While we wait for the OBR, here is some interim good news from the retail sector where news has been mixed in the last couple of weeks (Tesco & M&S disappointing, the former on international operations, the latter on clothing).
Asda is investing 700m pounds in in its online operations, new and existing stores and its supply chain after posting an increase in 2012 sales.
The company will create 2,500 jobs though the investment in its growing multichannel business, with stores supporting its internet and smartphone channels.
The British arm of US retailer Wal-Mart will open 10 new stores this year including five superstores, four new small format supermarkets and one non-food outlet.
Asda currently has 568 UK stores after opening two new stores this year.
The announcement came as the retailer posted a 4.5% rise in total sales, including petrol, to £22.8bn in 2012.
The first one, obviously. But the Tory line will have to be that it's the second one so they can blame them for whatever goes wrong.
In practice it would be a mixture of the two, but of course at this stage we have not the slightest clue about how much reality would get mixed into the fantasy. I have a horrible feeling that the excellent assessment by Janan Ganesh in the FT (which Carlotta linked to upthread) could be spot-on.
Indeed, Mr. Eagles. One of the unsung successes of British politics, along with the absolutely non-partisan approach to the abortion topic, is the way that money is a relatively minor factor. There isn't massive, ridiculous spending akin to what happens in the US.
Indeed, Mr. Eagles. One of the unsung successes of British politics, along with the absolutely non-partisan approach to the abortion topic, is the way that money is a relatively minor factor. There isn't massive, ridiculous spending akin to what happens in the US.
I was in America last September and October, and the plethora of ads for politicians on the TV, even down to congressional races wasn't appealing, plus it was all so negative
Political rivals put family albums in frame VIDEO: Miliband visits South Shields to give support to Labour candidate Labour chief’s nuke-test vets vow By-election battle lines drawn TV comic Lee Nelson joins then quits South Shields election battle Nine in fight for David Miliband’s South Shields seat South Shields ‘MP candidate’ Lee Nelson starts campaigning TV comic Lee Nelson ‘to stand for election in South Shields’ Special school set for academy status ‘Who better than party leader to endorse you?’ VIDEO: Ed backs Emma to replace departing David Lull in canvassing for ‘divisive’ Thatcher’s funeral VIDEO: ‘Labour should do more for disabled’ Miliband told VIDEO: Leader’s tribute to candidate and council chief SLIDESHOW: Labour’s ‘Ed boy’ visits South Shields VIDEO: Miliband told of concern over jobs and shops Hundreds turn out to greet Ed Miliband VIDEO: Labour leader Ed Miliband in South Shields Follow Ed Miliband’s visit to South Shields Labour leader Ed heads for his brother’s old patch UKIP man wants to beat coalition Ousted councillor Khan seeks comeback - as MP Commons writ formally sets by-election date
The vilest American campaign I saw was the 2002 Georgia senate race.
The incumbent, Max Clelland voted against one of the Homeland Security acts proposed by George W Bush.
He had ads run against him implying he was soft on terrorist/not a patriot/a coward.
Now you might think, all's fair in politics, except, Senator Clelland is a triple amputee Vietnam veteran, whilst George W Bush avoided Vietnam by getting a position with the Texas National Air Guard and Dick Cheney, used so many deferments, he missed the Vietnam war.
UKIP really are charlatans. UKIP used to be in favour of HS2 as recently as 2010.
I'd be inclined to give them a break on this one. I think it's fair enough for opposition parties to change their minds on things in between elections.
UKIP really are charlatans. UKIP used to be in favour of HS2 as recently as 2010.
I'd be inclined to give them a break on this one. I think it's fair enough for opposition parties to change their minds on things in between elections.
But the holier than thou comments of their supporters really does grate.
You should licence SeanT to use the graph in his next Telegraph blog. The implications are sufficiently explosive to justify the kind of cautious wording for which Sean is so renowned.
"One of the UK's top union leaders has voiced doubts about whether Labour can win the next general election.
Unite boss Len McCluskey told BBC Radio 5Live that if Labour say they "believe in an austerity programme but won't cut as deep or as fast, it is my view they will lose".
Unite, which has 1.5 million members, is Labour's largest financial backer.
Mr McCluskey's comments come as there is increasing pressure on Labour to give specific details of future policies and set out how its spending plans at the next election, scheduled for 2015, would differ from the Conservatives' and Lib Dems'."
Includes a wish list of things Scotland would like :
* Formal monetary union with UK, with Bank of England (BofE) as central bank.
* Ownership and governance of BofE undertaken on an explicit shared basis, reflecting Scotland’s current implicit share of existing assets.
* Monetary policy set according to economic conditions across Sterling Zone.
* The Scottish Government to input into appointment process to key positions within Bank of England (for example, Monetary Policy Committee and Financial Policy Committee), its remit and objectives.
* Representative from Scottish Treasury attends MPC meetings in similar capacity to existing HM Treasury representative (i.e. in a non-voting capacity).
* Matters of collective decision making on governance addressed within an overarching agreement between both governments. An institutional arrangement, a ‘Macroeconomic Governance Committee’, to be established.
