I do think we will see at least a couple of overs of gentle leg side half volleys served up by Fraser in particular for Salmond to put in whatever part of the stand he sees fit.
Anyone know why Andrew Neil Frazer Nelson and The Spectator are so interested in fermenting a bloodbath in Scotland. Mere seekers after truth or Unionist Ultras promoting a cause?
son has a bill from an electric power supplier for 3 months adding up to .....1327 ........ his previous bill was nowhere near this.
This is a 2 bed flat
They insist the bill is accurate
however they tried to charge him 912 for his first month - after much debate they agreed it should be 67
In October they asked for 781 for 3 months - after much debate they said it was actually 71
Now they asked for 541 - after he read the meter they said he actually owes 1327.....
the day readings seem ok - the night meter reading shows a tripling of the number shown over the 3 months
Who the hell do I complain to?
There seems no way he could have used that much even if he wanted to
What approximate number does he get when he runs the current reading through the algorithm for his tariff? What would it have to be to give that bill?
If it is 3 or 4 times too high, then the current reading may well be below the number on the bill.
The other one I can think of is if he has a specialist tariff that he is using in precisely the wrong way.
Or, maybe, if has electric heating running during the day in winter? Does he have those 'magic' direct heaters that they sell as 'better than storage' installed?
I do think we will see at least a couple of overs of gentle leg side half volleys served up by Fraser in particular for Salmond to put in whatever part of the stand he sees fit.
Anyone know why Andrew Neil Frazer Nelson and The Spectator are so interested in fermenting a bloodbath in Scotland. Mere seekers after truth or Unionist Ultras promoting a cause?
I do think we will see at least a couple of overs of gentle leg side half volleys served up by Fraser in particular for Salmond to put in whatever part of the stand he sees fit.
Anyone know why Andrew Neil Frazer Nelson and The Spectator are so interested in fermenting a bloodbath in Scotland. Mere seekers after truth or Unionist Ultras promoting a cause?
This testimony from Salmond is devastating for Sturgeon, her husband and the Scottish government
The aforementioned have a deep interest in Scotland and this evidence has to be put on the record
I do think we will see at least a couple of overs of gentle leg side half volleys served up by Fraser in particular for Salmond to put in whatever part of the stand he sees fit.
Anyone know why Andrew Neil Frazer Nelson and The Spectator are so interested in fermenting a bloodbath in Scotland. Mere seekers after truth or Unionist Ultras promoting a cause?
We have a shocking and disgraceful state of affairs which all our media should be obsessed by if the rule of law is to have any strength or power in this case at all. Of course the fact that the people responsible for this are an SNP government is felicitous but we should not lose sight of that first point. Frazer Nelson is absolutely right to be involved. I wish more would take the effort.
This is starting to get a wee bit sticky for Sturgeon.
If not Sturgeon at least the Permanent Secretary......tho Salmond just dropped Sturgeon in it for allowing the case to continue well after their lawyers were telling them it wouldn't work....
son has a bill from an electric power supplier for 3 months adding up to .....1327 ........ his previous bill was nowhere near this.
This is a 2 bed flat
They insist the bill is accurate
however they tried to charge him 912 for his first month - after much debate they agreed it should be 67
In October they asked for 781 for 3 months - after much debate they said it was actually 71
Now they asked for 541 - after he read the meter they said he actually owes 1327.....
the day readings seem ok - the night meter reading shows a tripling of the number shown over the 3 months
Who the hell do I complain to?
There seems no way he could have used that much even if he wanted to
What approximate number does he get when he runs the current reading through the algorithm for his tariff? What would it have to be to give that bill?
If it is 3 or 4 times too high, then the current reading may well be below the number on the bill.
The other one I can think of is if he has a specialist tariff that he is using in precisely the wrong way.
Or, maybe, if has electric heating running during the day in winter? Does he have those 'magic' direct heaters that they sell as 'better than storage' installed?
Immersion heater (Hot water) left running?
That wouldn't do it imo. Most immersion tanks are well-insulated. We rented a flat where the immersion tank was deliberately left on all the time... ever present hot water, the costs were not that high, unless you used a lot of hot water.
Britain and the European Union are nearing agreement on how to cooperate on financial market rules -- a first, limited step toward working together after Brexit.
The two sides are proposing a joint forum for discussing regulations and sharing information, though this accord won’t require them to open markets through so-called equivalence decisions, according to a draft memorandum of understanding seen by Bloomberg News.
The forum would lead to “informal consultations concerning decisions to adopt, suspend or withdraw equivalence,” according to the draft. Each side will keep the power to make and change its own rules.
The ECB's regulation of Financial Services is designed to make the post Brexit EMA regulation look good. The idea that they are not dependent upon the expertise of the FCA and the Bank is optimistic at best.
I do think we will see at least a couple of overs of gentle leg side half volleys served up by Fraser in particular for Salmond to put in whatever part of the stand he sees fit.
Anyone know why Andrew Neil Frazer Nelson and The Spectator are so interested in fermenting a bloodbath in Scotland. Mere seekers after truth or Unionist Ultras promoting a cause?
Roger, I know you've been a Sturgeon fan in the past, but can you not see the way the Scottish government has behaved is a wee bit, er, Putinesque? Scrutinising the attempts of an executive to get a political opponent tarred with the Jimmy Savile brush and jailed is hardly the actions of an 'ultra'. The Spectator only did it because so much of the Scottish media has been made so sycophantic to the SNP.
All of those three people in N1 should tell us why the death-cult-joining, beheading-supporting, sex-slavery facilitator Shamima Begum should not be tried in Syria or Iraq. Given that is where the people who suffered from her repulsive actions and beliefs actually live. It is THEIR right to see justice done, because they were the people raped and tortured by Isis, aided by Begum.
Sure, she’d probably hang, but that’s the legal system there. And Begum was happy to see enemies of Isis blown up, or burned alive, with no trial at all
1. She is British so we should deal with her (fully, according to applicable laws) here. 2. She was a child. 3. This is state overreach; today because you join ISIS and want to blow up your fellow countrymen; tomorrow is that a Hawaiian pizza I see you have there, sir?
Your welcome.
No no no no no no no no. How wrong can you be?
It's You're welcome.
No its not.
No it's not.
Finally someone who agrees with me.
Sorry Topping - only just spotted the joke! I thought it was an uncharacteristic error.
Britain and the European Union are nearing agreement on how to cooperate on financial market rules -- a first, limited step toward working together after Brexit.
The two sides are proposing a joint forum for discussing regulations and sharing information, though this accord won’t require them to open markets through so-called equivalence decisions, according to a draft memorandum of understanding seen by Bloomberg News.
The forum would lead to “informal consultations concerning decisions to adopt, suspend or withdraw equivalence,” according to the draft. Each side will keep the power to make and change its own rules.
The ECB's regulation of Financial Services is designed to make the post Brexit EMA regulation look good. The idea that they are not dependent upon the expertise of the FCA and the Bank is optimistic at best.
All of those three people in N1 should tell us why the death-cult-joining, beheading-supporting, sex-slavery facilitator Shamima Begum should not be tried in Syria or Iraq. Given that is where the people who suffered from her repulsive actions and beliefs actually live. It is THEIR right to see justice done, because they were the people raped and tortured by Isis, aided by Begum.
Sure, she’d probably hang, but that’s the legal system there. And Begum was happy to see enemies of Isis blown up, or burned alive, with no trial at all
1. She is British so we should deal with her (fully, according to applicable laws) here. 2. She was a child. 3. This is state overreach; today because you join ISIS and want to blow up your fellow countrymen; tomorrow is that a Hawaiian pizza I see you have there, sir?
Your welcome.
No no no no no no no no. How wrong can you be?
It's You're welcome.
No its not.
No it's not.
Finally someone who agrees with me.
Sorry Topping - only just spotted the joke! I thought it was an uncharacteristic error.
I see the Guardian says the Begum ruling is “controversial”
This is one of those special Guardian word-definitions, where “controversial” means “it dismays three people in Islington”
The view of the court about the respect to be given to the views and judgment of Ministers is something of a throw back and may cause ripples. It is not easy to reconcile that view with the unanimous view of the Court in the Prorogation case, to take an example.
