Ed Miliband been unpersoned in Scotland over 2015?
Is he the first Asian leader of a major UK political party ?
Yes, if you don’t count Johnson (which for all my mischievous trolling, you probably shouldn’t). And I fully agree that is a good thing. And I have no doubt he will be the first of many.
But ‘ethnic minority’ and ‘Asian’ are not quite the same thing. All Asians in this country are members of an ethnic minority, but not all ethnic minorities are Asian.
The annoying thing about this claim he is the first EM leader of a political party is it distracts from the real achievement that you highlight above.
Thanks I said yesterday ethnic minority my mistake . His family have done very well from coming to Scotland a few generations ago. From hearing his acceptance speech, which was good.
Hardly your mistake, it’s Labour that were pushing that line.
If Jews are BAMEs does that mean you can convert to BAMEhood?
It is almost impossible to ‘convert’ to Judaism. It is not like Islam or Christianity. The only effective way to do it is to marry somebody who is Jewish.
That's not true. It is possible but difficult. My cousin's daughter did so to marry her Jewish boyfriend and we all then had a very jolly Irish-Jewish wedding near Harrogate a few years back.
Could someone please explain - briefly - why Salmond and Sturgeon fell out. I thought they were best mates. So why would she be - allegedly - trying to put him in prison?
There is a perception in the SNP that Nicola rather enjoys being first Minister and the trappings and salary that come with it and is reluctant to risk that by a second referendum that she thinks she might lose. I think @malcolmg is in that camp.
Salmond was perceived to be one of the stirrers of this and there was an apprehension that if he returned to Holyrood this might form a basis for challenging Nicola's leadership. She has been doing her best to keep him and his supporters (such as Cherry and MacAskill) out of Holyrood so this can't happen.
Plus she signed up big time to the #metoo bandwagon which meant she felt she had to be seen to take the allegations against Salmond very seriously.
David, she must in trouble now, it is falling to pieces around her. They can stall for a bit yet and use crown office etc but her goose is cooked now. She reputedly has a 5M property portfolio and both her and Uncle Fester have been coining it in for years so it cannot be cash. All down to ego and her doing a Margaret Thatcher, she actually believes she is the chosen one. Will be interesting to see who cracks first as the noose tightens. Evans has a gold plated pension and she may stay quiet if sent packing with a wheelbarrow pay off who knows. Interesting rumours of Salmond and others joining another independence party for list, that would really put the cat among the pigeons. This from Times does not help. New evidence that Nicola Sturgeon’s team leaked name of Alex Salmond accuser https://archive.vn/k7L3Q#selection-871.0-875.192
I think that we have known that for a while. The Times comment about the elephant in the room being ignored is also rather on point.
Not so sure about the goose cooking though and the closer she can run this to an election the more likely it is that the party will rally around her.
Via Lesley Evans, the gang keep together and Sturgeon being judge , jury and executioner is a laugh. Looks like Jim is not going to let her off the hook.
So the Sunak master plan seems to be, raise corporation tax now/over the next two years, then prior to 2024 cut it again?
Seems a bit weird to me? Do they honestly expect the economy to have fully recovered by 2024, in which case why not just leave the raise in place.
This seems very incoherent and not well designed, a bit like the "young people" housing plan that also applies to existing homeowners.
Of course he gets away with it because Labour's SC is invisible and somehow worse. Sunak is not good, he is just not as bad as Labour's offering.
Why do you want to exclude existing homeowners from a housing plan?
Are you aware how the housing market works in chains? So long as the plan is for owner occupiers only and not buying second homes there's no problem including existing owners . . . if they are moving.
Put it this way, lets say someone buys a home using the scheme in Newcastle. Then they get a job offer in Plymouth and they wish to relocate. The only way to do so is to sell their home in Newcastle and buy a new home in Plymouth . . . but that may entail requiring to use the scheme again in order to do so. Why should they be deliberately excluded?
If you exclude them from the scheme then potentially you're forcing them to rent somewhere in Plymouth which can only be afforded by them letting out their own home in Newcastle, so rather than 2 homes sold to owner occupiers you now have 2 homes let out by landlords. Do you consider that better?
It’s also worth noting that outsiders have always regarded Jewish people as an ethnic group. Even after conversion, Conversios in Spain were still subject to repression by the Inquisition, and one could not convert one’s way to safety under the Nazis. Debates about whether or not they actually are are somewhat otiose in that context.
In 1492 the Jews in Spain were given the choice between becoming Christians and leaving the country. If they decided to remain, they were Catholics, and it was as such that the Holy Inquisition took an interest in them, to make sure that they were not still practising their old religion. They were hardly "repressed", still less persecuted on the basis of their skin colour.
Disappointed there appears to be no plans to change pensioner taxation in the budget. After a year where billions of pounds have been spent to keep the over 70s alive, the moral case for tax rises is overhwelming
44% say the Scottish government failed over the Salmond inquiry, only 32% disagree
Only 24 consecutive polls with YES in the lead, things are really bad. That is a few more than the union gangs setup to supposedly kill it that have ended in collapse, down now to Bozo, Gove , Union Jack and Frosty as the dream team going to save the union, we are quaking in our boots.
To be fair its its not looking good with a previous first minister attacking the current one. Especially in the medium term with no chance of Johnson approving an official one. Plus many on the edge of supporting a yes vote might not think the country is ready now.
There is something like that in any such situation, as people will rely on some pretty precise detail with impressive recall, at the same time and even involving the same issues as something they claim to be pretty vague about. Granted, the human memory is a pretty bizarre thing, I can recall quotes from some movies I've seen once in 20 years, yet not what I had for breakfast 2 weeks, but it does always make the certainty of a lot of claims, in defence or attack, seem questionable.
Hague is a numpty, failed dog food salesman trying to pretend he is an economist. When will unionists realise using absolute clowns like that don't help their cause, just makes them look like the shifty slime balls they are.
No and she is not going to. There are 2 SNP muppets and an ex Green sock-puppet on the committee who will protect her regardless of the evidence. Fraser and Baillie are outgunned. The Lib Dems seem too stupid to contribute anything of note. At worst the head of our Civil Service will take early retirement on a generous package.
I'd like to think that this would cause both Sturgeon and her party real damage. It should. But it won't. People support the SNP because they want independence. Not because they are competent, honest, trustworthy or whatever. Its a very happy situation for a political party to be in.
Only the vague suspicion that Sturgeon is rather too fond of the trappings of office and doesn't want to risk a second referendum has caused murmurings in the ranks. A Sturgeon with a manifesto of a second referendum in the next Parliament will prevail over her domestic critics and all too probably over the opposing parties as well.
Is it even possible that the committee will get talked out until the Election?
Court challenge on something?
Very possible. The way things are going it is quite likely that Crown Office will demand changes to the report and who knows how long that might take?
A bit like the report on the desperate state of Scottish education that is on Swinney's desk but will not be published until after the election. These things happen in a one party state.
I think they happen in states regardless on the withholding as itd take time to force disclosure, it's just even harder when theres dominance. I dont even remember what report Boris was sat on, some intelligence report?
Something about how Putin's flying monkeys had interfered in the Brexit vote, or the Scottish independence referendum, or both. I don't recall the details either.
If you're expecting Boris Johnson to display intelligence, be prepared for a very long wait...
It seems weird, if not creepy, to keep referring to Michael Howard as “BAME”.
BLACK ASIAN and MINORITY ETHNIC. Jews are an ethnicity.
Labour still being blind to Jews really surprises and disappoints me. Labour trying to pass off "Scottish Labour" as a political party is just funny. After a succession of shite leaders up here who have been very firmly held in their box as a regional organisation with little authority, the idea that Sarwar is the big boss man is a joke.
BAME is a horrible term. I have not yet heard anyone self describe themselves that way.
The race relations industry has two separate strands - one is creating a narrative for non-BAME people on how they should think of/react to/behave around BAME people. The other is the conversation(s) inside and between minority communities.
BAME is a term designed to be used by non-BAME people.
Ed Miliband been unpersoned in Scotland over 2015?
Is he the first Asian leader of a major UK political party ?
Yes, if you don’t count Johnson (which for all my mischievous trolling, you probably shouldn’t). And I fully agree that is a good thing. And I have no doubt he will be the first of many.
But ‘ethnic minority’ and ‘Asian’ are not quite the same thing. All Asians in this country are members of an ethnic minority, but not all ethnic minorities are Asian.
The annoying thing about this claim he is the first EM leader of a political party is it distracts from the real achievement that you highlight above.
Thanks I said yesterday ethnic minority my mistake . His family have done very well from coming to Scotland a few generations ago. From hearing his acceptance speech, which was good.
Hardly your mistake, it’s Labour that were pushing that line.
If Jews are BAMEs does that mean you can convert to BAMEhood?