* Scottish Government to establish an independent Scottish Monetary Institute
Well Robert Chote has finally published his commentary on the ONS Public Finance Figures. It appears Roger has been spilling the beans and not observing PB Carlton House Rules:
some cash receipts received in the early part of 2013-14 relate to economic activity in 2012-13 and will be accrued back to that year. April PAYE and NICs cash receipts largely relate to March salaries and will be accrued back to 2012-13. Likewise, some of the cash VAT receipts received between April and June relate to consumer spending in the first quarter of 2013 and will thus be accrued back to 2012-13. The income tax , NICs and VAT estimates included in today’s release depend to a large extent on forecasts of cash receipts in early 2013-14;
and more
As anticipated in our EFO forecast, central government current spending was much lower than in March 2012. Overall, this reflects the large reductions in spending that departments had agreed with the Treasury. But it also reflects differences in the timing of spending, where payments of grants to local authorities and transfers to the EU had been made earlier this year, compared to last year.
It is quite clear that the government finances are in much better condition than the headline figures are reporting. That said, Chote is reporting lower than expected income tax and NI receipts either suggesting a softening of employment growth or more likely known lower growth in average earnings.
If Al-Beeb's £120.6 billion guestimate holds true until June then I will pay the princely sum of £50 to Junior's paternal's site-costs. If not can Wee-Timmy ensure that the same happens (and not w3ltch)...?
[NOTE: Our Gay-Oirish eejit should pay double the antee for feckin' interference! Bermondsey should STFU, ennit!]
Arguing that the conditions exist for an optimal currency area (which is what the lines you quoted are doing) is not the same as arguing that all parts of the optimal currency area should pool sovereignty. I dont a contradiction.
Arguing that the conditions exist for an optimal currency area (which is what the lines you quoted are doing) is not the same as arguing that all parts of the optimal currency area should pool sovereignty. I dont a contradiction.
What is the evidence that the monetary union has achieved successful results that don't apply to the political union achieving successful results?
It's beginning increasingly clear that the SNP don't understand that the word 'independence' means you become a separate country.
As the Quebecois-kid said: They wanted to claim their independence without any fiscal or monetary responsibility. Egged-on by Wigan-boy they spout exchange-rate stability (via a Tweed-level line) built upon oil (outwith gas) but withoout an understand how 'moeny' works.
Scots don't have the "hanging"; if they did then the argument would have been resolved long before this post. The only thing that they hold upon to are the facile arguments - Scotland's 15% of UK taxes (Sturgeon) - that make Smithson's senility thread-headers seem to appear sensible....
It is beginning to sound like someone who wants a divorce... but thinks that keeping a joint account makes sense. And if they stayed in the same house it would be so much more convenient for all concerned.
Actually the party does have a plausible explanation for the apparent discrepancy. A spokesman says that Ukip is in favour of “high-speed rail”, just not HS2. Under its thinking, you could have new routes alongside existing ones, with much less pain for local residents.
The model would be HS1, from London to the Channel Tunnel, which followed the route of an existing line – and therefore had rather less opposition (although it was not insignificant) than HS2.
Do you think their alleged change of position on HS2 is more or less charlatanry than David Cameron once advocating for no top-down re-organisation of the NHS, or campaigning against Labour's coming 20% VAT bombshell?
Includes a wish list of things Scotland would like :
* Insane list
I can here the laughter at the Treasury from here.
This is getting silly. If our Scottish friends want Independence, they should just f'ing go. Start their own currency, be separate.
Instead they want some insane bastardised scheme.
At the moment they are a loved and valued part of the UK. If they get their wishes, they'll be a (very) small and junior economic partner. The monetary policy will be set from London, based on the wishes and requirements of the rest of the Kingdom. They'll have to trot along at the heels of the rest of us.
What a terrible state for a great people to descend to.
Actually the party does have a plausible explanation for the apparent discrepancy. A spokesman says that Ukip is in favour of “high-speed rail”, just not HS2. Under its thinking, you could have new routes alongside existing ones, with much less pain for local residents.
The model would be HS1, from London to the Channel Tunnel, which followed the route of an existing line – and therefore had rather less opposition (although it was not insignificant) than HS2.
Do you think their alleged change of position on HS2 is more or less charlatanry than David Cameron once advocating for no top-down re-organisation of the NHS, or campaigning against Labour's coming 20% VAT bombshell?
I see Chris Bryant hasn't forgotten labours 'British jobs for British workers' statement.
Lets see how many labour supporters who have been having a go at the Cameron and the coalition over they touth talk on immigration/Romania,Bulgaria free movement of people from the EU have anything to say on what Bryant as said.
You can't pick and choose your workers if you have Eu free movement of people.
The Scottish nationalists need to get off the process questions. They will never win a referendum on the basis of the precise transitional arrangements. They're getting bogged down.
They need to explain instead how an independent Scotland would look and act differently from the current arrangement. James Kelly has sought to do this a few times, but the Scottish nationalists have done conspicuously little of this.
It's beginning increasingly clear that the SNP don't understand that the word 'independence' means you become a separate country.
Ireland had the pound for about 50 years as an independent country. Isle of man, not in the EU by the way, Jersey, Gibraltar and Falklands all use sterling. At times Roger you forget the basic facts and come up with spew. With countries within the EU the line on what defines independence and what is centralised in Europe seems increasingly blurred.
The Scottish Government to input into appointment process to key positions within Bank of England (for example, Monetary Policy Committee and Financial Policy Committee), its remit and objectives.
Matters of collective decision making on governance addressed within an overarching agreement between both governments. An institutional arrangement, a ‘Macroeconomic Governance Committee’, to be established.