The court over-reached with the prorogation case; this time they are exactly right. These difficult executive decisions must be made by people who are democratically accountable
"People who are democratically accountable" (politicians) might act in a way that violates the rights of individuals or minorities in order to pander to popular sentiment. This risk arises precisely because they are democratically accountable, i.e. they rely on votes for their power and position. It is mitigated by having such decisions overturnable by people who are not democratically accountable, e.g. judges. As a rule of thumb, the more a government is minded towards softhead populism, the more important it is that judges are willing and able to intervene. And regardless of this particular case, we do have such a government.
Listening to this, Salmond is showing just how well he knows the details of his case and the SNP members are just embarrassing and frankly not fit for their role in this hearing
Plus they can cause problems when switching suppliers.
This is true. Ed Miliband completely screwed up on this, and the industry has still not sorted out his mess.
TBH, I think successive governments have over-egged the advantages of smart meters.
I was originally in favour of smart meters, so when OVO offered one I said OK. The house display was not useful, it didn't tell me what I wanted. A couple of years later I switched - and the meters became dumb. Not only that but the gas meter had been fitted so that the display was pointing forward about 3 inches off the ground. The way I read it is via my Smartphone video. All in all I would have been better off not switching at that point. Hopefully they are better now.
Mental note. Never let Mr Allan speak in favour of anything I am in favour of, ever.
Allan is the MSP for Western Isles. Salmond fan, Angus MacNeil, is the MP for Western Isles. Wonder if there will be an attempt to remove Allan as the candidate by the local members aided and abetted by MacNeil.
Mental note. Never let Mr Allan speak in favour of anything I am in favour of, ever.
Allan is the MSP for Western Isles. Salmond fan, Angus MacNeil, is the MP for Western Isles. Wonder if there will be an attempt to remove Allan as the candidate by the local members aided and abetted by MacNeil.
Britain and the European Union are nearing agreement on how to cooperate on financial market rules -- a first, limited step toward working together after Brexit.
The two sides are proposing a joint forum for discussing regulations and sharing information, though this accord won’t require them to open markets through so-called equivalence decisions, according to a draft memorandum of understanding seen by Bloomberg News.
The forum would lead to “informal consultations concerning decisions to adopt, suspend or withdraw equivalence,” according to the draft. Each side will keep the power to make and change its own rules.
The ECB's regulation of Financial Services is designed to make the post Brexit EMA regulation look good. The idea that they are not dependent upon the expertise of the FCA and the Bank is optimistic at best.
I hear they're getting advice from Deutsche Bank.
Wirecard too!
I particularly like the idea that software developers are creating core assets that can be treated as tier 1 capital.
I do think we will see at least a couple of overs of gentle leg side half volleys served up by Fraser in particular for Salmond to put in whatever part of the stand he sees fit.
Anyone know why Andrew Neil Frazer Nelson and The Spectator are so interested in fermenting a bloodbath in Scotland. Mere seekers after truth or Unionist Ultras promoting a cause?
Roger, I know you've been a Sturgeon fan in the past, but can you not see the way the Scottish government has behaved is a wee bit, er, Putinesque? Scrutinising the attempts of an executive to get a political opponent tarred with the Jimmy Savile brush and jailed is hardly the actions of an 'ultra'. The Spectator only did it because so much of the Scottish media has been made so sycophantic to the SNP.
As a neutral do you think it likely that nine women with nothing to gain would risk prison by perjuring themselves? If the answer is 'yes' can you offer a reason why?
I see the Guardian says the Begum ruling is “controversial”
This is one of those special Guardian word-definitions, where “controversial” means “it dismays three people in Islington”
The view of the court about the respect to be given to the views and judgment of Ministers is something of a throw back and may cause ripples. It is not easy to reconcile that view with the unanimous view of the Court in the Prorogation case, to take an example.
The court over-reached with the prorogation case; this time they are exactly right. These difficult executive decisions must be made by people who are democratically accountable
"People who are democratically accountable" (politicians) might act in a way that violates the rights of individuals or minorities in order to pander to popular sentiment. This risk arises precisely because they are democratically accountable, i.e. they rely on votes for their power and position. It is mitigated by having such decisions overturnable by people who are not democratically accountable, e.g. judges. As a rule of thumb, the more a government is minded towards softhead populism, the more important it is that judges are willing and able to intervene. And regardless of this particular case, we do have such a government.
Or, more generally, the less I approve of a government, the more important it is that some sort of mechanism is found to oppose it, and vice versa.
Britain and the European Union are nearing agreement on how to cooperate on financial market rules -- a first, limited step toward working together after Brexit.
The two sides are proposing a joint forum for discussing regulations and sharing information, though this accord won’t require them to open markets through so-called equivalence decisions, according to a draft memorandum of understanding seen by Bloomberg News.
The forum would lead to “informal consultations concerning decisions to adopt, suspend or withdraw equivalence,” according to the draft. Each side will keep the power to make and change its own rules.
The ECB's regulation of Financial Services is designed to make the post Brexit EMA regulation look good. The idea that they are not dependent upon the expertise of the FCA and the Bank is optimistic at best.
I hear they're getting advice from Deutsche Bank.
Wirecard too!
I particularly like the idea that software developers are creating core assets that can be treated as tier 1 capital.
Why not?
TSB and RBS software developers created core liabilities with their software 'upgrade' then surely a good software developer could create core assets.
I see the Guardian says the Begum ruling is “controversial”
This is one of those special Guardian word-definitions, where “controversial” means “it dismays three people in Islington”
The view of the court about the respect to be given to the views and judgment of Ministers is something of a throw back and may cause ripples. It is not easy to reconcile that view with the unanimous view of the Court in the Prorogation case, to take an example.
The court over-reached with the prorogation case; this time they are exactly right. These difficult executive decisions must be made by people who are democratically accountable
These two cases are easily reconciled.
In both cases the court found it had the power to intervene. It took the view that it should intervene in the prorogation case because the government was taking the piss (which it was): the government's refusal to give any account under oath for its actions may well have proven fatal to its case. You seem to have forgotten that at the time of the purported prorogation Britain had a Prime Minister who had not been elected at a general election, who did not command a majority in Parliament and indeed had not won a vote in Parliament pursuing a policy that had not been put before the British public and using prorogation as a tool to impose that irreversibly.
In the present case it took the view that the government had acted within the wide latitude granted to governments when taking decisions. Which, given that the Home Secretary was exercising statutory powers given to them in an extreme case, is not all that surprising.
The main consequence of the prorogation case was political. The public decided, unlike in the USA, that they were AOK with self-coups. As a result Britain now has a government with a light attachment to democracy and an extreme aversion to any form of accountability enthusiastically supported by a self-radicalised posse who are quite willing to overlook anything it does, up to and including the avoidable deaths of tens of thousands.
Nice example of ensuring people wont pay attention to your solidly put points because you wanted to indulge in unrelated theatrical condemnation.
Now you can pretend to be affronted when people ignore your good first paras, even though that was presumably your intention and you want Brexiteers to rage at you so you can respond in turn.
Well, each of us has fun in their own way i suppose.
As it happens whilst I was not as persuaded by the arguments in the prorogation case as to why it was something they could rule on, I supported the outcome, and the reaction politically was shameful. Mostly how it was about brexit, despite denying beforehand it was about brexit.
Britain and the European Union are nearing agreement on how to cooperate on financial market rules -- a first, limited step toward working together after Brexit.
The two sides are proposing a joint forum for discussing regulations and sharing information, though this accord won’t require them to open markets through so-called equivalence decisions, according to a draft memorandum of understanding seen by Bloomberg News.
The forum would lead to “informal consultations concerning decisions to adopt, suspend or withdraw equivalence,” according to the draft. Each side will keep the power to make and change its own rules.
The ECB's regulation of Financial Services is designed to make the post Brexit EMA regulation look good. The idea that they are not dependent upon the expertise of the FCA and the Bank is optimistic at best.
Of course, compared to Germany's BaFin (*cough* Wirecard *cough*), the ECB is a paragon of virtue and competence.
Mental note. Never let Mr Allan speak in favour of anything I am in favour of, ever.
Allan is the MSP for Western Isles. Salmond fan, Angus MacNeil, is the MP for Western Isles. Wonder if there will be an attempt to remove Allan as the candidate by the local members aided and abetted by MacNeil.
son has a bill from an electric power supplier for 3 months adding up to .....1327 ........ his previous bill was nowhere near this.