It is almost impossible to ‘convert’ to Judaism. It is not like Islam or Christianity. The only effective way to do it is to marry somebody who is Jewish.
The Jews are an ethno-religious group. It was only with the advent of proselytising religions like Christianity and Islam that something of a distinction between your people and your religion began to be drawn. Judaism is older than that and was (and is) the religion of the Jewish people, you can’t practice Judaism and not be part of that demos - but you can be part of the Jewish people and not practice Judaism (Disraeli and Einstein being two examples). This kind of thing was common when Judaism was founded - each people had their own religion (eg the Roman pantheon) but it is now something of an exception. The most common way of becoming Jewish is through matrilineal succession. Conversion is of course possible but not (in contrast to Christianity and Islam) encouraged nor universally acknowledged by all strands of the faith.
It’s also worth noting that outsiders have always regarded Jewish people as an ethnic group. Even after conversion, Conversios in Spain were still subject to repression by the Inquisition, and one could not convert one’s way to safety under the Nazis. Debates about whether or not they actually are are somewhat otiose in that context.
That's a very good summary.
I think people use "ethnic minority" as shorthand for "group subject to prejudice" - nobody really talks of French or American residents in Britain as an ethnic minority, but I've seen it used of Poles.
I knew a lady (born in Britain to Polish parents in the 50s, married to a Pole) who certainly saw it that way, but had apparently not felt she really fit in when attending a (then) BME work session.
I was once on a diversity course with a bunch of other (apparently) white people, where I was told that I wasn't Jewish enough for it to count.
Which, while sort-of true (only one half-Jewish grandmother), kind of felt like it missed the point of encouraging people to be more considerate of diversity.
That was one NUS issue - no idea whether it is still. They told the Jewish Student community that they could not have a 'liberation causus' (eg like a black section, women's section etc).
No and she is not going to. There are 2 SNP muppets and an ex Green sock-puppet on the committee who will protect her regardless of the evidence. Fraser and Baillie are outgunned. The Lib Dems seem too stupid to contribute anything of note. At worst the head of our Civil Service will take early retirement on a generous package.
I'd like to think that this would cause both Sturgeon and her party real damage. It should. But it won't. People support the SNP because they want independence. Not because they are competent, honest, trustworthy or whatever. Its a very happy situation for a political party to be in.
Only the vague suspicion that Sturgeon is rather too fond of the trappings of office and doesn't want to risk a second referendum has caused murmurings in the ranks. A Sturgeon with a manifesto of a second referendum in the next Parliament will prevail over her domestic critics and all too probably over the opposing parties as well.
Is it even possible that the committee will get talked out until the Election?
Court challenge on something?
Very possible. The way things are going it is quite likely that Crown Office will demand changes to the report and who knows how long that might take?
A bit like the report on the desperate state of Scottish education that is on Swinney's desk but will not be published until after the election. These things happen in a one party state.
Amazing that the party of (minority) government in a one party state is allowing an election to take place in just over two months. Notwithstanding the whiny noises emanating from Unionist parties that the election should be postponed due to Covid, I’m sure they’re ready to grasp this opportunity with a raft of exciting new policies, talented pols and a vision for Scotland within the UK.
Most of the posters complaining about a "one-party state" seem to be ignoring the fact that Wales is easily the country in the UK for which that moniker holds true.
Again, it is worth comparing the Salmond affair with the (much more serious in terms of outcome) Sergeant affair. Nothing has ever been published about the murky suicide of Carl Sergeant. Nothing ever will.
In a real one-party state, the same party is always in power. Transition of power happens internally, when the leader of the party changes. All important posts (like the Ombudsman) are chosen from the membership of the party.
That is Wales.
Curiously, very few posters (and certainly no English Labour posters) have been at all worried about the one-party state that Labour has created west of Clawdd Offa.
Yep, and the same applied to the Labour fiefdom of Scotland for decades. This was the icing on the irony cake over the last few days.
There is something like that in any such situation, as people will rely on some pretty precise detail with impressive recall, at the same time and even involving the same issues as something they claim to be pretty vague about. Granted, the human memory is a pretty bizarre thing, I can recall quotes from some movies I've seen once in 20 years, yet not what I had for breakfast 2 weeks, but it does always make the certainty of a lot of claims, in defence or attack, seem questionable.
Hague is a numpty, failed dog food salesman trying to pretend he is an economist. When will unionists realise using absolute clowns like that don't help their cause, just makes them look like the shifty slime balls they are.
Hague got a first class honours in PPE from Magdalen College, Oxford and an MBA from INSEAD. Just saying.
Do they have an interest to declare, or are they merely foolish ?
Max Johnson, 36, the youngest of Stanley’s six children, who was born to his second wife, is a businessman who lives in Hong Kong and is keen to promote tech and investment from China as well as green issues. The ambiguity in the relationship, he said, was “causing hesitation, which means people don’t necessarily invest”. Regarding human rights as “the only issue that matters” was a “militant, unhinged, crackpot view”.
The two men are bound by a belief that China is too big to ignore, and have used diplomatic channels to advance co-operation between London and Beijing in recent years. They are taking that message public to counter a growing hawkishness in British public life towards a country they love.
Thanks for answering. I am very far from a Sinophobe, but their attitude to the Xi regime is remarkably complacent.
Max Johnson is a bit of a tool, not only did he work for Goldman Sachs but today he says
Asked about human rights abuses, he is candid. “Hong Kong,” he says, “is part of China ... I think that for people has been hard to understand and has provoked a sort of emotional reaction, and may even hark back to a sort of regret that Hong Kong was handed back.”
He adopts a similar tone on the Uighurs. He “can’t say” whether China hawks are right or wrong about what is going on.
One step up from an outright denial. I guess... But yes, a tool.
It’s also worth noting that outsiders have always regarded Jewish people as an ethnic group. Even after conversion, Conversios in Spain were still subject to repression by the Inquisition, and one could not convert one’s way to safety under the Nazis. Debates about whether or not they actually are are somewhat otiose in that context.
In 1492 the Jews in Spain were given the choice between becoming Christians and leaving the country. If they decided to remain, they were Catholics, and it was as such that the Holy Inquisition took an interest in them, to make sure that they were not still practising their old religion. They were hardly "repressed", still less persecuted on the basis of their skin colour.
Nothing to do with skin colour. They were repressed and persecuted on the basis of their membership of an ethno-religious group. It’s a sad fact that we Europeans have managed to find different reasons for anti-Semitism throughout the ages and many, if not most, have had little to do with religious observance. As I said, conversion in Medieval and Early Modern Europe garnered only limited relief and, in 20th Century Europe, none whatsoever.
Ed Miliband been unpersoned in Scotland over 2015?
Is he the first Asian leader of a major UK political party ?
Yes, if you don’t count Johnson (which for all my mischievous trolling, you probably shouldn’t). And I fully agree that is a good thing. And I have no doubt he will be the first of many.
But ‘ethnic minority’ and ‘Asian’ are not quite the same thing. All Asians in this country are members of an ethnic minority, but not all ethnic minorities are Asian.
The annoying thing about this claim he is the first EM leader of a political party is it distracts from the real achievement that you highlight above.
Thanks I said yesterday ethnic minority my mistake . His family have done very well from coming to Scotland a few generations ago. From hearing his acceptance speech, which was good.
Hardly your mistake, it’s Labour that were pushing that line.
If Jews are BAMEs does that mean you can convert to BAMEhood?
It is almost impossible to ‘convert’ to Judaism. It is not like Islam or Christianity. The only effective way to do it is to marry somebody who is Jewish.
That's not true. It is possible but difficult. My cousin's daughter did so to marry her Jewish boyfriend and we all then had a very jolly Irish-Jewish wedding near Harrogate a few years back.
Could someone please explain - briefly - why Salmond and Sturgeon fell out. I thought they were best mates. So why would she be - allegedly - trying to put him in prison?
There is a perception in the SNP that Nicola rather enjoys being first Minister and the trappings and salary that come with it and is reluctant to risk that by a second referendum that she thinks she might lose. I think @malcolmg is in that camp.
Salmond was perceived to be one of the stirrers of this and there was an apprehension that if he returned to Holyrood this might form a basis for challenging Nicola's leadership. She has been doing her best to keep him and his supporters (such as Cherry and MacAskill) out of Holyrood so this can't happen.
Plus she signed up big time to the #metoo bandwagon which meant she felt she had to be seen to take the allegations against Salmond very seriously.