Yes. Every time there is an appointment to be filled or a decision to be taken, the Scottish government can take a view and the UK government can take a view. There can then be a vote, based on percentage ownership of the bank.
I also note that one of the 20 "economic levers" the SNP claim would be available to them post-independence is "EU legislation". Yes, Scotland will be able to decide that all by itself.
Danny Alexander backing Osborne on rUK not signing up to a "Sterling Zone" on R4.
Healey was honest enough to say the IMF gave him the money based on N Sea oil. Had that been part of indy Scotland then UK would have been even worse on the bottom line in the mid to late 70's. Has the situation changed economically on that matter?
It's beginning increasingly clear that the SNP don't understand that the word 'independence' means you become a separate country.
Ireland had the pound for about 50 years as an indepenndent country. Isle of man, not in the EU by the way, Jersey, Gibraltar and Falklands all use sterling. At times Roger you forget the basic facts and come up with spew.
Are you arguing that Scotland should use the pound, but not be backed by the BoE - as is the case in the IoM?
I am wholly neutral when it comes to Scotland's upcoming vote, I have no preference whether they stay or go (though I'd probably qualify for a new shiny blue (presumably?) passport should they decide to go - making some assumptions about grandparents' status born north of Hadrian's Wall), however, it does strike me the nats are in a real pickle over this currency issue.
It does seem symptomatic of a recent drift towards the SNP wanting a sort of independence a la carte (no nukes, no debt, but yes to Sterling etc), and a worrying lack of grasp being demonstrated by their spokespeople that independence means well, err, just that really. You really are on your own, largely, even in an interconnected world full of G20's EU's, NATOs' etc (ask Cyprus)
Now whilist it makes perfect level headed sense for all to thrash out reasonable compromises on tax/debt/resources/nukes/currency and doubtless this would happen, I also doubt that Salmond's analogy or a "surly lodger becoming a good neighbour" (I paraphrase) will resonante with the 53.5M English giant sat south of Berwick. You can't spend a considerable period of time telling the English they are the root cause of Scotland's ills and then pretend it's going to be all lovey dovey after. The Scots even after a break will have to spend a lot of time stroking England for their own good.
Arguing that the conditions exist for an optimal currency area (which is what the lines you quoted are doing) is not the same as arguing that all parts of the optimal currency area should pool sovereignty. I dont a contradiction.
Neil, I think it is fair to argue that the reason the currency area has been a success is because of the political and fiscal union that a shared government in Westminster has provided.
All the arguments in the Eurozone are over what degree of political and fiscal union is necessary to keep their currency area going.
Except as the article makes clear UKIP were never in favour of HS2. They were always in favour of additional high speed lines along side existing rail routes. Interesting that you are so keen to misrepresent their views on this.
The vilest American campaign I saw was the 2002 Georgia senate race.
The incumbent, Max Clelland voted against one of the Homeland Security acts proposed by George W Bush.
He had ads run against him implying he was soft on terrorist/not a patriot/a coward.
Now you might think, all's fair in politics, except, Senator Clelland is a triple amputee Vietnam veteran, whilst George W Bush avoided Vietnam by getting a position with the Texas National Air Guard and Dick Cheney, used so many deferments, he missed the Vietnam war.
The sad thing is, it worked and he lost his seat.
That's nothing. In the South Carolina primary in 2000, the Bush campaign ran an anonymous push-poll asking Republican primary voters if they would be less likely to support John McCain if they knew he had an illegitimate black child. The child in question was a Bangladeshi street orphan than John McCain and his wife had adopted.
On topic. The only basis for restricting political advertisements on television and radio is that the extent of the right to freedom of expression ought to depend on the medium by which it is communicated. That is self-evidently preposterous now that broadcasting is no longer a natural monopoly, if it was ever justifiable in the first place. All who support the current ban on the thread do so for the reasons either that they wouldn't like political advertising on TV, or that it would have a detrimental effect on politics. I don't much like Manchester United and strongly believe the leadership of the main political parties has a decidedly detrimental effect on politics. I'm not proposing to ban either.
I don't know enough about the Irish situation so how did it work with Ireland having the pound as an independent country? Is it a realistic model for Scotland?
Actually the party does have a plausible explanation for the apparent discrepancy. A spokesman says that Ukip is in favour of “high-speed rail”, just not HS2. Under its thinking, you could have new routes alongside existing ones, with much less pain for local residents.
The model would be HS1, from London to the Channel Tunnel, which followed the route of an existing line – and therefore had rather less opposition (although it was not insignificant) than HS2.
Do you think their alleged change of position on HS2 is more or less charlatanry than David Cameron once advocating for no top-down re-organisation of the NHS, or campaigning against Labour's coming 20% VAT bombshell?
They're the same.
See my reply to Edmund below.
"The model would be HS1, from London to the Channel Tunnel, which followed the route of an existing line – and therefore had rather less opposition (although it was not insignificant) than HS2."
No, it does not. It leaves St Pancras and tunnels under much of East London and passed under the Thames. If it runs close to anything, then it's the M2 and M20. The only place it signifcantly parallels a railway is the 11-mile stretch east of Ashford.
There is only a relatively small transport corridor for a direct route to Dover whilst avoiding the high ground of the North Downs. Therefore many transport routes congregate through that corridor. There are many more potential routes available from London to the north, especially if you want to avoid or serve population centres.