This is a 2 bed flat
They insist the bill is accurate
however they tried to charge him 912 for his first month - after much debate they agreed it should be 67
In October they asked for 781 for 3 months - after much debate they said it was actually 71
Now they asked for 541 - after he read the meter they said he actually owes 1327.....
the day readings seem ok - the night meter reading shows a tripling of the number shown over the 3 months
Who the hell do I complain to?
There seems no way he could have used that much even if he wanted to
What approximate number does he get when he runs the current reading through the algorithm for his tariff? What would it have to be to give that bill?
If it is 3 or 4 times too high, then the current reading may well be below the number on the bill.
The other one I can think of is if he has a specialist tariff that he is using in precisely the wrong way.
Or, maybe, if has electric heating running during the day in winter? Does he have those 'magic' direct heaters that they sell as 'better than storage' installed?
Immersion heater (Hot water) left running?
Check the meter is recording the electricity consumed in HIS flat and not next doors! When I moved into my new flat I assumed that the electricity being recorded on the meter was in fact for my flat. However over the years nothing I tried could get the bill below £100 a month for a two bed flat. In Winter I would turn down the heating and immersion but to no avail. Then I spent a winter abroad and switched everything off when I left in November and back on when I returned in March. In that time the meter recorded NO day units and HUNDREDS of night units consumed. I was able to get the site electrician to test where the off peak wiring went and it turned out that it was connected to the 3 bed flat next to mine! I had been paying most of next door's bill for 15 years and never realised it! Once that was swapped round my monthly bill dropped to £35.
All of those three people in N1 should tell us why the death-cult-joining, beheading-supporting, sex-slavery facilitator Shamima Begum should not be tried in Syria or Iraq. Given that is where the people who suffered from her repulsive actions and beliefs actually live. It is THEIR right to see justice done, because they were the people raped and tortured by Isis, aided by Begum.
Sure, she’d probably hang, but that’s the legal system there. And Begum was happy to see enemies of Isis blown up, or burned alive, with no trial at all
1. She is British so we should deal with her (fully, according to applicable laws) here. 2. She was a child. 3. This is state overreach; today because you join ISIS and want to blow up your fellow countrymen; tomorrow is that a Hawaiian pizza I see you have there, sir?
Your welcome.
I get the slippery slope argument, and largely agree with it. However, there is a qualitative difference between treason and mere criminal activity, such as pineapple on pizza.
I see the Guardian says the Begum ruling is “controversial”
This is one of those special Guardian word-definitions, where “controversial” means “it dismays three people in Islington”
The view of the court about the respect to be given to the views and judgment of Ministers is something of a throw back and may cause ripples. It is not easy to reconcile that view with the unanimous view of the Court in the Prorogation case, to take an example.
The court over-reached with the prorogation case; this time they are exactly right. These difficult executive decisions must be made by people who are democratically accountable
We don't give any one, whether democratically accountable or not, complete freedom of action. Everyone is contrained by the law. If a parish council acted to pass an act of attainder over a planning dispute that might get challenged in court. The court is there to decide where those boundaries lie.
I do think we will see at least a couple of overs of gentle leg side half volleys served up by Fraser in particular for Salmond to put in whatever part of the stand he sees fit.
Anyone know why Andrew Neil Frazer Nelson and The Spectator are so interested in fermenting a bloodbath in Scotland. Mere seekers after truth or Unionist Ultras promoting a cause?
Roger, I know you've been a Sturgeon fan in the past, but can you not see the way the Scottish government has behaved is a wee bit, er, Putinesque? Scrutinising the attempts of an executive to get a political opponent tarred with the Jimmy Savile brush and jailed is hardly the actions of an 'ultra'. The Spectator only did it because so much of the Scottish media has been made so sycophantic to the SNP.
As a neutral do you think it likely that nine women with nothing to gain would risk prison by perjuring themselves? If the answer is 'yes' can you offer a reason why?
I'm assuming - as Salmind was found not guilty - he's not guilty. It wasn't, to be honest, a case I followed assiduously. I may be missing some subtleties. But I find the smoke=fire argument a little worrying.
I see the Guardian says the Begum ruling is “controversial”
This is one of those special Guardian word-definitions, where “controversial” means “it dismays three people in Islington”
The view of the court about the respect to be given to the views and judgment of Ministers is something of a throw back and may cause ripples. It is not easy to reconcile that view with the unanimous view of the Court in the Prorogation case, to take an example.
The court over-reached with the prorogation case; this time they are exactly right. These difficult executive decisions must be made by people who are democratically accountable
These two cases are easily reconciled.
In both cases the court found it had the power to intervene. It took the view that it should intervene in the prorogation case because the government was taking the piss (which it was): the government's refusal to give any account under oath for its actions may well have proven fatal to its case. You seem to have forgotten that at the time of the purported prorogation Britain had a Prime Minister who had not been elected at a general election, who did not command a majority in Parliament and indeed had not won a vote in Parliament pursuing a policy that had not been put before the British public and using prorogation as a tool to impose that irreversibly.
In the present case it took the view that the government had acted within the wide latitude granted to governments when taking decisions. Which, given that the Home Secretary was exercising statutory powers given to them in an extreme case, is not all that surprising.
The main consequence of the prorogation case was political. The public decided, unlike in the USA, that they were AOK with self-coups. As a result Britain now has a government with a light attachment to democracy and an extreme aversion to any form of accountability enthusiastically supported by a self-radicalised posse who are quite willing to overlook anything it does, up to and including the avoidable deaths of tens of thousands.
Nice example of ensuring people wont pay attention to your solidly put points because you wanted to indulge in unrelated theatrical condemnation.
Now you can pretend to be affronted when people ignore your good first paras, even though that was presumably your intention and you want Brexiteers to rage at you so you can respond in turn.
Well, each of us has fun in their own way i suppose.
The last bit is the important bit. Tens of thousands of people have died avoidable deaths, but the government's supporters simply don't think that's as important as supporting the government.
I am staggered at the self-degradation of these partisans.
son has a bill from an electric power supplier for 3 months adding up to .....1327 ........ his previous bill was nowhere near this.
This is a 2 bed flat
They insist the bill is accurate
however they tried to charge him 912 for his first month - after much debate they agreed it should be 67
In October they asked for 781 for 3 months - after much debate they said it was actually 71
Now they asked for 541 - after he read the meter they said he actually owes 1327.....
the day readings seem ok - the night meter reading shows a tripling of the number shown over the 3 months
Who the hell do I complain to?
There seems no way he could have used that much even if he wanted to
What approximate number does he get when he runs the current reading through the algorithm for his tariff? What would it have to be to give that bill?
If it is 3 or 4 times too high, then the current reading may well be below the number on the bill.
The other one I can think of is if he has a specialist tariff that he is using in precisely the wrong way.
Or, maybe, if has electric heating running during the day in winter? Does he have those 'magic' direct heaters that they sell as 'better than storage' installed?
Immersion heater (Hot water) left running?
Check the meter is recording the electricity consumed in HIS flat and not next doors! When I moved into my new flat I assumed that the electricity being recorded on the meter was in fact for my flat. However over the years nothing I tried could get the bill below £100 a month for a two bed flat. In Winter I would turn down the heating and immersion but to no avail. Then I spent a winter abroad and switched everything off when I left in November and back on when I returned in March. In that time the meter recorded NO day units and HUNDREDS of night units consumed. I was able to get the site electrician to test where the off peak wiring went and it turned out that it was connected to the 3 bed flat next to mine! I had been paying most of next door's bill for 15 years and never realised it! Once that was swapped round my monthly bill dropped to £35.
Funny you should say that ..... I can't say more but something is currently being investigated
Mental note. Never let Mr Allan speak in favour of anything I am in favour of, ever.
Allan is the MSP for Western Isles. Salmond fan, Angus MacNeil, is the MP for Western Isles. Wonder if there will be an attempt to remove Allan as the candidate by the local members aided and abetted by MacNeil.
I do think we will see at least a couple of overs of gentle leg side half volleys served up by Fraser in particular for Salmond to put in whatever part of the stand he sees fit.
Anyone know why Andrew Neil Frazer Nelson and The Spectator are so interested in fermenting a bloodbath in Scotland. Mere seekers after truth or Unionist Ultras promoting a cause?
Roger, I know you've been a Sturgeon fan in the past, but can you not see the way the Scottish government has behaved is a wee bit, er, Putinesque? Scrutinising the attempts of an executive to get a political opponent tarred with the Jimmy Savile brush and jailed is hardly the actions of an 'ultra'. The Spectator only did it because so much of the Scottish media has been made so sycophantic to the SNP.