David, she must in trouble now, it is falling to pieces around her. They can stall for a bit yet and use crown office etc but her goose is cooked now. She reputedly has a 5M property portfolio and both her and Uncle Fester have been coining it in for years so it cannot be cash. All down to ego and her doing a Margaret Thatcher, she actually believes she is the chosen one. Will be interesting to see who cracks first as the noose tightens. Evans has a gold plated pension and she may stay quiet if sent packing with a wheelbarrow pay off who knows. Interesting rumours of Salmond and others joining another independence party for list, that would really put the cat among the pigeons. This from Times does not help. New evidence that Nicola Sturgeon’s team leaked name of Alex Salmond accuser https://archive.vn/k7L3Q#selection-871.0-875.192
Operation Save Nicola underway:
SNP sources predict Leslie Evans, the head of Scotland’s civil service, will be ousted over her role in the affair. The SNP chief executive, Peter Murrell, who is also Sturgeon’s husband, and her chief of staff, Liz Lloyd, are also tipped to move.
If they all fall on their sword it just proves it totally, I do not see her surviving long. She may delay and obfuscate till parliament closes but her days are numbered. There are others that should be joining the above list as well.
It’s also worth noting that outsiders have always regarded Jewish people as an ethnic group. Even after conversion, Conversios in Spain were still subject to repression by the Inquisition, and one could not convert one’s way to safety under the Nazis. Debates about whether or not they actually are are somewhat otiose in that context.
In 1492 the Jews in Spain were given the choice between becoming Christians and leaving the country. If they decided to remain, they were Catholics, and it was as such that the Holy Inquisition took an interest in them, to make sure that they were not still practising their old religion. They were hardly "repressed", still less persecuted on the basis of their skin colour.
So they faced particular negative attention despite now being catholics, on the basis of their ethnicity as (former) jews? And they faced that choice in the first place because of their ethnoreligious position?
I'm quite happy to accept that Jews are an ethnic (minority) group. However, there's a bit of rewriting of history going on here today. I don't recall anybody ever referring to Ed Miliband or Michael Howard as party leaders of a minority ethnic background, despite the hints of anti-semitism in some commentary on both of them. Until today, on here.
Well you are wrong, people did mention it certainly of Ed M. Sadly it's also how I discovered by father was a racist based on how he referred to Ed M.
It's also completely immaterial whether people have been consistent as to whether something is a fact. The SLab position is not correct. I don't think there's anything sinister about that in the slightest, but whatever the motivation of people pointing it out that you wish to critique, the point being made is still correct.
It's also a factor that things have changed in perceptions of race and the conversations about it - as with related issues such as feminism.
For example, a number of the speeches/articles about Thatcher would be viewed as instant-resignation-grade misogyny, today.
The Labour position on it is complicated by the attempted mapping of race onto politics - in this view all member of "BAME" are the downtrodden, automatically. The evident problems with this view of the world, such as existence of Rishi Sunak, leads to comedy such as the recent Guardian article.
No and she is not going to. There are 2 SNP muppets and an ex Green sock-puppet on the committee who will protect her regardless of the evidence. Fraser and Baillie are outgunned. The Lib Dems seem too stupid to contribute anything of note. At worst the head of our Civil Service will take early retirement on a generous package.
I'd like to think that this would cause both Sturgeon and her party real damage. It should. But it won't. People support the SNP because they want independence. Not because they are competent, honest, trustworthy or whatever. Its a very happy situation for a political party to be in.
Only the vague suspicion that Sturgeon is rather too fond of the trappings of office and doesn't want to risk a second referendum has caused murmurings in the ranks. A Sturgeon with a manifesto of a second referendum in the next Parliament will prevail over her domestic critics and all too probably over the opposing parties as well.
Is it even possible that the committee will get talked out until the Election?
Court challenge on something?
Very possible. The way things are going it is quite likely that Crown Office will demand changes to the report and who knows how long that might take?
A bit like the report on the desperate state of Scottish education that is on Swinney's desk but will not be published until after the election. These things happen in a one party state.
I think they happen in states regardless on the withholding as itd take time to force disclosure, it's just even harder when theres dominance. I dont even remember what report Boris was sat on, some intelligence report?
Something about how Putin's flying monkeys had interfered in the Brexit vote, or the Scottish independence referendum, or both. I don't recall the details either.
If you're expecting Boris Johnson to display intelligence, be prepared for a very long wait...
And still it works.
Remarkable.
Johnson is, the pandemic notwithstanding, a lucky general. Quite a lot of us here keep expecting him to fall flat on his face and stay down, but he still, as with the virus, seems to bounce up. The problem for some at least of us is that when the inevitable political catastrophe hits him, we'll all suffer.
It seems weird, if not creepy, to keep referring to Michael Howard as “BAME”.
BLACK ASIAN and MINORITY ETHNIC. Jews are an ethnicity.
Labour still being blind to Jews really surprises and disappoints me. Labour trying to pass off "Scottish Labour" as a political party is just funny. After a succession of shite leaders up here who have been very firmly held in their box as a regional organisation with little authority, the idea that Sarwar is the big boss man is a joke.
Yes, but so are the Welsh. Was Neil Kinnock BAME?
Anyway, the point was that I don’t think Michael Howard went about advertising his Jewish background and it makes me uncomfortable to think of someone out there with a checklist putting him in the “Jew” box.
Ed Miliband been unpersoned in Scotland over 2015?
Is he the first Asian leader of a major UK political party ?
Yes, if you don’t count Johnson (which for all my mischievous trolling, you probably shouldn’t). And I fully agree that is a good thing. And I have no doubt he will be the first of many.
But ‘ethnic minority’ and ‘Asian’ are not quite the same thing. All Asians in this country are members of an ethnic minority, but not all ethnic minorities are Asian.
The annoying thing about this claim he is the first EM leader of a political party is it distracts from the real achievement that you highlight above.
Thanks I said yesterday ethnic minority my mistake . His family have done very well from coming to Scotland a few generations ago. From hearing his acceptance speech, which was good.
Hardly your mistake, it’s Labour that were pushing that line.
If Jews are BAMEs does that mean you can convert to BAMEhood?
It is almost impossible to ‘convert’ to Judaism. It is not like Islam or Christianity. The only effective way to do it is to marry somebody who is Jewish.
That's not true. It is possible but difficult. My cousin's daughter did so to marry her Jewish boyfriend and we all then had a very jolly Irish-Jewish wedding near Harrogate a few years back.
Could someone please explain - briefly - why Salmond and Sturgeon fell out. I thought they were best mates. So why would she be - allegedly - trying to put him in prison?
The former "first daughter" Ivanka Trump was a high-profile convert, of course. She might yet become the first Jewish president of the United States if she stands in 2024.
I think can help explain the depth of Salmond's fury, having listened to the 6hr testimony.
One issue is over harrassment policies.
The former harrassment policy had been introduced by Mr Salmond, via what he regarded as the proper process, consultation etc, back soon after the SNP became the Government (2007 ?). Can't recall all the details so I will not attempt to rehearse it here.
After #Metoo NS very rapidly introduced a modified policy, which brought complaints about Former Ministers in scope ie historic complaints. That new policy was not subject to consultations, done via legislation, Salmond was not consulted etc etc.
Very rapidly he was the subject of a number of historic complaints, up to attempted rape. And these appeared very suddenly.
Subsequently it went into an official ScotGov investigation, which the Civil Court found to have been unlawfully run. Not sure of the reasons given by the Court but this is part of the controversy around withheld evidence, forgotten about meetings etc. Salmond won that case (was it a Judicial Review?) and 500k+ of his costs (=85% which is a punitive level).
After that started but before it reached a verdict, a parallel police Criminal investigation started, which raised the possibility that it would overtake and rub out the Civil Court Action against the other case (to - allegedly - Sturgeon's advantage). There are allegations about the way this police investigation was generated.
The Committee is investigating how the Scottish Gov handled these processes and the investigation, and seems to have been set up strangely (one afternoon a week, no Counsel), and evidence that seems relevant has been scoped out procedurally so they cannot consider it etc.
So it is all murky.
Without reaching any judgement, I think that Salmond faced up to years in prison would probably explain his determination / resolution. He feels he has been mugged via procedural politics with the possibility of his life being destroyed.
As for Sturgeon, various reasons have been suggested above. I have no comment in this post.
Only one bit wrong Matt, the complaints were manufactured , that is the evidence they are hiding , if the names came out it would be obvious. They even said as much in their whatsapp meetings whilst planning the stories supposedly but that too is being hidden. Amazing a government minister heading the Crown office can stop parliament seeing the evidence. Banana republic stuff.
Ed Miliband been unpersoned in Scotland over 2015?
Is he the first Asian leader of a major UK political party ?
Yes, if you don’t count Johnson (which for all my mischievous trolling, you probably shouldn’t). And I fully agree that is a good thing. And I have no doubt he will be the first of many.
But ‘ethnic minority’ and ‘Asian’ are not quite the same thing. All Asians in this country are members of an ethnic minority, but not all ethnic minorities are Asian.
The annoying thing about this claim he is the first EM leader of a political party is it distracts from the real achievement that you highlight above.