(As an aside, years ago I got told the government's plans for the Channel Tunnel were delivered to bidders in a couple of cardboard boxes. The plans for the Channel Tunnel Rail Link a few years later came in the back of a lorry with a fork-lift to offload them).
Are we missing the point of the SNP's protestations? Ostensibly about the referendum, but in truth they are a warm up for the post-referendum negotiations about the "Devo-max" consolation prize (aka wooden spoon).
Neil, I think it is fair to argue that the reason the currency area has been a success is because of the political and fiscal union that a shared government in Westminster has provided.
All the arguments in the Eurozone are over what degree of political and fiscal union is necessary to keep their currency area going.
I think you're taking the argument further than the document (as much as SeanT quoted anyway) took it. All the document appears to me to be saying is that the conditions are such that Scotland and the rUK would form an optimal currency area. That a currency union between the two would be successful. You could argue that a political and fiscal union would be even more successful but this is obviously not their line (nor does their line depend on there being a political or fiscal union).
All the document appears to me to be saying is that the conditions are such that Scotland and the rUK would form an optimal currency area.
No, it doesn't just say that the conditions would be right for one in the future. It says, historically, the last 300 years of the monetary union have been successful.
I don't know enough about the Irish situation so how did it work with Ireland having the pound as an independent country? Is it a realistic model for Scotland?
It didn't have the British pound. It had the Irish pound with a currency peg to the British one.
Actually the party does have a plausible explanation for the apparent discrepancy. A spokesman says that Ukip is in favour of “high-speed rail”, just not HS2. Under its thinking, you could have new routes alongside existing ones, with much less pain for local residents.
The model would be HS1, from London to the Channel Tunnel, which followed the route of an existing line – and therefore had rather less opposition (although it was not insignificant) than HS2.
Do you think their alleged change of position on HS2 is more or less charlatanry than David Cameron once advocating for no top-down re-organisation of the NHS, or campaigning against Labour's coming 20% VAT bombshell?
They're the same.
See my reply to Edmund below.
"The model would be HS1, from London to the Channel Tunnel, which followed the route of an existing line – and therefore had rather less opposition (although it was not insignificant) than HS2."
No, it does not. It leaves St Pancras and tunnels under much of East London and passed under the Thames. If it runs close to anything, then it's the M2 and M20. The only place it signifcantly parallels a railway is the 11-mile stretch east of Ashford.
There is only a relatively small transport corridor for a direct route to Dover whilst avoiding the high ground of the North Downs. Therefore many transport routes congregate through that corridor. There are many more potential routes available from London to the north, especially if you want to avoid or serve population centres.
(As an aside, years ago I got told the government's plans for the Channel Tunnel were delivered to bidders in a couple of cardboard boxes. The plans for the Channel Tunnel Rail Link a few years later came in the back of a lorry with a fork-lift to offload them).
There's also the short surface stretch between Dagenham and past Rainham, HS1 is right next to the former LTS line.
politicshomeuk Asked if he would accept that unprotected departments face 5-6% further cuts, Danny Alexander says "broadly speaking, yes I would" #wato
Ireland had the pound for about 50 years as an independent country. Isle of man, not in the EU by the way, Jersey, Gibraltar and Falklands all use sterling.
Sure, and an independent Scotland could also use Sterling, just as the British Virgin Islands, Ecuador and El Salvador use the US Dollar
What an independent Scotland couldn't do is expect a foreign country to set fiscal and monetary policy to take account of Scotland, any more than the US Treasury takes account of the views of foreign countries which use its currency.
I don't know enough about the Irish situation so how did it work with Ireland having the pound as an independent country? Is it a realistic model for Scotland?
Ireland used Sterling (with no influence on the BoE) for about 8 years. At that point the Free State Pound was introduced but a monetary union was maintained with Sterling (implicitly restricting Ireland's monetary and fiscal policy) for the next 50 years or so. Then Ireland broke the link with Sterling and attached itself to the German bandwagon via EMS / ERM / ECU / Euro (also with restrictions on monetary and fiscal policy).
Scotland has a wide range of options available:
- use of Sterling without making arrangements with the rUK - currency union (involving a say in the BoE) - adopting an independent currency that is pegged at 1:1 to Sterling - adopting an independent currency that is pegged to any other currency - adopting an independent currency that is free to float - joining the Euro
It's a political rather than economic consideration though. Obviously the 2nd option is deemed least likely to frighten the horses so that is the favoured approach. The difference in practice between that and the 1st or 3rd options is not likely to be hugely significant.
Not wishing to p*ss on your chips (geddit), but the speccy is 31 years old. That article is from Apr 23 2012. I've still got my 48k rubber keyboard jobbie - and it works too!
I don't know enough about the Irish situation so how did it work with Ireland having the pound as an independent country? Is it a realistic model for Scotland?
It didn't have the British pound. It had the Irish pound with a currency peg to the British one.
It lasted till 1979 when the Irish decoupled from it having got cheesed off with our constant Sterling crises of the 70's and before I shouldn't wonder.
Another analogy to Ireland (and the SNP might've answered this to be fair I just don't know the answer), who actually gets citizenship in a newly minted Scotland? I think the Irish Free State made it anyone born anywhere in Ireland or who had a parent or grandparent who was plus anyone who'd been living there for the seven years previous. (Doubtless someone has the excat facts). What are the SNP proposing?
No, it doesn't just say that the conditions would be right for one in the future. It says, historically, the last 300 years of the monetary union have been successful.
