 extension.
2. Then hold a general election.
Sometimes people do end up acting contrary to their best personal interests, but my guess is that this will not be an example.
Johnson will either lead us into no deal, or fight an election after a caretaker government has prevented him from doing so.
Billy Godleman is probably most displeased at the moment, but every Gloucestershire fan is laughing all the way back to the First Division.
He plays the opposition by letting fly at their sacred cows and they drool like Pavlovian dogs every time he does.
If the same calculation was done for the regions of England I would not be surprised if London and the South East were the only regions in surplus with deficits in all other regions.
It is not Scotland which is the odd one out, it is London and the tax receipts generated from high earners.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HgQM_v3mln0
They could come in red like London buses. It could be something you do when you come to the UK. Get on the red train and go somewhere exciting. Imagine the sleeper cars you could do.
Imagine Twitter that evening.
Similarly, in some of the other regions - the South West probably breaks about even, but if you just calculated for Bristol and Bath it would be a surplus.
Or perhaps, in the case of Scotland, the deficit would be less if you got rid of Ayrshire (sorry Malcolm!) and the Western Isles, while it would surely be a surplus for Fife and Aberdeen.
The point I am making here is that at some level, all regions are artificial constructs. There will be places in deficit and in surplus within all of them. The reason why Scotland and Northern Ireland are important at this moment is because of the independence/separation movements within them for those tax gathering areas which have to address issues around funding if they are to advance their agenda.
That's not to say they couldn't address those problems, just that they pose questions that need answering.