Thanks I said yesterday ethnic minority my mistake . His family have done very well from coming to Scotland a few generations ago. From hearing his acceptance speech, which was good.
Hardly your mistake, it’s Labour that were pushing that line.
If Jews are BAMEs does that mean you can convert to BAMEhood?
It is almost impossible to ‘convert’ to Judaism. It is not like Islam or Christianity. The only effective way to do it is to marry somebody who is Jewish.
That's not true. It is possible but difficult. My cousin's daughter did so to marry her Jewish boyfriend and we all then had a very jolly Irish-Jewish wedding near Harrogate a few years back.
Could someone please explain - briefly - why Salmond and Sturgeon fell out. I thought they were best mates. So why would she be - allegedly - trying to put him in prison?
Sturgeon was Salmond's protege but outgrew him. Salmond wouldn't let go. He disappointed her by joining RT.
He is allegedly handy. Sturgeon used the #metoo movement to retrospectively have him investigated. Government, Civil Service and Crown Office all became involved.
Tories and Labour are trying to make capital out of it but it's actually a family tragedy - a messy divorce. Salmond and Sturgeon are both hurt and damaged by it but Sturgeon won't resign.
That's my take on it and I have £100 at stake that she won't resign this year.
EDIT: Massie in this week's Spectator has a very good take on it
LOL, cowardy custard allegedly, found innocent on all charges and not a previous complaint in 30 years. Based on diehard unionist Massie as well, usual stuff from Scotch experts on here.
I thought it was not proven on one is that the same as not guilty ?
I think it was one withdrawn, one not proven, and 11 not guilty.
No and she is not going to. There are 2 SNP muppets and an ex Green sock-puppet on the committee who will protect her regardless of the evidence. Fraser and Baillie are outgunned. The Lib Dems seem too stupid to contribute anything of note. At worst the head of our Civil Service will take early retirement on a generous package.
I'd like to think that this would cause both Sturgeon and her party real damage. It should. But it won't. People support the SNP because they want independence. Not because they are competent, honest, trustworthy or whatever. Its a very happy situation for a political party to be in.
Only the vague suspicion that Sturgeon is rather too fond of the trappings of office and doesn't want to risk a second referendum has caused murmurings in the ranks. A Sturgeon with a manifesto of a second referendum in the next Parliament will prevail over her domestic critics and all too probably over the opposing parties as well.
Is it even possible that the committee will get talked out until the Election?
Court challenge on something?
Very possible. The way things are going it is quite likely that Crown Office will demand changes to the report and who knows how long that might take?
A bit like the report on the desperate state of Scottish education that is on Swinney's desk but will not be published until after the election. These things happen in a one party state.
Amazing that the party of (minority) government in a one party state is allowing an election to take place in just over two months. Notwithstanding the whiny noises emanating from Unionist parties that the election should be postponed due to Covid, I’m sure they’re ready to grasp this opportunity with a raft of exciting new policies, talented pols and a vision for Scotland within the UK.
Most of the posters complaining about a "one-party state" seem to be ignoring the fact that Wales is easily the country in the UK for which that moniker holds true.
Again, it is worth comparing the Salmond affair with the (much more serious in terms of outcome) Sergeant affair. Nothing has ever been published about the murky suicide of Carl Sergeant. Nothing ever will.
In a real one-party state, the same party is always in power. Transition of power happens internally, when the leader of the party changes. All important posts (like the Ombudsman) are chosen from the membership of the party.
That is Wales.
Curiously, very few posters (and certainly no English Labour posters) have been at all worried about the one-party state that Labour has created west of Clawdd Offa.
Yep, and the same applied to the Labour fiefdom of Scotland for decades. This was the icing on the irony cake over the last few days.
There is something like that in any such situation, as people will rely on some pretty precise detail with impressive recall, at the same time and even involving the same issues as something they claim to be pretty vague about. Granted, the human memory is a pretty bizarre thing, I can recall quotes from some movies I've seen once in 20 years, yet not what I had for breakfast 2 weeks, but it does always make the certainty of a lot of claims, in defence or attack, seem questionable.
Hague is a numpty, failed dog food salesman trying to pretend he is an economist. When will unionists realise using absolute clowns like that don't help their cause, just makes them look like the shifty slime balls they are.
Hague got a first class honours in PPE from Magdalen College, Oxford and an MBA from INSEAD. Just saying.
I wonder if he’ll threaten to close down his business in Scotland and put his employees out of work when the next referendum comes around? Just saying.
Ed Miliband been unpersoned in Scotland over 2015?
Is he the first Asian leader of a major UK political party ?
Yes, if you don’t count Johnson (which for all my mischievous trolling, you probably shouldn’t). And I fully agree that is a good thing. And I have no doubt he will be the first of many.
But ‘ethnic minority’ and ‘Asian’ are not quite the same thing. All Asians in this country are members of an ethnic minority, but not all ethnic minorities are Asian.
The annoying thing about this claim he is the first EM leader of a political party is it distracts from the real achievement that you highlight above.
Thanks I said yesterday ethnic minority my mistake . His family have done very well from coming to Scotland a few generations ago. From hearing his acceptance speech, which was good.
Hardly your mistake, it’s Labour that were pushing that line.
If Jews are BAMEs does that mean you can convert to BAMEhood?
It is almost impossible to ‘convert’ to Judaism. It is not like Islam or Christianity. The only effective way to do it is to marry somebody who is Jewish.
That's not true. It is possible but difficult. My cousin's daughter did so to marry her Jewish boyfriend and we all then had a very jolly Irish-Jewish wedding near Harrogate a few years back.
Could someone please explain - briefly - why Salmond and Sturgeon fell out. I thought they were best mates. So why would she be - allegedly - trying to put him in prison?
There is a perception in the SNP that Nicola rather enjoys being first Minister and the trappings and salary that come with it and is reluctant to risk that by a second referendum that she thinks she might lose. I think @malcolmg is in that camp.
Salmond was perceived to be one of the stirrers of this and there was an apprehension that if he returned to Holyrood this might form a basis for challenging Nicola's leadership. She has been doing her best to keep him and his supporters (such as Cherry and MacAskill) out of Holyrood so this can't happen.
Plus she signed up big time to the #metoo bandwagon which meant she felt she had to be seen to take the allegations against Salmond very seriously.
David, she must in trouble now, it is falling to pieces around her. They can stall for a bit yet and use crown office etc but her goose is cooked now. She reputedly has a 5M property portfolio and both her and Uncle Fester have been coining it in for years so it cannot be cash. All down to ego and her doing a Margaret Thatcher, she actually believes she is the chosen one. Will be interesting to see who cracks first as the noose tightens. Evans has a gold plated pension and she may stay quiet if sent packing with a wheelbarrow pay off who knows. Interesting rumours of Salmond and others joining another independence party for list, that would really put the cat among the pigeons. This from Times does not help. New evidence that Nicola Sturgeon’s team leaked name of Alex Salmond accuser https://archive.vn/k7L3Q#selection-871.0-875.192
I think that we have known that for a while. The Times comment about the elephant in the room being ignored is also rather on point.
Not so sure about the goose cooking though and the closer she can run this to an election the more likely it is that the party will rally around her.
Yes agree that is the only hope they have now , stall till parliament closes and brazen it out. Looks like she will kill the party before going. Going to be losing lots of votes though, people will not vote and go for some other party on list. I for one will not vote for SNP if she is still there and will be someone else on list. Lots of people whilst desperate for independence have morals and principles.
There is something like that in any such situation, as people will rely on some pretty precise detail with impressive recall, at the same time and even involving the same issues as something they claim to be pretty vague about. Granted, the human memory is a pretty bizarre thing, I can recall quotes from some movies I've seen once in 20 years, yet not what I had for breakfast 2 weeks, but it does always make the certainty of a lot of claims, in defence or attack, seem questionable.
Hague is a numpty, failed dog food salesman trying to pretend he is an economist. When will unionists realise using absolute clowns like that don't help their cause, just makes them look like the shifty slime balls they are.
Hague got a first class honours in PPE from Magdalen College, Oxford and an MBA from INSEAD. Just saying.
There is something like that in any such situation, as people will rely on some pretty precise detail with impressive recall, at the same time and even involving the same issues as something they claim to be pretty vague about. Granted, the human memory is a pretty bizarre thing, I can recall quotes from some movies I've seen once in 20 years, yet not what I had for breakfast 2 weeks, but it does always make the certainty of a lot of claims, in defence or attack, seem questionable.
Hague is a numpty, failed dog food salesman trying to pretend he is an economist. When will unionists realise using absolute clowns like that don't help their cause, just makes them look like the shifty slime balls they are.
Hague got a first class honours in PPE from Magdalen College, Oxford and an MBA from INSEAD. Just saying.