Not in the bit SeanT quoted which, as I said, is the only bit of it I read and was commenting on.
Actually the party does have a plausible explanation for the apparent discrepancy. A spokesman says that Ukip is in favour of “high-speed rail”, just not HS2. Under its thinking, you could have new routes alongside existing ones, with much less pain for local residents.
The model would be HS1, from London to the Channel Tunnel, which followed the route of an existing line – and therefore had rather less opposition (although it was not insignificant) than HS2.
Do you think their alleged change of position on HS2 is more or less charlatanry than David Cameron once advocating for no top-down re-organisation of the NHS, or campaigning against Labour's coming 20% VAT bombshell?
They're the same.
See my reply to Edmund below.
"The model would be HS1, from London to the Channel Tunnel, which followed the route of an existing line – and therefore had rather less opposition (although it was not insignificant) than HS2."
No, it does not. It leaves St Pancras and tunnels under much of East London and passed under the Thames. If it runs close to anything, then it's the M2 and M20. The only place it signifcantly parallels a railway is the 11-mile stretch east of Ashford.
There is only a relatively small transport corridor for a direct route to Dover whilst avoiding the high ground of the North Downs. Therefore many transport routes congregate through that corridor. There are many more potential routes available from London to the north, especially if you want to avoid or serve population centres.
(As an aside, years ago I got told the government's plans for the Channel Tunnel were delivered to bidders in a couple of cardboard boxes. The plans for the Channel Tunnel Rail Link a few years later came in the back of a lorry with a fork-lift to offload them).
There's also the short surface stretch between Dagenham and past Rainham, HS2 is right next to the former LTS line.
Ooops, forgot about that; I'm not as familiar with the route of what was rather confusingly called HS2, which is now HS1. But the basic premise still follows.
It's like the idiots who think Osborne somehow intervened to get HS2 out of his constituency. There are scores of people working on the planning, and their guidelines are rather strict. The days of The Dukes of Devonshire and Rutland altering the course of a railway to avoid their land are long gone.
politicshomeuk Asked if he would accept that unprotected departments face 5-6% further cuts, Danny Alexander says "broadly speaking, yes I would" #wato
Hes a good egg is Danny, he'd get my vote if I lived in his seat.
"It's beginning increasingly clear that the SNP don't understand that the word 'independence' means you become a separate country."
Another Nabavi classic. The reality is that Tory posters on this forum had convinced themselves for years that the SNP didn't really want independence, and were after Devo Max instead. The gradual realisation that the SNP are, indeed, a pro-independence party seems to be causing some discombobulation.
I would also caution posters from south of the border against assuming that because the London media only ever mention the subject of independence when they have some kind of 'process' question which they reckon is "yet another setback for the SNP" (yawn), that this means that 'process' is what the SNP spend their time talking about. It isn't.
Now Richard Tyndall is back we have some hope of someone actually understanding UKIP policies.
What's their position on the EEA and free movement of workers Richard?
I am not sure I am the best person to elucidate UKIP's policies as I disagree with plenty of them and don't think they are clear on plenty more of them. I support them as the "best of a bad lot" and of course because of their position on EU withdrawal.
On free movement they claim they are currently updating their policy on immigration etc. They are clear on non EU immigration which is a 5 year freeze as far as permanent settlement is concerned. On EU immigration they seem to be up in the air. They know what they would like to do but don't seem to have the confidence to be explicit. So the only principle they have outlined so far has been that any EU citizens living in the UK for more than 7 years would be allowed to apply for leave to remain permanently. I assume that means that anyone with less than that time here would lose any right to stay and no new migration would be allowed. To me this seems to rule out any EEA membership. Again they do not make this explicit.
Lets see how many labour supporters who have been having a go at the Cameron and the coalition over they touth talk on immigration/Romania,Bulgaria free movement of people from the EU have anything to say on what Bryant as said.
He's either a moron or a pandering sleazebag. Probably the second one. People who run hotels should hire the best person for the job.
I don't know enough about the Irish situation so how did it work with Ireland having the pound as an independent country? Is it a realistic model for Scotland?
It didn't have the British pound. It had the Irish pound with a currency peg to the British one.
I don't know enough about the Irish situation so how did it work with Ireland having the pound as an independent country? Is it a realistic model for Scotland?
It didn't have the British pound. It had the Irish pound with a currency peg to the British one.
It lasted till 1979 when the Irish decoupled from it having got cheesed off with our constant Sterling crises of the 70's and before I shouldn't wonder.
As with any currency peg, it meant that it lost control of its monetary policy, and couldn't either stimulate its economy during recessions, nor control inflation. When it finally broke the peg it was one of the poorest countries in Western Europe.
It's beginning increasingly clear that the SNP don't understand that the word 'independence' means you become a separate country.
Ireland had the pound for about 50 years as an indepenndent country. Isle of man, not in the EU by the way, Jersey, Gibraltar and Falklands all use sterling. At times Roger you forget the basic facts and come up with spew.
Are you arguing that Scotland should use the pound, but not be backed by the BoE - as is the case in the IoM?
I would prefer shaking hands and doing a deal, but London has a bad track record on splitting amicably. I think that short term having no say on the UK pound is acceptable. Maybe pegged at 1:1 as happened in Ireland. assuming the UK currency does better in terms of stability than 40 years ago.
The Scottish nationalists need to get off the process questions. They will never win a referendum on the basis of the precise transitional arrangements. They're getting bogged down.