As a neutral do you think it likely that nine women with nothing to gain would risk prison by perjuring themselves? If the answer is 'yes' can you offer a reason why?
A lack of perjury by complainants wouldn't necessarily mean the scottish government did not behave with malice. But not sure that can be proven easily, as it's a major charge.
Mental note. Never let Mr Allan speak in favour of anything I am in favour of, ever.
Allan is the MSP for Western Isles. Salmond fan, Angus MacNeil, is the MP for Western Isles. Wonder if there will be an attempt to remove Allan as the candidate by the local members aided and abetted by MacNeil.
Britain and the European Union are nearing agreement on how to cooperate on financial market rules -- a first, limited step toward working together after Brexit.
The two sides are proposing a joint forum for discussing regulations and sharing information, though this accord won’t require them to open markets through so-called equivalence decisions, according to a draft memorandum of understanding seen by Bloomberg News.
The forum would lead to “informal consultations concerning decisions to adopt, suspend or withdraw equivalence,” according to the draft. Each side will keep the power to make and change its own rules.
The ECB's regulation of Financial Services is designed to make the post Brexit EMA regulation look good. The idea that they are not dependent upon the expertise of the FCA and the Bank is optimistic at best.
I hear they're getting advice from Deutsche Bank.
Wirecard too!
I particularly like the idea that software developers are creating core assets that can be treated as tier 1 capital.
Hang on. That's a misrepresentation of the rules.
Internally developed software is part of risk weighted assets. Risk weighted assets is used in the calculation of the ratios.
And the EU's rules on this - while you might disagree with them - are part of the Basel Capital Adequacy rules that have been adopted by pretty much everyone.
Britain and the European Union are nearing agreement on how to cooperate on financial market rules -- a first, limited step toward working together after Brexit.
The two sides are proposing a joint forum for discussing regulations and sharing information, though this accord won’t require them to open markets through so-called equivalence decisions, according to a draft memorandum of understanding seen by Bloomberg News.
The forum would lead to “informal consultations concerning decisions to adopt, suspend or withdraw equivalence,” according to the draft. Each side will keep the power to make and change its own rules.
This does feel like the grown ups have realised the political point scoring helps no one and eventually we're going to need mutual recognition on regulations. Equivalence was never going to work for the city and the government has got a lot of defensive and offensive moves it can make should they deny it or move to take it away once given.
I do think we will see at least a couple of overs of gentle leg side half volleys served up by Fraser in particular for Salmond to put in whatever part of the stand he sees fit.
Anyone know why Andrew Neil Frazer Nelson and The Spectator are so interested in fermenting a bloodbath in Scotland. Mere seekers after truth or Unionist Ultras promoting a cause?
Motivation is not as important as whether issues are indeed revealed. Even partisans should be looked at even if their conclusions will naturally be skewed.
son has a bill from an electric power supplier for 3 months adding up to .....1327 ........ his previous bill was nowhere near this.
This is a 2 bed flat
They insist the bill is accurate
however they tried to charge him 912 for his first month - after much debate they agreed it should be 67
In October they asked for 781 for 3 months - after much debate they said it was actually 71
Now they asked for 541 - after he read the meter they said he actually owes 1327.....
the day readings seem ok - the night meter reading shows a tripling of the number shown over the 3 months
Who the hell do I complain to?
There seems no way he could have used that much even if he wanted to
What approximate number does he get when he runs the current reading through the algorithm for his tariff? What would it have to be to give that bill?
If it is 3 or 4 times too high, then the current reading may well be below the number on the bill.
The other one I can think of is if he has a specialist tariff that he is using in precisely the wrong way.
Or, maybe, if has electric heating running during the day in winter? Does he have those 'magic' direct heaters that they sell as 'better than storage' installed?
Immersion heater (Hot water) left running?
That wouldn't do it imo. Most immersion tanks are well-insulated. We rented a flat where the immersion tank was deliberately left on all the time... ever present hot water, the costs were not that high, unless you used a lot of hot water.
Britain and the European Union are nearing agreement on how to cooperate on financial market rules -- a first, limited step toward working together after Brexit.
The two sides are proposing a joint forum for discussing regulations and sharing information, though this accord won’t require them to open markets through so-called equivalence decisions, according to a draft memorandum of understanding seen by Bloomberg News.
The forum would lead to “informal consultations concerning decisions to adopt, suspend or withdraw equivalence,” according to the draft. Each side will keep the power to make and change its own rules.
This does feel like the grown ups have realised the political point scoring helps no one and eventually we're going to need mutual recognition on regulations. Equivalence was never going to work for the city and the government has got a lot of defensive and offensive moves it can make should they deny it or move to take it away once given.
I noted Andrew Bailey fuming over the derivs clearing this week. Perhaps it was building up on all sides.
I see the Guardian says the Begum ruling is “controversial”
This is one of those special Guardian word-definitions, where “controversial” means “it dismays three people in Islington”
The view of the court about the respect to be given to the views and judgment of Ministers is something of a throw back and may cause ripples. It is not easy to reconcile that view with the unanimous view of the Court in the Prorogation case, to take an example.
The court over-reached with the prorogation case; this time they are exactly right. These difficult executive decisions must be made by people who are democratically accountable
We don't give any one, whether democratically accountable or not, complete freedom of action. Everyone is contrained by the law. If a parish council acted to pass an act of attainder over a planning dispute that might get challenged in court. The court is there to decide where those boundaries lie.
Parishes might be a poor example - outside of something major like that it feels a bit like the wild west, probably a lot of minor illegality and unlawfulness going on that goes unnoticed and hard to challenge when noticed.
I do think we will see at least a couple of overs of gentle leg side half volleys served up by Fraser in particular for Salmond to put in whatever part of the stand he sees fit.
Anyone know why Andrew Neil Frazer Nelson and The Spectator are so interested in fermenting a bloodbath in Scotland. Mere seekers after truth or Unionist Ultras promoting a cause?
Roger, I know you've been a Sturgeon fan in the past, but can you not see the way the Scottish government has behaved is a wee bit, er, Putinesque? Scrutinising the attempts of an executive to get a political opponent tarred with the Jimmy Savile brush and jailed is hardly the actions of an 'ultra'. The Spectator only did it because so much of the Scottish media has been made so sycophantic to the SNP.
As a neutral do you think it likely that nine women with nothing to gain would risk prison by perjuring themselves? If the answer is 'yes' can you offer a reason why?
I'm assuming - as Salmind was found not guilty - he's not guilty. It wasn't, to be honest, a case I followed assiduously. I may be missing some subtleties. But I find the smoke=fire argument a little worrying.
Britain and the European Union are nearing agreement on how to cooperate on financial market rules -- a first, limited step toward working together after Brexit.
The two sides are proposing a joint forum for discussing regulations and sharing information, though this accord won’t require them to open markets through so-called equivalence decisions, according to a draft memorandum of understanding seen by Bloomberg News.
The forum would lead to “informal consultations concerning decisions to adopt, suspend or withdraw equivalence,” according to the draft. Each side will keep the power to make and change its own rules.
The ECB's regulation of Financial Services is designed to make the post Brexit EMA regulation look good. The idea that they are not dependent upon the expertise of the FCA and the Bank is optimistic at best.
I hear they're getting advice from Deutsche Bank.
Wirecard too!
I particularly like the idea that software developers are creating core assets that can be treated as tier 1 capital.
Hang on. That's a misrepresentation of the rules.
Internally developed software is part of risk weighted assets. Risk weighted assets is used in the calculation of the ratios.
And the EU's rules on this - while you might disagree with them - are part of the Basel Capital Adequacy rules that have been adopted by pretty much everyone.
(Personally, I think the software rules are pretty inoffensive compared to the use of deferred tax assets - i.e. tax that I won't have to pay in the future because of the big losses I've run up now - in the calculations. I'd love to see the UK crack down on that. *Cough* RBS *Cough* Most of the Italia banking sector *Cough*)
Britain and the European Union are nearing agreement on how to cooperate on financial market rules -- a first, limited step toward working together after Brexit.
The two sides are proposing a joint forum for discussing regulations and sharing information, though this accord won’t require them to open markets through so-called equivalence decisions, according to a draft memorandum of understanding seen by Bloomberg News.