I wonder if he’ll threaten to close down his business in Scotland and put his employees out of work when the next referendum comes around? Just saying.
No and she is not going to. There are 2 SNP muppets and an ex Green sock-puppet on the committee who will protect her regardless of the evidence. Fraser and Baillie are outgunned. The Lib Dems seem too stupid to contribute anything of note. At worst the head of our Civil Service will take early retirement on a generous package.
I'd like to think that this would cause both Sturgeon and her party real damage. It should. But it won't. People support the SNP because they want independence. Not because they are competent, honest, trustworthy or whatever. Its a very happy situation for a political party to be in.
Only the vague suspicion that Sturgeon is rather too fond of the trappings of office and doesn't want to risk a second referendum has caused murmurings in the ranks. A Sturgeon with a manifesto of a second referendum in the next Parliament will prevail over her domestic critics and all too probably over the opposing parties as well.
Is it even possible that the committee will get talked out until the Election?
Court challenge on something?
Very possible. The way things are going it is quite likely that Crown Office will demand changes to the report and who knows how long that might take?
A bit like the report on the desperate state of Scottish education that is on Swinney's desk but will not be published until after the election. These things happen in a one party state.
Amazing that the party of (minority) government in a one party state is allowing an election to take place in just over two months. Notwithstanding the whiny noises emanating from Unionist parties that the election should be postponed due to Covid, I’m sure they’re ready to grasp this opportunity with a raft of exciting new policies, talented pols and a vision for Scotland within the UK.
Most of the posters complaining about a "one-party state" seem to be ignoring the fact that Wales is easily the country in the UK for which that moniker holds true.
Again, it is worth comparing the Salmond affair with the (much more serious in terms of outcome) Sergeant affair. Nothing has ever been published about the murky suicide of Carl Sergeant. Nothing ever will.
In a real one-party state, the same party is always in power. Transition of power happens internally, when the leader of the party changes. All important posts (like the Ombudsman) are chosen from the membership of the party.
That is Wales.
Curiously, very few posters (and certainly no English Labour posters) have been at all worried about the one-party state that Labour has created west of Clawdd Offa.
Yep, and the same applied to the Labour fiefdom of Scotland for decades. This was the icing on the irony cake over the last few days.
I'm quite happy to accept that Jews are an ethnic (minority) group. However, there's a bit of rewriting of history going on here today. I don't recall anybody ever referring to Ed Miliband or Michael Howard as party leaders of a minority ethnic background, despite the hints of anti-semitism in some commentary on both of them. Until today, on here.
Well you are wrong, people did mention it certainly of Ed M. Sadly it's also how I discovered by father was a racist based on how he referred to Ed M.
It's also completely immaterial whether people have been consistent as to whether something is a fact. The SLab position is not correct. I don't think there's anything sinister about that in the slightest, but whatever the motivation of people pointing it out that you wish to critique, the point being made is still correct.
Interesting point that imo can be overthought. Jewish - the race not the religion - is a minority ethnic grouping in the UK. That's a fact. But BAME has a black/brown/asian vibe for me, regardless of what the acronym stands for. BAME is not white. So, you ask me if a Jewish person here is a member of an ethnic minority, I'll say yes. But ask me if Ed Miliband is BAME and I'll instinctively say no. It feels wrong to say that.
I'm quite happy to accept that Jews are an ethnic (minority) group. However, there's a bit of rewriting of history going on here today. I don't recall anybody ever referring to Ed Miliband or Michael Howard as party leaders of a minority ethnic background, despite the hints of anti-semitism in some commentary on both of them. Until today, on here.
It was Labour who used anti-semitic slurs against Michael Howard.
"Both Mr Howard and Mr Letwin are Jewish and according to their faith pigs are unclean.
The other poster featured Mr Howard swinging a pocket watch on a chain and the strapline, "I can spend the same money twice."
The pose has been likened to that of Jewish pickpocket Fagin from Charles Dickens' Oliver and money lender Shylock from Shakespeare's The Merchant of Venice.
Jewish Labour MPs said they did not believe the posters were deliberately anti-semitic but found them offensive nonetheless."
There is something like that in any such situation, as people will rely on some pretty precise detail with impressive recall, at the same time and even involving the same issues as something they claim to be pretty vague about. Granted, the human memory is a pretty bizarre thing, I can recall quotes from some movies I've seen once in 20 years, yet not what I had for breakfast 2 weeks, but it does always make the certainty of a lot of claims, in defence or attack, seem questionable.
Hague is a numpty, failed dog food salesman trying to pretend he is an economist. When will unionists realise using absolute clowns like that don't help their cause, just makes them look like the shifty slime balls they are.
Hague got a first class honours in PPE from Magdalen College, Oxford and an MBA from INSEAD. Just saying.
There is something like that in any such situation, as people will rely on some pretty precise detail with impressive recall, at the same time and even involving the same issues as something they claim to be pretty vague about. Granted, the human memory is a pretty bizarre thing, I can recall quotes from some movies I've seen once in 20 years, yet not what I had for breakfast 2 weeks, but it does always make the certainty of a lot of claims, in defence or attack, seem questionable.
Hague is a numpty, failed dog food salesman trying to pretend he is an economist. When will unionists realise using absolute clowns like that don't help their cause, just makes them look like the shifty slime balls they are.
Hague got a first class honours in PPE from Magdalen College, Oxford and an MBA from INSEAD. Just saying.
Wrong Hague David, dog food salesman should have been a clue?
There is something like that in any such situation, as people will rely on some pretty precise detail with impressive recall, at the same time and even involving the same issues as something they claim to be pretty vague about. Granted, the human memory is a pretty bizarre thing, I can recall quotes from some movies I've seen once in 20 years, yet not what I had for breakfast 2 weeks, but it does always make the certainty of a lot of claims, in defence or attack, seem questionable.
Hague is a numpty, failed dog food salesman trying to pretend he is an economist. When will unionists realise using absolute clowns like that don't help their cause, just makes them look like the shifty slime balls they are.
Hague got a first class honours in PPE from Magdalen College, Oxford and an MBA from INSEAD. Just saying.
I wonder if he’ll threaten to close down his business in Scotland and put his employees out of work when the next referendum comes around? Just saying.
Perhaps if you could tell him what currency he'd be trading in, might put his mind at rest? Just saying.
Ed Miliband been unpersoned in Scotland over 2015?
Is he the first Asian leader of a major UK political party ?
Yes, if you don’t count Johnson (which for all my mischievous trolling, you probably shouldn’t). And I fully agree that is a good thing. And I have no doubt he will be the first of many.
But ‘ethnic minority’ and ‘Asian’ are not quite the same thing. All Asians in this country are members of an ethnic minority, but not all ethnic minorities are Asian.
The annoying thing about this claim he is the first EM leader of a political party is it distracts from the real achievement that you highlight above.
Thanks I said yesterday ethnic minority my mistake . His family have done very well from coming to Scotland a few generations ago. From hearing his acceptance speech, which was good.
Hardly your mistake, it’s Labour that were pushing that line.
If Jews are BAMEs does that mean you can convert to BAMEhood?
It is almost impossible to ‘convert’ to Judaism. It is not like Islam or Christianity. The only effective way to do it is to marry somebody who is Jewish.
That's not true. It is possible but difficult. My cousin's daughter did so to marry her Jewish boyfriend and we all then had a very jolly Irish-Jewish wedding near Harrogate a few years back.
Could someone please explain - briefly - why Salmond and Sturgeon fell out. I thought they were best mates. So why would she be - allegedly - trying to put him in prison?
Sturgeon was Salmond's protege but outgrew him. Salmond wouldn't let go. He disappointed her by joining RT.
He is allegedly handy. Sturgeon used the #metoo movement to retrospectively have him investigated. Government, Civil Service and Crown Office all became involved.
Tories and Labour are trying to make capital out of it but it's actually a family tragedy - a messy divorce. Salmond and Sturgeon are both hurt and damaged by it but Sturgeon won't resign.
That's my take on it and I have £100 at stake that she won't resign this year.
EDIT: Massie in this week's Spectator has a very good take on it
LOL, cowardy custard allegedly, found innocent on all charges and not a previous complaint in 30 years. Based on diehard unionist Massie as well, usual stuff from Scotch experts on here.
I thought it was not proven on one is that the same as not guilty ?
I think it was one withdrawn, one not proven, and 11 not guilty.
@Yorkcity Not proven is exactly the same as not guilty
Ed Miliband been unpersoned in Scotland over 2015?
Is he the first Asian leader of a major UK political party ?
Yes, if you don’t count Johnson (which for all my mischievous trolling, you probably shouldn’t). And I fully agree that is a good thing. And I have no doubt he will be the first of many.
But ‘ethnic minority’ and ‘Asian’ are not quite the same thing. All Asians in this country are members of an ethnic minority, but not all ethnic minorities are Asian.