Oh gosh: You're trying to be rational! Just use your fingers to count to six (or a dozen; whatever preference)....
Actually the party does have a plausible explanation for the apparent discrepancy. A spokesman says that Ukip is in favour of “high-speed rail”, just not HS2. Under its thinking, you could have new routes alongside existing ones, with much less pain for local residents.
The model would be HS1, from London to the Channel Tunnel, which followed the route of an existing line – and therefore had rather less opposition (although it was not insignificant) than HS2.
Do you think their alleged change of position on HS2 is more or less charlatanry than David Cameron once advocating for no top-down re-organisation of the NHS, or campaigning against Labour's coming 20% VAT bombshell?
They're the same.
See my reply to Edmund below.
"The model would be HS1, from London to the Channel Tunnel, which followed the route of an existing line – and therefore had rather less opposition (although it was not insignificant) than HS2."
No, it does not. It leaves St Pancras and tunnels under much of East London and passed under the Thames. If it runs close to anything, then it's the M2 and M20. The only place it signifcantly parallels a railway is the 11-mile stretch east of Ashford.
There is only a relatively small transport corridor for a direct route to Dover whilst avoiding the high ground of the North Downs. Therefore many transport routes congregate through that corridor. There are many more potential routes available from London to the north, especially if you want to avoid or serve population centres.
(As an aside, years ago I got told the government's plans for the Channel Tunnel were delivered to bidders in a couple of cardboard boxes. The plans for the Channel Tunnel Rail Link a few years later came in the back of a lorry with a fork-lift to offload them).
There's also the short surface stretch between Dagenham and past Rainham, HS1 is right next to the former LTS line.
Ooops, forgot about that; I'm not as familiar with the route of what was rather confusingly called HS2, which is now HS1. But the basic premise still follows.
It's like the idiots who think Osborne somehow intervened to get HS2 out of his constituency. There are scores of people working on the planning, and their guidelines are rather strict. The days of The Dukes of Devonshire and Rutland altering the course of a railway to avoid their land are long gone.
Ooops I meant HS1 at Rainham!!! (original post edited!)
Thanks Neil. I can hardly see option 1 being possible as it would leave Scotland almost entirely at the mercy of the rUK when it comes to economic and monetary policy.
Lets see how many labour supporters who have been having a go at the Cameron and the coalition over they touth talk on immigration/Romania,Bulgaria free movement of people from the EU have anything to say on what Bryant as said.
He's either a moron or a pandering sleazebag. Probably the second one. People who run hotels should hire the best person for the job.
Comments
Asda is investing 700m pounds in in its online operations, new and existing stores and its supply chain after posting an increase in 2012 sales.
The company will create 2,500 jobs though the investment in its growing multichannel business, with stores supporting its internet and smartphone channels.
The British arm of US retailer Wal-Mart will open 10 new stores this year including five superstores, four new small format supermarkets and one non-food outlet.
Asda currently has 568 UK stores after opening two new stores this year.
The announcement came as the retailer posted a 4.5% rise in total sales, including petrol, to £22.8bn in 2012.
Do we really want the concept of swiftboating, pacs and superpacs over here?
UKIP used to be in favour of HS2 as recently as 2010.
http://blogs.ft.com/westminster/2013/04/when-ukip-called-for-three-new-high-speed-rail-lines/
"Vote for me, or the world will end" type of ads.
Watch turnout out rocket.
Political rivals put family albums in frame
VIDEO: Miliband visits South Shields to give support to Labour candidate
Labour chief’s nuke-test vets vow
By-election battle lines drawn
TV comic Lee Nelson joins then quits South Shields election battle
Nine in fight for David Miliband’s South Shields seat
South Shields ‘MP candidate’ Lee Nelson starts campaigning
TV comic Lee Nelson ‘to stand for election in South Shields’
Special school set for academy status
‘Who better than party leader to endorse you?’
VIDEO: Ed backs Emma to replace departing David
Lull in canvassing for ‘divisive’ Thatcher’s funeral
VIDEO: ‘Labour should do more for disabled’ Miliband told
VIDEO: Leader’s tribute to candidate and council chief
SLIDESHOW: Labour’s ‘Ed boy’ visits South Shields
VIDEO: Miliband told of concern over jobs and shops
Hundreds turn out to greet Ed Miliband
VIDEO: Labour leader Ed Miliband in South Shields
Follow Ed Miliband’s visit to South Shields
Labour leader Ed heads for his brother’s old patch
UKIP man wants to beat coalition
Ousted councillor Khan seeks comeback - as MP
Commons writ formally sets by-election date
http://www.shieldsgazette.com/news/politics
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/326658870867013633/photo/1
Does the link work?
Politics doesn't need more negativity and smearing.
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/326660744479391744/photo/1
Betfair prices of 2.42; 1.13; 2.9 suggest this is a fair price if you fancy a gamble
The incumbent, Max Clelland voted against one of the Homeland Security acts proposed by George W Bush.
He had ads run against him implying he was soft on terrorist/not a patriot/a coward.
Now you might think, all's fair in politics, except, Senator Clelland is a triple amputee Vietnam veteran, whilst George W Bush avoided Vietnam by getting a position with the Texas National Air Guard and Dick Cheney, used so many deferments, he missed the Vietnam war.
The sad thing is, it worked and he lost his seat.