The forum would lead to “informal consultations concerning decisions to adopt, suspend or withdraw equivalence,” according to the draft. Each side will keep the power to make and change its own rules.
This does feel like the grown ups have realised the political point scoring helps no one and eventually we're going to need mutual recognition on regulations. Equivalence was never going to work for the city and the government has got a lot of defensive and offensive moves it can make should they deny it or move to take it away once given.
A forum leading to informal consultations on potentials. Sounds fun.
I do think we will see at least a couple of overs of gentle leg side half volleys served up by Fraser in particular for Salmond to put in whatever part of the stand he sees fit.
Anyone know why Andrew Neil Frazer Nelson and The Spectator are so interested in fermenting a bloodbath in Scotland. Mere seekers after truth or Unionist Ultras promoting a cause?
Roger, I know you've been a Sturgeon fan in the past, but can you not see the way the Scottish government has behaved is a wee bit, er, Putinesque? Scrutinising the attempts of an executive to get a political opponent tarred with the Jimmy Savile brush and jailed is hardly the actions of an 'ultra'. The Spectator only did it because so much of the Scottish media has been made so sycophantic to the SNP.
As a neutral do you think it likely that nine women with nothing to gain would risk prison by perjuring themselves? If the answer is 'yes' can you offer a reason why?
I'm assuming - as Salmind was found not guilty - he's not guilty. It wasn't, to be honest, a case I followed assiduously. I may be missing some subtleties. But I find the smoke=fire argument a little worrying.
You would need to know the names to know that
Genuinely confused, Malc. Why would you need to know the names to assume the courts got it right? Was there a not guilty or not proven verdict? Like Cookie, did not follow the case at the time.
I see the Guardian says the Begum ruling is “controversial”
This is one of those special Guardian word-definitions, where “controversial” means “it dismays three people in Islington”
The view of the court about the respect to be given to the views and judgment of Ministers is something of a throw back and may cause ripples. It is not easy to reconcile that view with the unanimous view of the Court in the Prorogation case, to take an example.
The court over-reached with the prorogation case; this time they are exactly right. These difficult executive decisions must be made by people who are democratically accountable
"People who are democratically accountable" (politicians) might act in a way that violates the rights of individuals or minorities in order to pander to popular sentiment. This risk arises precisely because they are democratically accountable, i.e. they rely on votes for their power and position. It is mitigated by having such decisions overturnable by people who are not democratically accountable, e.g. judges. As a rule of thumb, the more a government is minded towards softhead populism, the more important it is that judges are willing and able to intervene. And regardless of this particular case, we do have such a government.
Or, more generally, the less I approve of a government, the more important it is that some sort of mechanism is found to oppose it, and vice versa.
Nope. I can easily see the dangers of a Left Populist government. For example, they might pass a law excluding anybody who has been to Eton from becoming an MP. My visceral reaction to that would be "punch the air" - same for millions - and few would suffer but this is precisely why it should be struck down by m'learned friends. The whole point is to elevate certain fundamental rights and values above politics.
Britain and the European Union are nearing agreement on how to cooperate on financial market rules -- a first, limited step toward working together after Brexit.
The two sides are proposing a joint forum for discussing regulations and sharing information, though this accord won’t require them to open markets through so-called equivalence decisions, according to a draft memorandum of understanding seen by Bloomberg News.
The forum would lead to “informal consultations concerning decisions to adopt, suspend or withdraw equivalence,” according to the draft. Each side will keep the power to make and change its own rules.
This does feel like the grown ups have realised the political point scoring helps no one and eventually we're going to need mutual recognition on regulations. Equivalence was never going to work for the city and the government has got a lot of defensive and offensive moves it can make should they deny it or move to take it away once given.
I noted Andrew Bailey fuming over the derivs clearing this week. Perhaps it was building up on all sides.
Yes maybe, I think over the next few months the political heat will die down and an effective mutual recognition will get announced as a footnote in some Friday afternoon briefing by the commission in August.
Britain and the European Union are nearing agreement on how to cooperate on financial market rules -- a first, limited step toward working together after Brexit.
The two sides are proposing a joint forum for discussing regulations and sharing information, though this accord won’t require them to open markets through so-called equivalence decisions, according to a draft memorandum of understanding seen by Bloomberg News.
The forum would lead to “informal consultations concerning decisions to adopt, suspend or withdraw equivalence,” according to the draft. Each side will keep the power to make and change its own rules.
This does feel like the grown ups have realised the political point scoring helps no one and eventually we're going to need mutual recognition on regulations. Equivalence was never going to work for the city and the government has got a lot of defensive and offensive moves it can make should they deny it or move to take it away once given.
I noted Andrew Bailey fuming over the derivs clearing this week. Perhaps it was building up on all sides.
Yes maybe, I think over the next few months the political heat will die down and an effective mutual recognition will get announced as a footnote in some Friday afternoon briefing by the commission in August.
Derivatives clearing is a a difficult one, because clearing houses are implicitly guaranteed by central banks.
I see the Guardian says the Begum ruling is “controversial”
This is one of those special Guardian word-definitions, where “controversial” means “it dismays three people in Islington”
The view of the court about the respect to be given to the views and judgment of Ministers is something of a throw back and may cause ripples. It is not easy to reconcile that view with the unanimous view of the Court in the Prorogation case, to take an example.
The court over-reached with the prorogation case; this time they are exactly right. These difficult executive decisions must be made by people who are democratically accountable
We don't give any one, whether democratically accountable or not, complete freedom of action. Everyone is contrained by the law. If a parish council acted to pass an act of attainder over a planning dispute that might get challenged in court. The court is there to decide where those boundaries lie.
Parishes might be a poor example - outside of something major like that it feels a bit like the wild west, probably a lot of minor illegality and unlawfulness going on that goes unnoticed and hard to challenge when noticed.
Britain and the European Union are nearing agreement on how to cooperate on financial market rules -- a first, limited step toward working together after Brexit.
The two sides are proposing a joint forum for discussing regulations and sharing information, though this accord won’t require them to open markets through so-called equivalence decisions, according to a draft memorandum of understanding seen by Bloomberg News.
The forum would lead to “informal consultations concerning decisions to adopt, suspend or withdraw equivalence,” according to the draft. Each side will keep the power to make and change its own rules.
This does feel like the grown ups have realised the political point scoring helps no one and eventually we're going to need mutual recognition on regulations. Equivalence was never going to work for the city and the government has got a lot of defensive and offensive moves it can make should they deny it or move to take it away once given.
I noted Andrew Bailey fuming over the derivs clearing this week. Perhaps it was building up on all sides.
Yes maybe, I think over the next few months the political heat will die down and an effective mutual recognition will get announced as a footnote in some Friday afternoon briefing by the commission in August.
Derivatives clearing is a a difficult one, because clearing houses are implicitly guaranteed by central banks.
Jeez, the death rate is cratering, 10% faster decrease than hospitalisations and holding. Furthermore the decrease in cases seems to be holding at -15% a week rather than continuing to slow down. Brilliant news all round at the moment.
Jeez, the death rate is cratering, 10% faster decrease than hospitalisations and holding. Furthermore the decrease in cases seems to be holding at -15% a week rather than continuing to slow down. Brilliant news all round at the moment.
The latest few modelled days for cases are actually decreasing by around 25% WoW in England.
Mental note. Never let Mr Allan speak in favour of anything I am in favour of, ever.
Allan is the MSP for Western Isles. Salmond fan, Angus MacNeil, is the MP for Western Isles. Wonder if there will be an attempt to remove Allan as the candidate by the local members aided and abetted by MacNeil.
I'm pretty sure that was ironic given his tweeting history. Suspect he despises O'Hara.
Indeed, iff the SNP do lose their majority in May then the internal warfare is going to be something to behold.
One side will say 'Sturgeon has cost us independence' and other side will say 'Salmond has cost us independence.'
If that happened Boris would once again have proved he has 9 lives and can comfortably ignore any demands for indyref2 while leaving the SNP to their civil war
Jeez, the death rate is cratering, 10% faster decrease than hospitalisations and holding. Furthermore the decrease in cases seems to be holding at -15% a week rather than continuing to slow down. Brilliant news all round at the moment.
The latest few modelled days for cases are actually decreasing by around 25% WoW in England.
Britain and the European Union are nearing agreement on how to cooperate on financial market rules -- a first, limited step toward working together after Brexit.