The annoying thing about this claim he is the first EM leader of a political party is it distracts from the real achievement that you highlight above.
Thanks I said yesterday ethnic minority my mistake . His family have done very well from coming to Scotland a few generations ago. From hearing his acceptance speech, which was good.
Hardly your mistake, it’s Labour that were pushing that line.
If Jews are BAMEs does that mean you can convert to BAMEhood?
It is almost impossible to ‘convert’ to Judaism. It is not like Islam or Christianity. The only effective way to do it is to marry somebody who is Jewish.
That's not true. It is possible but difficult. My cousin's daughter did so to marry her Jewish boyfriend and we all then had a very jolly Irish-Jewish wedding near Harrogate a few years back.
Could someone please explain - briefly - why Salmond and Sturgeon fell out. I thought they were best mates. So why would she be - allegedly - trying to put him in prison?
The former "first daughter" Ivanka Trump was a high-profile convert, of course. She might yet become the first Jewish president of the United States if she stands in 2024.
I think can help explain the depth of Salmond's fury, having listened to the 6hr testimony.
One issue is over harrassment policies.
The former harrassment policy had been introduced by Mr Salmond, via what he regarded as the proper process, consultation etc, back soon after the SNP became the Government (2007 ?). Can't recall all the details so I will not attempt to rehearse it here.
After #Metoo NS very rapidly introduced a modified policy, which brought complaints about Former Ministers in scope ie historic complaints. That new policy was not subject to consultations, done via legislation, Salmond was not consulted etc etc.
Very rapidly he was the subject of a number of historic complaints, up to attempted rape. And these appeared very suddenly.
Subsequently it went into an official ScotGov investigation, which the Civil Court found to have been unlawfully run. Not sure of the reasons given by the Court but this is part of the controversy around withheld evidence, forgotten about meetings etc. Salmond won that case (was it a Judicial Review?) and 500k+ of his costs (=85% which is a punitive level).
After that started but before it reached a verdict, a parallel police Criminal investigation started, which raised the possibility that it would overtake and rub out the Civil Court Action against the other case (to - allegedly - Sturgeon's advantage). There are allegations about the way this police investigation was generated.
The Committee is investigating how the Scottish Gov handled these processes and the investigation, and seems to have been set up strangely (one afternoon a week, no Counsel), and evidence that seems relevant has been scoped out procedurally so they cannot consider it etc.
So it is all murky.
Without reaching any judgement, I think that Salmond faced up to years in prison would probably explain his determination / resolution. He feels he has been mugged via procedural politics with the possibility of his life being destroyed.
As for Sturgeon, various reasons have been suggested above. I have no comment in this post.
Only one bit wrong Matt, the complaints were manufactured , that is the evidence they are hiding , if the names came out it would be obvious. They even said as much in their whatsapp meetings whilst planning the stories supposedly but that too is being hidden. Amazing a government minister heading the Crown office can stop parliament seeing the evidence. Banana republic stuff.
Are you suggesting that the complaintants committed organised perjury?
There is something like that in any such situation, as people will rely on some pretty precise detail with impressive recall, at the same time and even involving the same issues as something they claim to be pretty vague about. Granted, the human memory is a pretty bizarre thing, I can recall quotes from some movies I've seen once in 20 years, yet not what I had for breakfast 2 weeks, but it does always make the certainty of a lot of claims, in defence or attack, seem questionable.
Hague is a numpty, failed dog food salesman trying to pretend he is an economist. When will unionists realise using absolute clowns like that don't help their cause, just makes them look like the shifty slime balls they are.
Hague got a first class honours in PPE from Magdalen College, Oxford and an MBA from INSEAD. Just saying.
I wonder if he’ll threaten to close down his business in Scotland and put his employees out of work when the next referendum comes around? Just saying.
There is something like that in any such situation, as people will rely on some pretty precise detail with impressive recall, at the same time and even involving the same issues as something they claim to be pretty vague about. Granted, the human memory is a pretty bizarre thing, I can recall quotes from some movies I've seen once in 20 years, yet not what I had for breakfast 2 weeks, but it does always make the certainty of a lot of claims, in defence or attack, seem questionable.
Hague is a numpty, failed dog food salesman trying to pretend he is an economist. When will unionists realise using absolute clowns like that don't help their cause, just makes them look like the shifty slime balls they are.
Hague got a first class honours in PPE from Magdalen College, Oxford and an MBA from INSEAD. Just saying.
I wonder if he’ll threaten to close down his business in Scotland and put his employees out of work when the next referendum comes around? Just saying.
Perhaps if you could tell him what currency he'd be trading in, might put his mind at rest? Just saying.
As you well know it would be whatever currency an independent Scotland chose to use, Pound, Dollar ,whatever. Exactly the same as every other independent country in the world does. Only colonies are not allowed to have their own currency.
I'm quite happy to accept that Jews are an ethnic (minority) group. However, there's a bit of rewriting of history going on here today. I don't recall anybody ever referring to Ed Miliband or Michael Howard as party leaders of a minority ethnic background, despite the hints of anti-semitism in some commentary on both of them. Until today, on here.
Well you are wrong, people did mention it certainly of Ed M. Sadly it's also how I discovered by father was a racist based on how he referred to Ed M.
It's also completely immaterial whether people have been consistent as to whether something is a fact. The SLab position is not correct. I don't think there's anything sinister about that in the slightest, but whatever the motivation of people pointing it out that you wish to critique, the point being made is still correct.
Interesting point that imo can be overthought. Jewish - the race not the religion - is a minority ethnic grouping in the UK. That's a fact. But BAME has a black/brown/asian vibe for me, regardless of what the acronym stands for. BAME is not white. So, you ask me if a Jewish person here is a member of an ethnic minority, I'll say yes. But ask me if Ed Miliband is BAME and I'll instinctively say no. It feels wrong to say that.
So much of this comes from lazy societal constructs. None of it is logical or consistent and trying to say things like “well x is an ethnic group so why shouldn’t y be” misses the point.
I love this notion Wales is a "one party state". The same can be said for England and for Scotland and of course it's completely wrong.
It's not even "one party Government" in Wales or even Scotland and to be fair it's only been 2015-17 and 2019 onwards that has been the case in the UK.
If you want a better example of a "one party State", I give you the London Borough of Newham. 60 Councillors, all Labour. I have no problem with Labour running the Council seeing as they got 65% of the vote but, unlike in Wales, Scotland and elsewhere, the 35% who didn't vote Labour are completely unrepresented.
Even if there were 10 Opposition Councillors, it would mean other voices were heard, other options considered and the Borough would be better for it but the current voting system doesn't allow for the representation of minorities unless there are any areas where they are majorities.
Needless to say, even Newham isn't really a one Party State. It's a one Party Government but to be fair the Conservatives, Lib Dems, Greens and others have every right to organise and campaign. Their lack of (or inability to obtain) representation may or may not be a flaw depending on your perspective but that doesn't mean they can't put up candidates.
At least I know I can express my opinion and that my vote will be counted even if it makes no difference to the overall result - that's infinitely better than is the case for all too many people elsewhere.
I'm quite happy to accept that Jews are an ethnic (minority) group. However, there's a bit of rewriting of history going on here today. I don't recall anybody ever referring to Ed Miliband or Michael Howard as party leaders of a minority ethnic background, despite the hints of anti-semitism in some commentary on both of them. Until today, on here.
Well you are wrong, people did mention it certainly of Ed M. Sadly it's also how I discovered by father was a racist based on how he referred to Ed M.
It's also completely immaterial whether people have been consistent as to whether something is a fact. The SLab position is not correct. I don't think there's anything sinister about that in the slightest, but whatever the motivation of people pointing it out that you wish to critique, the point being made is still correct.
Interesting point that imo can be overthought. Jewish - the race not the religion - is a minority ethnic grouping in the UK. That's a fact. But BAME has a black/brown/asian vibe for me, regardless of what the acronym stands for. BAME is not white. So, you ask me if a Jewish person here is a member of an ethnic minority, I'll say yes. But ask me if Ed Miliband is BAME and I'll instinctively say no. It feels wrong to say that.
I think that is a fair point - the definition of BAME doesn't exclude white minority ethnic populations, but that is how it is generally talked about and treated.
But that rather illustrates the point that it is a poor acronym to use, as well as occasionally the difficulties with precise ethnic classification (the example used near me locally is people from generation to generation marking things differently in terms of ethnicity in the census, in respect of a sizable grouping which came over from Morocco). If it is meant to be a catch all for the non-white population, then it needs a different term.
Because there is a conflict here between recognising genuine ongoing issues with regards race, and an over focus on ethnicity on all issues at all times.
Ed Miliband been unpersoned in Scotland over 2015?