You should licence SeanT to use the graph in his next Telegraph blog. The implications are sufficiently explosive to justify the kind of cautious wording for which Sean is so renowned.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22262030
"One of the UK's top union leaders has voiced doubts about whether Labour can win the next general election.
Unite boss Len McCluskey told BBC Radio 5Live that if Labour say they "believe in an austerity programme but won't cut as deep or as fast, it is my view they will lose".
Unite, which has 1.5 million members, is Labour's largest financial backer.
Mr McCluskey's comments come as there is increasing pressure on Labour to give specific details of future policies and set out how its spending plans at the next election, scheduled for 2015, would differ from the Conservatives' and Lib Dems'."
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0041/00419554.pdf
Includes a wish list of things Scotland would like :
* Formal monetary union with UK, with Bank of England (BofE) as central bank.
* Ownership and governance of BofE undertaken on an explicit shared basis, reflecting Scotland’s current implicit share of existing assets.
* Monetary policy set according to economic conditions across Sterling Zone.
* The Scottish Government to input into appointment process to key positions within Bank of England (for example, Monetary Policy Committee and Financial Policy Committee), its remit and objectives.
* Representative from Scottish Treasury attends MPC meetings in similar capacity to existing HM Treasury representative (i.e. in a non-voting capacity).
* Matters of collective decision making on governance addressed within an overarching agreement between both governments. An institutional arrangement, a ‘Macroeconomic Governance Committee’, to be established.
* Scottish Government to establish an independent Scottish Monetary Institute
some cash receipts received in the early part of 2013-14 relate to economic activity in 2012-13 and will be accrued back to that year. April PAYE and NICs cash receipts largely relate to March salaries and will be accrued back to 2012-13. Likewise, some of the cash VAT receipts received between April and June relate to consumer spending in the first quarter of 2013 and will thus be accrued back to 2012-13. The income tax , NICs and VAT estimates included in today’s release depend to a large extent on forecasts of cash receipts in early 2013-14;
and more
As anticipated in our EFO forecast, central government current spending was much lower than in March 2012. Overall, this reflects the large reductions in spending that departments had agreed with the Treasury. But it also reflects differences in the timing of spending, where payments of grants to local authorities and transfers to the EU had been made earlier this year, compared to last year.
It is quite clear that the government finances are in much better condition than the headline figures are reporting. That said, Chote is reporting lower than expected income tax and NI receipts either suggesting a softening of employment growth or more likely known lower growth in average earnings.
A plague on both your houses: how Ukip is worrying Labour as well as the Conservatives
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jameskirkup/100213458/a-plague-on-both-your-houses-how-ukip-is-worrying-labour-as-well-as-the-conservatives/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
Lol - aye right !
Sounds like what the Greeks are getting from the Germans.
BETTING POSTIf Al-Beeb's £120.6 billion guestimate holds true until June then I will pay the princely sum of £50 to Junior's paternal's site-costs. If not can Wee-Timmy ensure that the same happens (and not w3ltch)...?
[NOTE: Our Gay-Oirish eejit should pay double the antee for feckin' interference! Bermondsey should STFU, ennit!]
The Treasury should agree to all the SNP demands, but inform the SNP, that post referendum the following will happen
1) The pound will be renamed "The Thatcher"
2) All coins and notes will contain the image of Lady Thatcher on them.
Win win for all sides.
...And I'm not talking to you! Grrr.
Arguing that the conditions exist for an optimal currency area (which is what the lines you quoted are doing) is not the same as arguing that all parts of the optimal currency area should pool sovereignty. I dont a contradiction.
This is the latest one from the Gold Standard, is from Jan 2012
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/9015374/Britain-divided-over-Scottish-independence.html
Edit: Which may be down to Tory levels come the next GE.
Scots don't have the "hanging"; if they did then the argument would have been resolved long before this post. The only thing that they hold upon to are the facile arguments - Scotland's 15% of UK taxes (Sturgeon) - that make Smithson's senility thread-headers seem to appear sensible....
Even The Times only commission Mori to do Scotland polling every 3 or 4 months.
Which is immensely frustrating, as we're left with YouGov and Panelbase, and I have doubts over both of them.
btw check your vanilla inbox, Ive sent you a message about this.
The model would be HS1, from London to the Channel Tunnel, which followed the route of an existing line – and therefore had rather less opposition (although it was not insignificant) than HS2.
Do you think their alleged change of position on HS2 is more or less charlatanry than David Cameron once advocating for no top-down re-organisation of the NHS, or campaigning against Labour's coming 20% VAT bombshell?
I do miss my spectrums, especially my 128k +3
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-17776666
Instead they want some insane bastardised scheme.
At the moment they are a loved and valued part of the UK. If they get their wishes, they'll be a (very) small and junior economic partner. The monetary policy will be set from London, based on the wishes and requirements of the rest of the Kingdom. They'll have to trot along at the heels of the rest of us.
What a terrible state for a great people to descend to.
See my reply to Edmund below.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2313463/It-nice-British-hotels-British-receptionists-Labours-immigration-spokesman-slams-tourism-industry.html
I see Chris Bryant hasn't forgotten labours 'British jobs for British workers' statement.
Lets see how many labour supporters who have been having a go at the Cameron and the coalition over they touth talk on immigration/Romania,Bulgaria free movement of people from the EU have anything to say on what Bryant as said.
You can't pick and choose your workers if you have Eu free movement of people.