The two sides are proposing a joint forum for discussing regulations and sharing information, though this accord won’t require them to open markets through so-called equivalence decisions, according to a draft memorandum of understanding seen by Bloomberg News.
The forum would lead to “informal consultations concerning decisions to adopt, suspend or withdraw equivalence,” according to the draft. Each side will keep the power to make and change its own rules.
This does feel like the grown ups have realised the political point scoring helps no one and eventually we're going to need mutual recognition on regulations. Equivalence was never going to work for the city and the government has got a lot of defensive and offensive moves it can make should they deny it or move to take it away once given.
I noted Andrew Bailey fuming over the derivs clearing this week. Perhaps it was building up on all sides.
Yes maybe, I think over the next few months the political heat will die down and an effective mutual recognition will get announced as a footnote in some Friday afternoon briefing by the commission in August.
Derivatives clearing is a a difficult one, because clearing houses are implicitly guaranteed by central banks.
Wouldn't the BoE just take on that guarantee?
Effectively guaranteeing a Euro denominated contract between two European counterparties? That's a tough one.
What if it was the Italian government who owed (say) €250bn to LCH, and LCH owed €250bn to the German government. Would the BoE really print pounds to convert into Euros to pay the €250bn to the Germans?
Jeez, the death rate is cratering, 10% faster decrease than hospitalisations and holding. Furthermore the decrease in cases seems to be holding at -15% a week rather than continuing to slow down. Brilliant news all round at the moment.
The latest few modelled days for cases are actually decreasing by around 25% WoW in England.
Once cases get below about 5,000 or so (i.e, half a dozen per parliamentary constituency per day), I think they become pretty irrelevant, and the focus should move entirely to hospitalisations.
Mental note. Never let Mr Allan speak in favour of anything I am in favour of, ever.
Allan is the MSP for Western Isles. Salmond fan, Angus MacNeil, is the MP for Western Isles. Wonder if there will be an attempt to remove Allan as the candidate by the local members aided and abetted by MacNeil.
Mental note. Never let Mr Allan speak in favour of anything I am in favour of, ever.
Allan is the MSP for Western Isles. Salmond fan, Angus MacNeil, is the MP for Western Isles. Wonder if there will be an attempt to remove Allan as the candidate by the local members aided and abetted by MacNeil.
I'm pretty sure that was ironic given his tweeting history. Suspect he despises O'Hara.
Indeed, iff the SNP do lose their majority in May then the internal warfare is going to be something to behold.
One side will say 'Sturgeon has cost us independence' and other side will say 'Salmond has cost us independence.'
If that happened Boris would once again have proved he has 9 lives and can comfortably ignore any demands for indyref2 while leaving the SNP to their civil war
I do think we will see at least a couple of overs of gentle leg side half volleys served up by Fraser in particular for Salmond to put in whatever part of the stand he sees fit.
Anyone know why Andrew Neil Frazer Nelson and The Spectator are so interested in fermenting a bloodbath in Scotland. Mere seekers after truth or Unionist Ultras promoting a cause?
Roger, I know you've been a Sturgeon fan in the past, but can you not see the way the Scottish government has behaved is a wee bit, er, Putinesque? Scrutinising the attempts of an executive to get a political opponent tarred with the Jimmy Savile brush and jailed is hardly the actions of an 'ultra'. The Spectator only did it because so much of the Scottish media has been made so sycophantic to the SNP.
As a neutral do you think it likely that nine women with nothing to gain would risk prison by perjuring themselves? If the answer is 'yes' can you offer a reason why?
A lack of perjury by complainants wouldn't necessarily mean the scottish government did not behave with malice. But not sure that can be proven easily, as it's a major charge.
There are many reasons why a jury can find someone not guilty when the evidence points towards their guilt. Nine independent women who claimed under oath that they were molested without motive would be unprecedented.
My guess is that this will come down to public opinion and Salmond whose reputation is on a par with Harvey Weinstein's will get no public sympathy and support only from those seeking a political advantage.
Britain and the European Union are nearing agreement on how to cooperate on financial market rules -- a first, limited step toward working together after Brexit.
The two sides are proposing a joint forum for discussing regulations and sharing information, though this accord won’t require them to open markets through so-called equivalence decisions, according to a draft memorandum of understanding seen by Bloomberg News.
The forum would lead to “informal consultations concerning decisions to adopt, suspend or withdraw equivalence,” according to the draft. Each side will keep the power to make and change its own rules.
This does feel like the grown ups have realised the political point scoring helps no one and eventually we're going to need mutual recognition on regulations. Equivalence was never going to work for the city and the government has got a lot of defensive and offensive moves it can make should they deny it or move to take it away once given.
I noted Andrew Bailey fuming over the derivs clearing this week. Perhaps it was building up on all sides.
Yes maybe, I think over the next few months the political heat will die down and an effective mutual recognition will get announced as a footnote in some Friday afternoon briefing by the commission in August.
Derivatives clearing is a a difficult one, because clearing houses are implicitly guaranteed by central banks.
Wouldn't the BoE just take on that guarantee?
Effectively guaranteeing a Euro denominated contract between two European counterparties? That's a tough one.
What if it was the Italian government who owed (say) €250bn to LCH, and LCH owed €250bn to the German government. Would the BoE really print pounds to convert into Euros to pay the €250bn to the Germans?
Agree that it's not a palatable idea but it has always been the the nuclear option.
Britain and the European Union are nearing agreement on how to cooperate on financial market rules -- a first, limited step toward working together after Brexit.
The two sides are proposing a joint forum for discussing regulations and sharing information, though this accord won’t require them to open markets through so-called equivalence decisions, according to a draft memorandum of understanding seen by Bloomberg News.
The forum would lead to “informal consultations concerning decisions to adopt, suspend or withdraw equivalence,” according to the draft. Each side will keep the power to make and change its own rules.
This does feel like the grown ups have realised the political point scoring helps no one and eventually we're going to need mutual recognition on regulations. Equivalence was never going to work for the city and the government has got a lot of defensive and offensive moves it can make should they deny it or move to take it away once given.
I noted Andrew Bailey fuming over the derivs clearing this week. Perhaps it was building up on all sides.
Yes maybe, I think over the next few months the political heat will die down and an effective mutual recognition will get announced as a footnote in some Friday afternoon briefing by the commission in August.
Derivatives clearing is a a difficult one, because clearing houses are implicitly guaranteed by central banks.
Which is of course the "be careful what you wish for" element of this. At present it is the BoE who is guarantor and the EU is wanting to onshore that risk.
She is an HR professional and has the effrontery to say that neither mediation nor arbitration are suitable for HR matters. Just astonishing and, as Salmond pointed out, contrary to the Scottish government's policy in respect of current ministers.
Jeez, the death rate is cratering, 10% faster decrease than hospitalisations and holding. Furthermore the decrease in cases seems to be holding at -15% a week rather than continuing to slow down. Brilliant news all round at the moment.
The latest few modelled days for cases are actually decreasing by around 25% WoW in England.
Once cases get below about 5,000 or so (i.e, half a dozen per parliamentary constituency per day), I think they become pretty irrelevant, and the focus should move entirely to hospitalisations.
Yes, Boris made that distinction in his announcement on Monday as well. Cases aren't going form much of the decision making process and it is going to be based on hospitalisations which are still falling pretty rapidly.
My Ears were burning... Hi Mike and everyone Yes, I was abroad for a while, and now living in the boondocks, so I'm probably not the best person to organise a PB London pub session. A few comments - I think most people want a pub that's reasonably spacious, not too noisy, and well-ventilated. I think it helps to physically visit a pub and speak to the manager - Email or phone arrangements can suddenly turn a bit vague, in some pubs, at the most inconvenient time. - A lot of pubs have a bunch of admin around booking places, paying deposits, minimum spend etc. I always tried to look for places that didn't overdo the admin - If you can find a good one, "organising" is not a big onerous task.
- I'm posting less but continuously lurking. I'm not "not posting" for any particular reason - simply that the site is so good and broad in its views - whenever I have a political thought, someone else has already had it and expressed it better than I could ..
Britain and the European Union are nearing agreement on how to cooperate on financial market rules -- a first, limited step toward working together after Brexit.
The two sides are proposing a joint forum for discussing regulations and sharing information, though this accord won’t require them to open markets through so-called equivalence decisions, according to a draft memorandum of understanding seen by Bloomberg News.