Is he the first Asian leader of a major UK political party ?
Yes, if you don’t count Johnson (which for all my mischievous trolling, you probably shouldn’t). And I fully agree that is a good thing. And I have no doubt he will be the first of many.
But ‘ethnic minority’ and ‘Asian’ are not quite the same thing. All Asians in this country are members of an ethnic minority, but not all ethnic minorities are Asian.
The annoying thing about this claim he is the first EM leader of a political party is it distracts from the real achievement that you highlight above.
Thanks I said yesterday ethnic minority my mistake . His family have done very well from coming to Scotland a few generations ago. From hearing his acceptance speech, which was good.
Hardly your mistake, it’s Labour that were pushing that line.
If Jews are BAMEs does that mean you can convert to BAMEhood?
It is almost impossible to ‘convert’ to Judaism. It is not like Islam or Christianity. The only effective way to do it is to marry somebody who is Jewish.
That's not true. It is possible but difficult. My cousin's daughter did so to marry her Jewish boyfriend and we all then had a very jolly Irish-Jewish wedding near Harrogate a few years back.
Could someone please explain - briefly - why Salmond and Sturgeon fell out. I thought they were best mates. So why would she be - allegedly - trying to put him in prison?
The former "first daughter" Ivanka Trump was a high-profile convert, of course. She might yet become the first Jewish president of the United States if she stands in 2024.
I think can help explain the depth of Salmond's fury, having listened to the 6hr testimony.
One issue is over harrassment policies.
The former harrassment policy had been introduced by Mr Salmond, via what he regarded as the proper process, consultation etc, back soon after the SNP became the Government (2007 ?). Can't recall all the details so I will not attempt to rehearse it here.
After #Metoo NS very rapidly introduced a modified policy, which brought complaints about Former Ministers in scope ie historic complaints. That new policy was not subject to consultations, done via legislation, Salmond was not consulted etc etc.
Very rapidly he was the subject of a number of historic complaints, up to attempted rape. And these appeared very suddenly.
Subsequently it went into an official ScotGov investigation, which the Civil Court found to have been unlawfully run. Not sure of the reasons given by the Court but this is part of the controversy around withheld evidence, forgotten about meetings etc. Salmond won that case (was it a Judicial Review?) and 500k+ of his costs (=85% which is a punitive level).
After that started but before it reached a verdict, a parallel police Criminal investigation started, which raised the possibility that it would overtake and rub out the Civil Court Action against the other case (to - allegedly - Sturgeon's advantage). There are allegations about the way this police investigation was generated.
The Committee is investigating how the Scottish Gov handled these processes and the investigation, and seems to have been set up strangely (one afternoon a week, no Counsel), and evidence that seems relevant has been scoped out procedurally so they cannot consider it etc.
So it is all murky.
Without reaching any judgement, I think that Salmond faced up to years in prison would probably explain his determination / resolution. He feels he has been mugged via procedural politics with the possibility of his life being destroyed.
As for Sturgeon, various reasons have been suggested above. I have no comment in this post.
Only one bit wrong Matt, the complaints were manufactured , that is the evidence they are hiding , if the names came out it would be obvious. They even said as much in their whatsapp meetings whilst planning the stories supposedly but that too is being hidden. Amazing a government minister heading the Crown office can stop parliament seeing the evidence. Banana republic stuff.
Are you suggesting that the complaintants committed organised perjury?
Be careful.
No I am not saying that , I am saying that it was in newspapers that they had organised whatapp meetings to discuss their complaints, and the charges were all dismissed, Salmond was innocent on all counts , and some were shown by witnesses in court to not having actually been there, eye witnesses dismissed the claims as never happening. So someone got their ideas wrong, jury believed the defence witnesses versions. One would imagine if there had been perjury that the Crown would have acted on it. Regardless of that it does seem odd that 9 people can get it wrong at same time.
I'm quite happy to accept that Jews are an ethnic (minority) group. However, there's a bit of rewriting of history going on here today. I don't recall anybody ever referring to Ed Miliband or Michael Howard as party leaders of a minority ethnic background, despite the hints of anti-semitism in some commentary on both of them. Until today, on here.
Well you are wrong, people did mention it certainly of Ed M. Sadly it's also how I discovered by father was a racist based on how he referred to Ed M.
It's also completely immaterial whether people have been consistent as to whether something is a fact. The SLab position is not correct. I don't think there's anything sinister about that in the slightest, but whatever the motivation of people pointing it out that you wish to critique, the point being made is still correct.
Interesting point that imo can be overthought. Jewish - the race not the religion - is a minority ethnic grouping in the UK. That's a fact. But BAME has a black/brown/asian vibe for me, regardless of what the acronym stands for. BAME is not white. So, you ask me if a Jewish person here is a member of an ethnic minority, I'll say yes. But ask me if Ed Miliband is BAME and I'll instinctively say no. It feels wrong to say that.
That does make it sound like BAME is simply a currently polite way to say coloured. Maybe one to avoid using.
No and she is not going to. There are 2 SNP muppets and an ex Green sock-puppet on the committee who will protect her regardless of the evidence. Fraser and Baillie are outgunned. The Lib Dems seem too stupid to contribute anything of note. At worst the head of our Civil Service will take early retirement on a generous package.
I'd like to think that this would cause both Sturgeon and her party real damage. It should. But it won't. People support the SNP because they want independence. Not because they are competent, honest, trustworthy or whatever. Its a very happy situation for a political party to be in.
Only the vague suspicion that Sturgeon is rather too fond of the trappings of office and doesn't want to risk a second referendum has caused murmurings in the ranks. A Sturgeon with a manifesto of a second referendum in the next Parliament will prevail over her domestic critics and all too probably over the opposing parties as well.
Is it even possible that the committee will get talked out until the Election?
Court challenge on something?
Very possible. The way things are going it is quite likely that Crown Office will demand changes to the report and who knows how long that might take?
A bit like the report on the desperate state of Scottish education that is on Swinney's desk but will not be published until after the election. These things happen in a one party state.
Amazing that the party of (minority) government in a one party state is allowing an election to take place in just over two months. Notwithstanding the whiny noises emanating from Unionist parties that the election should be postponed due to Covid, I’m sure they’re ready to grasp this opportunity with a raft of exciting new policies, talented pols and a vision for Scotland within the UK.
Most of the posters complaining about a "one-party state" seem to be ignoring the fact that Wales is easily the country in the UK for which that moniker holds true.
Again, it is worth comparing the Salmond affair with the (much more serious in terms of outcome) Sergeant affair. Nothing has ever been published about the murky suicide of Carl Sergeant. Nothing ever will.
In a real one-party state, the same party is always in power. Transition of power happens internally, when the leader of the party changes. All important posts (like the Ombudsman) are chosen from the membership of the party.
That is Wales.
Curiously, very few posters (and certainly no English Labour posters) have been at all worried about the one-party state that Labour has created west of Clawdd Offa.
Yep, and the same applied to the Labour fiefdom of Scotland for decades. This was the icing on the irony cake over the last few days.
There is something like that in any such situation, as people will rely on some pretty precise detail with impressive recall, at the same time and even involving the same issues as something they claim to be pretty vague about. Granted, the human memory is a pretty bizarre thing, I can recall quotes from some movies I've seen once in 20 years, yet not what I had for breakfast 2 weeks, but it does always make the certainty of a lot of claims, in defence or attack, seem questionable.
Hague is a numpty, failed dog food salesman trying to pretend he is an economist. When will unionists realise using absolute clowns like that don't help their cause, just makes them look like the shifty slime balls they are.
Hague got a first class honours in PPE from Magdalen College, Oxford and an MBA from INSEAD. Just saying.
There is something like that in any such situation, as people will rely on some pretty precise detail with impressive recall, at the same time and even involving the same issues as something they claim to be pretty vague about. Granted, the human memory is a pretty bizarre thing, I can recall quotes from some movies I've seen once in 20 years, yet not what I had for breakfast 2 weeks, but it does always make the certainty of a lot of claims, in defence or attack, seem questionable.
Hague is a numpty, failed dog food salesman trying to pretend he is an economist. When will unionists realise using absolute clowns like that don't help their cause, just makes them look like the shifty slime balls they are.
Hague got a first class honours in PPE from Magdalen College, Oxford and an MBA from INSEAD. Just saying.
I wonder if he’ll threaten to close down his business in Scotland and put his employees out of work when the next referendum comes around? Just saying.
Ed Miliband been unpersoned in Scotland over 2015?
Is he the first Asian leader of a major UK political party ?
Yes, if you don’t count Johnson (which for all my mischievous trolling, you probably shouldn’t). And I fully agree that is a good thing. And I have no doubt he will be the first of many.
But ‘ethnic minority’ and ‘Asian’ are not quite the same thing. All Asians in this country are members of an ethnic minority, but not all ethnic minorities are Asian.