They need to explain instead how an independent Scotland would look and act differently from the current arrangement. James Kelly has sought to do this a few times, but the Scottish nationalists have done conspicuously little of this.
With countries within the EU the line on what defines independence and what is centralised in Europe seems increasingly blurred.
The Scottish Government to input into appointment process to key positions within
Bank of England (for example, Monetary Policy Committee and Financial Policy
Committee), its remit and objectives.
Matters of collective decision making on governance addressed within an
overarching agreement between both governments. An institutional arrangement, a
‘Macroeconomic Governance Committee’, to be established.
Yes. Every time there is an appointment to be filled or a decision to be taken, the Scottish government can take a view and the UK government can take a view. There can then be a vote, based on percentage ownership of the bank.
EDIT: Another is international trade policy!
Has the situation changed economically on that matter?
It does seem symptomatic of a recent drift towards the SNP wanting a sort of independence a la carte (no nukes, no debt, but yes to Sterling etc), and a worrying lack of grasp being demonstrated by their spokespeople that independence means well, err, just that really. You really are on your own, largely, even in an interconnected world full of G20's EU's, NATOs' etc (ask Cyprus)
Now whilist it makes perfect level headed sense for all to thrash out reasonable compromises on tax/debt/resources/nukes/currency and doubtless this would happen, I also doubt that Salmond's analogy or a "surly lodger becoming a good neighbour" (I paraphrase) will resonante with the 53.5M English giant sat south of Berwick. You can't spend a considerable period of time telling the English they are the root cause of Scotland's ills and then pretend it's going to be all lovey dovey after. The Scots even after a break will have to spend a lot of time stroking England for their own good.
All the arguments in the Eurozone are over what degree of political and fiscal union is necessary to keep their currency area going.
The only basis for restricting political advertisements on television and radio is that the extent of the right to freedom of expression ought to depend on the medium by which it is communicated. That is self-evidently preposterous now that broadcasting is no longer a natural monopoly, if it was ever justifiable in the first place. All who support the current ban on the thread do so for the reasons either that they wouldn't like political advertising on TV, or that it would have a detrimental effect on politics. I don't much like Manchester United and strongly believe the leadership of the main political parties has a decidedly detrimental effect on politics. I'm not proposing to ban either.
No, it does not. It leaves St Pancras and tunnels under much of East London and passed under the Thames. If it runs close to anything, then it's the M2 and M20. The only place it signifcantly parallels a railway is the 11-mile stretch east of Ashford.
There is only a relatively small transport corridor for a direct route to Dover whilst avoiding the high ground of the North Downs. Therefore many transport routes congregate through that corridor. There are many more potential routes available from London to the north, especially if you want to avoid or serve population centres.
(As an aside, years ago I got told the government's plans for the Channel Tunnel were delivered to bidders in a couple of cardboard boxes. The plans for the Channel Tunnel Rail Link a few years later came in the back of a lorry with a fork-lift to offload them).
What an independent Scotland couldn't do is expect a foreign country to set fiscal and monetary policy to take account of Scotland, any more than the US Treasury takes account of the views of foreign countries which use its currency.
Scotland has a wide range of options available:
- use of Sterling without making arrangements with the rUK
- currency union (involving a say in the BoE)
- adopting an independent currency that is pegged at 1:1 to Sterling
- adopting an independent currency that is pegged to any other currency
- adopting an independent currency that is free to float
- joining the Euro
It's a political rather than economic consideration though. Obviously the 2nd option is deemed least likely to frighten the horses so that is the favoured approach. The difference in practice between that and the 1st or 3rd options is not likely to be hugely significant.
You better ask the same Question to chris Bryant,he seems he doesn't understand it.
Another analogy to Ireland (and the SNP might've answered this to be fair I just don't know the answer), who actually gets citizenship in a newly minted Scotland? I think the Irish Free State made it anyone born anywhere in Ireland or who had a parent or grandparent who was plus anyone who'd been living there for the seven years previous. (Doubtless someone has the excat facts). What are the SNP proposing?
It's like the idiots who think Osborne somehow intervened to get HS2 out of his constituency. There are scores of people working on the planning, and their guidelines are rather strict. The days of The Dukes of Devonshire and Rutland altering the course of a railway to avoid their land are long gone.
Another Nabavi classic. The reality is that Tory posters on this forum had convinced themselves for years that the SNP didn't really want independence, and were after Devo Max instead. The gradual realisation that the SNP are, indeed, a pro-independence party seems to be causing some discombobulation.
I would also caution posters from south of the border against assuming that because the London media only ever mention the subject of independence when they have some kind of 'process' question which they reckon is "yet another setback for the SNP" (yawn), that this means that 'process' is what the SNP spend their time talking about. It isn't.
On free movement they claim they are currently updating their policy on immigration etc. They are clear on non EU immigration which is a 5 year freeze as far as permanent settlement is concerned. On EU immigration they seem to be up in the air. They know what they would like to do but don't seem to have the confidence to be explicit. So the only principle they have outlined so far has been that any EU citizens living in the UK for more than 7 years would be allowed to apply for leave to remain permanently. I assume that means that anyone with less than that time here would lose any right to stay and no new migration would be allowed. To me this seems to rule out any EEA membership. Again they do not make this explicit.
Politicians, dontcha love em. :-)
Because a separate currency is not an essential feature of an independent country. Ask the President of France, or the Chancellor of Germany.
I would go with both.