The forum would lead to “informal consultations concerning decisions to adopt, suspend or withdraw equivalence,” according to the draft. Each side will keep the power to make and change its own rules.
This does feel like the grown ups have realised the political point scoring helps no one and eventually we're going to need mutual recognition on regulations. Equivalence was never going to work for the city and the government has got a lot of defensive and offensive moves it can make should they deny it or move to take it away once given.
I noted Andrew Bailey fuming over the derivs clearing this week. Perhaps it was building up on all sides.
Yes maybe, I think over the next few months the political heat will die down and an effective mutual recognition will get announced as a footnote in some Friday afternoon briefing by the commission in August.
Derivatives clearing is a a difficult one, because clearing houses are implicitly guaranteed by central banks.
Wouldn't the BoE just take on that guarantee?
Effectively guaranteeing a Euro denominated contract between two European counterparties? That's a tough one.
What if it was the Italian government who owed (say) €250bn to LCH, and LCH owed €250bn to the German government. Would the BoE really print pounds to convert into Euros to pay the €250bn to the Germans?
Wasn't that exactly what they'd have done in recent years? So what's changed from the BoE's perspective?
Isn't that why the ECB wanted clearing in its jurisdiction before the UK fought that off?
I do think we will see at least a couple of overs of gentle leg side half volleys served up by Fraser in particular for Salmond to put in whatever part of the stand he sees fit.
Anyone know why Andrew Neil Frazer Nelson and The Spectator are so interested in fermenting a bloodbath in Scotland. Mere seekers after truth or Unionist Ultras promoting a cause?
Roger, I know you've been a Sturgeon fan in the past, but can you not see the way the Scottish government has behaved is a wee bit, er, Putinesque? Scrutinising the attempts of an executive to get a political opponent tarred with the Jimmy Savile brush and jailed is hardly the actions of an 'ultra'. The Spectator only did it because so much of the Scottish media has been made so sycophantic to the SNP.
As a neutral do you think it likely that nine women with nothing to gain would risk prison by perjuring themselves? If the answer is 'yes' can you offer a reason why?
I'm assuming - as Salmind was found not guilty - he's not guilty. It wasn't, to be honest, a case I followed assiduously. I may be missing some subtleties. But I find the smoke=fire argument a little worrying.
You would need to know the names to know that
Genuinely confused, Malc. Why would you need to know the names to assume the courts got it right? Was there a not guilty or not proven verdict? Like Cookie, did not follow the case at the time.
The jury of mainly women found him not guilty on all charges, I was commenting on the comment from Roger re smoke = fire. The names of the majority , ie nearly all the complainers would show where the smoke was. Believe there was one original concern raised because of METOO etc but not a complaint at the time.
I do think we will see at least a couple of overs of gentle leg side half volleys served up by Fraser in particular for Salmond to put in whatever part of the stand he sees fit.
Anyone know why Andrew Neil Frazer Nelson and The Spectator are so interested in fermenting a bloodbath in Scotland. Mere seekers after truth or Unionist Ultras promoting a cause?
Roger, I know you've been a Sturgeon fan in the past, but can you not see the way the Scottish government has behaved is a wee bit, er, Putinesque? Scrutinising the attempts of an executive to get a political opponent tarred with the Jimmy Savile brush and jailed is hardly the actions of an 'ultra'. The Spectator only did it because so much of the Scottish media has been made so sycophantic to the SNP.
As a neutral do you think it likely that nine women with nothing to gain would risk prison by perjuring themselves? If the answer is 'yes' can you offer a reason why?
A lack of perjury by complainants wouldn't necessarily mean the scottish government did not behave with malice. But not sure that can be proven easily, as it's a major charge.
There are many reasons why a jury can find someone not guilty when the evidence points towards their guilt. Nine independent women who claimed under oath that they were molested without motive would be unprecedented.
My guess is that this will come down to public opinion and Salmond whose reputation is on a par with Harvey Weinstein's will get no public sympathy and support only from those seeking a political advantage.
Weinstein is a convicted criminal serving a long prison sentence. You are on very shaky ground there, Roger.
Britain and the European Union are nearing agreement on how to cooperate on financial market rules -- a first, limited step toward working together after Brexit.
The two sides are proposing a joint forum for discussing regulations and sharing information, though this accord won’t require them to open markets through so-called equivalence decisions, according to a draft memorandum of understanding seen by Bloomberg News.
The forum would lead to “informal consultations concerning decisions to adopt, suspend or withdraw equivalence,” according to the draft. Each side will keep the power to make and change its own rules.
This does feel like the grown ups have realised the political point scoring helps no one and eventually we're going to need mutual recognition on regulations. Equivalence was never going to work for the city and the government has got a lot of defensive and offensive moves it can make should they deny it or move to take it away once given.
I noted Andrew Bailey fuming over the derivs clearing this week. Perhaps it was building up on all sides.
Yes maybe, I think over the next few months the political heat will die down and an effective mutual recognition will get announced as a footnote in some Friday afternoon briefing by the commission in August.
Derivatives clearing is a a difficult one, because clearing houses are implicitly guaranteed by central banks.
Wouldn't the BoE just take on that guarantee?
Effectively guaranteeing a Euro denominated contract between two European counterparties? That's a tough one.
What if it was the Italian government who owed (say) €250bn to LCH, and LCH owed €250bn to the German government. Would the BoE really print pounds to convert into Euros to pay the €250bn to the Germans?
Wasn't that exactly what they'd have done in recent years? So what's changed from the BoE's perspective?
Isn't that why the ECB wanted clearing in its jurisdiction before the UK fought that off?
We each put in our NHS number, DoB, answered 'No' to the list of vulnerabilities, and hey presto - we were offered a range of nearby locations and dates.
It seems the online site is allowing cohort 7 to book now. (Good site too - very straightforward.)
Mental note. Never let Mr Allan speak in favour of anything I am in favour of, ever.
Allan is the MSP for Western Isles. Salmond fan, Angus MacNeil, is the MP for Western Isles. Wonder if there will be an attempt to remove Allan as the candidate by the local members aided and abetted by MacNeil.
I'm pretty sure that was ironic given his tweeting history. Suspect he despises O'Hara.
Indeed, iff the SNP do lose their majority in May then the internal warfare is going to be something to behold.
One side will say 'Sturgeon has cost us independence' and other side will say 'Salmond has cost us independence.'
If that happened Boris would once again have proved he has 9 lives and can comfortably ignore any demands for indyref2 while leaving the SNP to their civil war
There will be nothing civil about it, believe me.
I'm tempted to join the SNP to see the fun from the inside.
Because the SNP aren't blood and soil nationalists, they'll have no problem with me a working class kid in Sheffield joining the SNP.
I do have to admit I do miss being a member of a political party.
My knocking up the voters achievements are legendary and helpful to the SNP.
She is an HR professional and has the effrontery to say that neither mediation nor arbitration are suitable for HR matters. Just astonishing and, as Salmond pointed out, contrary to the Scottish government's policy in respect of current ministers.
I can only imagine that any half-decent SNP backbenchers refused to serve on the committee leaving just these duffers to do the dirty work, and take the consequences from the Salmondites, in due course.
Britain and the European Union are nearing agreement on how to cooperate on financial market rules -- a first, limited step toward working together after Brexit.
The two sides are proposing a joint forum for discussing regulations and sharing information, though this accord won’t require them to open markets through so-called equivalence decisions, according to a draft memorandum of understanding seen by Bloomberg News.
The forum would lead to “informal consultations concerning decisions to adopt, suspend or withdraw equivalence,” according to the draft. Each side will keep the power to make and change its own rules.
This does feel like the grown ups have realised the political point scoring helps no one and eventually we're going to need mutual recognition on regulations. Equivalence was never going to work for the city and the government has got a lot of defensive and offensive moves it can make should they deny it or move to take it away once given.
I noted Andrew Bailey fuming over the derivs clearing this week. Perhaps it was building up on all sides.
Yes maybe, I think over the next few months the political heat will die down and an effective mutual recognition will get announced as a footnote in some Friday afternoon briefing by the commission in August.
Derivatives clearing is a a difficult one, because clearing houses are implicitly guaranteed by central banks.
Wouldn't the BoE just take on that guarantee?
Effectively guaranteeing a Euro denominated contract between two European counterparties? That's a tough one.
What if it was the Italian government who owed (say) €250bn to LCH, and LCH owed €250bn to the German government. Would the BoE really print pounds to convert into Euros to pay the €250bn to the Germans?
Wasn't that exactly what they'd have done in recent years? So what's changed from the BoE's perspective?
Isn't that why the ECB wanted clearing in its jurisdiction before the UK fought that off?
Nothing really other than not being in the EU and the BoE no longer having a capital subscription in the ECB. I'm not sure if it changes anything on a technical level but it definitely does from a political perspective.
My Ears were burning... Hi Mike and everyone Yes, I was abroad for a while, and now living in the boondocks, so I'm probably not the best person to organise a PB London pub session. A few comments - I think most people want a pub that's reasonably spacious, not too noisy, and well-ventilated. I think it helps to physically visit a pub and speak to the manager - Email or phone arrangements can suddenly turn a bit vague, in some pubs, at the most inconvenient time. - A lot of pubs have a bunch of admin around booking places, paying deposits, minimum spend etc. I always tried to look for places that didn't overdo the admin - If you can find a good one, "organising" is not a big onerous task.
- I'm posting less but continuously lurking. I'm not "not posting" for any particular reason - simply that the site is so good and broad in its views - whenever I have a political thought, someone else has already had it and expressed it better than I could ..
We each put in our NHS number, DoB, answered 'No' to the list of vulnerabilities, and hey presto - we were offered a range of nearby locations and dates.
It seems the online site is allowing cohort 7 to book now. (Good site too - very straightforward.)
Hmm. I'm group 6 but haven't heard anything yet. However the instructions on the site rule me out from using it?
EDIT: just tried it - "You are not currently eligible to book through this service"
She is an HR professional and has the effrontery to say that neither mediation nor arbitration are suitable for HR matters. Just astonishing and, as Salmond pointed out, contrary to the Scottish government's policy in respect of current ministers.
We see little of the MSPs down here but if this lot are the cream of the crop theyre a shower of shite. Fraser is the only one with any gravitas and he's just having fun giving Salmond more ammo to fire.
It helps explain why Ian Blackford is seen as talent
I do think we will see at least a couple of overs of gentle leg side half volleys served up by Fraser in particular for Salmond to put in whatever part of the stand he sees fit.
Anyone know why Andrew Neil Frazer Nelson and The Spectator are so interested in fermenting a bloodbath in Scotland. Mere seekers after truth or Unionist Ultras promoting a cause?
Roger, I know you've been a Sturgeon fan in the past, but can you not see the way the Scottish government has behaved is a wee bit, er, Putinesque? Scrutinising the attempts of an executive to get a political opponent tarred with the Jimmy Savile brush and jailed is hardly the actions of an 'ultra'. The Spectator only did it because so much of the Scottish media has been made so sycophantic to the SNP.
As a neutral do you think it likely that nine women with nothing to gain would risk prison by perjuring themselves? If the answer is 'yes' can you offer a reason why?
I'm assuming - as Salmind was found not guilty - he's not guilty. It wasn't, to be honest, a case I followed assiduously. I may be missing some subtleties. But I find the smoke=fire argument a little worrying.
That isn't the argument. There are many reason's why juries find guilty people not guilty. . It's not the same as nine people perjuring themselves. Perhaps the jury knowing that a guilty verdict would mean ten years in prison baulked at it? I would have done. The jury can find as they please.
Comments
Holding power to account, maybe?
I think that's the soft ball DavidL suspected might be bowled.
The aforementioned have a deep interest in Scotland and this evidence has to be put on the record
Tell him to contact his local Citizens Advice.
https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/about-us/contact-us/contact-us/search-for-your-local-citizens-advice/
Some advice also on the CA public site but really, speak to an adviser: free, impartial, confidential.
https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/consumer/energy/energy-supply/
TBH, I think successive governments have over-egged the advantages of smart meters.
If you want cheery news, look at the improvements in Spain and Italy as far as willingness to take the vaccine goes.
Also, look at Poland. 28% FFS.
I just wonder what effect this toadying display will have on those SNP supporters watching this.
A couple of years later I switched - and the meters became dumb. Not only that but the gas meter had been fitted so that the display was pointing forward about 3 inches off the ground. The way I read it is via my Smartphone video. All in all I would have been better off not switching at that point.
Hopefully they are better now.
https://twitter.com/BrendanOHaraMP/status/1365294745963147265
TSB and RBS software developers created core liabilities with their software 'upgrade' then surely a good software developer could create core assets.
Now you can pretend to be affronted when people ignore your good first paras, even though that was presumably your intention and you want Brexiteers to rage at you so you can respond in turn.
Well, each of us has fun in their own way i suppose.
As it happens whilst I was not as persuaded by the arguments in the prorogation case as to why it was something they could rule on, I supported the outcome, and the reaction politically was shameful. Mostly how it was about brexit, despite denying beforehand it was about brexit.
When I moved into my new flat I assumed that the electricity being recorded on the meter was in fact for my flat. However over the years nothing I tried could get the bill below £100 a month for a two bed flat. In Winter I would turn down the heating and immersion but to no avail. Then I spent a winter abroad and switched everything off when I left in November and back on when I returned in March. In that time the meter recorded NO day units and HUNDREDS of night units consumed.
I was able to get the site electrician to test where the off peak wiring went and it turned out that it was connected to the 3 bed flat next to mine! I had been paying most of next door's bill for 15 years and never realised it! Once that was swapped round my monthly bill dropped to £35.
It wasn't, to be honest, a case I followed assiduously. I may be missing some subtleties. But I find the smoke=fire argument a little worrying.
I am staggered at the self-degradation of these partisans.
One side will say 'Sturgeon has cost us independence' and other side will say 'Salmond has cost us independence.'
But it's a nice dream, given how nailed on they look.
Internally developed software is part of risk weighted assets. Risk weighted assets is used in the calculation of the ratios.
And the EU's rules on this - while you might disagree with them - are part of the Basel Capital Adequacy rules that have been adopted by pretty much everyone.
On a specialist tariff such as Octopus Agile dynamic pricing, it can be £2 per hour if there is a spike in the wholesale price.
I hope nobody expects me to have a geordie accent.
What if it was the Italian government who owed (say) €250bn to LCH, and LCH owed €250bn to the German government. Would the BoE really print pounds to convert into Euros to pay the €250bn to the Germans?
My guess is that this will come down to public opinion and Salmond whose reputation is on a par with Harvey Weinstein's will get no public sympathy and support only from those seeking a political advantage.
In actual fact, it's been LESS than four years, Mike.
We had a little PB gathering at the Lord Raglan near St Paul's London, on 26th May 2017.
Yes, I was abroad for a while, and now living in the boondocks, so I'm probably not the best person to organise a PB London pub session.
A few comments
- I think most people want a pub that's reasonably spacious, not too noisy, and well-ventilated. I think it helps to physically visit a pub and speak to the manager - Email or phone arrangements can suddenly turn a bit vague, in some pubs, at the most inconvenient time.
- A lot of pubs have a bunch of admin around booking places, paying deposits, minimum spend etc. I always tried to look for places that didn't overdo the admin - If you can find a good one, "organising" is not a big onerous task.
- I'm posting less but continuously lurking. I'm not "not posting" for any particular reason - simply that the site is so good and broad in its views - whenever I have a political thought, someone else has already had it and expressed it better than I could ..
Anyone fancy PB drinks in Cambridge?
Isn't that why the ECB wanted clearing in its jurisdiction before the UK fought that off?
You are on very shaky ground there, Roger.
Someone on our zoom bookclub yesterday evening said their husband (62, no health issues) had just gone online and booked his first jab.
So this morning I tried the same for me (60) and Mrs P (63).
Success! First jab for both of us booked for Monday at 9:30; 2nd jab also booked (for 17 May).
https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/coronavirus-vaccination/book-coronavirus-vaccination/
We each put in our NHS number, DoB, answered 'No' to the list of vulnerabilities, and hey presto - we were offered a range of nearby locations and dates.
It seems the online site is allowing cohort 7 to book now. (Good site too - very straightforward.)
Because the SNP aren't blood and soil nationalists, they'll have no problem with me a working class kid in Sheffield joining the SNP.
I do have to admit I do miss being a member of a political party.
My knocking up the voters achievements are legendary and helpful to the SNP.
https://twitter.com/MollyJongFast/status/1365141354960084994
EDIT: just tried it - "You are not currently eligible to book through this service"
It helps explain why Ian Blackford is seen as talent