The annoying thing about this claim he is the first EM leader of a political party is it distracts from the real achievement that you highlight above.
Thanks I said yesterday ethnic minority my mistake . His family have done very well from coming to Scotland a few generations ago. From hearing his acceptance speech, which was good.
Hardly your mistake, it’s Labour that were pushing that line.
If Jews are BAMEs does that mean you can convert to BAMEhood?
It is almost impossible to ‘convert’ to Judaism. It is not like Islam or Christianity. The only effective way to do it is to marry somebody who is Jewish.
That's not true. It is possible but difficult. My cousin's daughter did so to marry her Jewish boyfriend and we all then had a very jolly Irish-Jewish wedding near Harrogate a few years back.
Could someone please explain - briefly - why Salmond and Sturgeon fell out. I thought they were best mates. So why would she be - allegedly - trying to put him in prison?
Sturgeon was Salmond's protege but outgrew him. Salmond wouldn't let go. He disappointed her by joining RT.
He is allegedly handy. Sturgeon used the #metoo movement to retrospectively have him investigated. Government, Civil Service and Crown Office all became involved.
Tories and Labour are trying to make capital out of it but it's actually a family tragedy - a messy divorce. Salmond and Sturgeon are both hurt and damaged by it but Sturgeon won't resign.
That's my take on it and I have £100 at stake that she won't resign this year.
EDIT: Massie in this week's Spectator has a very good take on it
LOL, cowardy custard allegedly, found innocent on all charges and not a previous complaint in 30 years. Based on diehard unionist Massie as well, usual stuff from Scotch experts on here.
I thought it was not proven on one is that the same as not guilty ?
I think it was one withdrawn, one not proven, and 11 not guilty.
@Yorkcity Not proven is exactly the same as not guilty
Ed Miliband been unpersoned in Scotland over 2015?
Is he the first Asian leader of a major UK political party ?
Yes, if you don’t count Johnson (which for all my mischievous trolling, you probably shouldn’t). And I fully agree that is a good thing. And I have no doubt he will be the first of many.
But ‘ethnic minority’ and ‘Asian’ are not quite the same thing. All Asians in this country are members of an ethnic minority, but not all ethnic minorities are Asian.
The annoying thing about this claim he is the first EM leader of a political party is it distracts from the real achievement that you highlight above.
Thanks I said yesterday ethnic minority my mistake . His family have done very well from coming to Scotland a few generations ago. From hearing his acceptance speech, which was good.
Hardly your mistake, it’s Labour that were pushing that line.
If Jews are BAMEs does that mean you can convert to BAMEhood?
It is almost impossible to ‘convert’ to Judaism. It is not like Islam or Christianity. The only effective way to do it is to marry somebody who is Jewish.
That's not true. It is possible but difficult. My cousin's daughter did so to marry her Jewish boyfriend and we all then had a very jolly Irish-Jewish wedding near Harrogate a few years back.
Could someone please explain - briefly - why Salmond and Sturgeon fell out. I thought they were best mates. So why would she be - allegedly - trying to put him in prison?
The former "first daughter" Ivanka Trump was a high-profile convert, of course. She might yet become the first Jewish president of the United States if she stands in 2024.
I think can help explain the depth of Salmond's fury, having listened to the 6hr testimony.
One issue is over harrassment policies.
The former harrassment policy had been introduced by Mr Salmond, via what he regarded as the proper process, consultation etc, back soon after the SNP became the Government (2007 ?). Can't recall all the details so I will not attempt to rehearse it here.
After #Metoo NS very rapidly introduced a modified policy, which brought complaints about Former Ministers in scope ie historic complaints. That new policy was not subject to consultations, done via legislation, Salmond was not consulted etc etc.
Very rapidly he was the subject of a number of historic complaints, up to attempted rape. And these appeared very suddenly.
Subsequently it went into an official ScotGov investigation, which the Civil Court found to have been unlawfully run. Not sure of the reasons given by the Court but this is part of the controversy around withheld evidence, forgotten about meetings etc. Salmond won that case (was it a Judicial Review?) and 500k+ of his costs (=85% which is a punitive level).
After that started but before it reached a verdict, a parallel police Criminal investigation started, which raised the possibility that it would overtake and rub out the Civil Court Action against the other case (to - allegedly - Sturgeon's advantage). There are allegations about the way this police investigation was generated.
The Committee is investigating how the Scottish Gov handled these processes and the investigation, and seems to have been set up strangely (one afternoon a week, no Counsel), and evidence that seems relevant has been scoped out procedurally so they cannot consider it etc.
So it is all murky.
Without reaching any judgement, I think that Salmond faced up to years in prison would probably explain his determination / resolution. He feels he has been mugged via procedural politics with the possibility of his life being destroyed.
As for Sturgeon, various reasons have been suggested above. I have no comment in this post.
Only one bit wrong Matt, the complaints were manufactured , that is the evidence they are hiding , if the names came out it would be obvious. They even said as much in their whatsapp meetings whilst planning the stories supposedly but that too is being hidden. Amazing a government minister heading the Crown office can stop parliament seeing the evidence. Banana republic stuff.
To be fair to Salmond, had my previous friend looked to allegedly develop a situation that would ultimately see me imprisoned, then my political ideology would probably take a back seat.
I’ve no idea what the truth of the matter is, but the quality of Salmonds arguments on Friday were impressive
There is something like that in any such situation, as people will rely on some pretty precise detail with impressive recall, at the same time and even involving the same issues as something they claim to be pretty vague about. Granted, the human memory is a pretty bizarre thing, I can recall quotes from some movies I've seen once in 20 years, yet not what I had for breakfast 2 weeks, but it does always make the certainty of a lot of claims, in defence or attack, seem questionable.
Hague is a numpty, failed dog food salesman trying to pretend he is an economist. When will unionists realise using absolute clowns like that don't help their cause, just makes them look like the shifty slime balls they are.
Hague got a first class honours in PPE from Magdalen College, Oxford and an MBA from INSEAD. Just saying.
I'm quite happy to accept that Jews are an ethnic (minority) group. However, there's a bit of rewriting of history going on here today. I don't recall anybody ever referring to Ed Miliband or Michael Howard as party leaders of a minority ethnic background, despite the hints of anti-semitism in some commentary on both of them. Until today, on here.
Well you are wrong, people did mention it certainly of Ed M. Sadly it's also how I discovered by father was a racist based on how he referred to Ed M.
It's also completely immaterial whether people have been consistent as to whether something is a fact. The SLab position is not correct. I don't think there's anything sinister about that in the slightest, but whatever the motivation of people pointing it out that you wish to critique, the point being made is still correct.
Interesting point that imo can be overthought. Jewish - the race not the religion - is a minority ethnic grouping in the UK. That's a fact. But BAME has a black/brown/asian vibe for me, regardless of what the acronym stands for. BAME is not white. So, you ask me if a Jewish person here is a member of an ethnic minority, I'll say yes. But ask me if Ed Miliband is BAME and I'll instinctively say no. It feels wrong to say that.
That does make it sound like BAME is simply a currently polite way to say coloured. Maybe one to avoid using.
BAME is only used in the U.K. It screams public sector box ticking.
Why do we even need such a term? It’s essentially a bureaucratically friendly way of saying non-white.
Except when you say, “non-white” the sheer awfulness of distinguishing between different colours of people is laid bare.
It’s tragic we are so wrapped up in race when class (and wealth) remain the key inequality in society.
No and she is not going to. There are 2 SNP muppets and an ex Green sock-puppet on the committee who will protect her regardless of the evidence. Fraser and Baillie are outgunned. The Lib Dems seem too stupid to contribute anything of note. At worst the head of our Civil Service will take early retirement on a generous package.
I'd like to think that this would cause both Sturgeon and her party real damage. It should. But it won't. People support the SNP because they want independence. Not because they are competent, honest, trustworthy or whatever. Its a very happy situation for a political party to be in.
Only the vague suspicion that Sturgeon is rather too fond of the trappings of office and doesn't want to risk a second referendum has caused murmurings in the ranks. A Sturgeon with a manifesto of a second referendum in the next Parliament will prevail over her domestic critics and all too probably over the opposing parties as well.
Is it even possible that the committee will get talked out until the Election?
Court challenge on something?
Very possible. The way things are going it is quite likely that Crown Office will demand changes to the report and who knows how long that might take?
A bit like the report on the desperate state of Scottish education that is on Swinney's desk but will not be published until after the election. These things happen in a one party state.
Amazing that the party of (minority) government in a one party state is allowing an election to take place in just over two months. Notwithstanding the whiny noises emanating from Unionist parties that the election should be postponed due to Covid, I’m sure they’re ready to grasp this opportunity with a raft of exciting new policies, talented pols and a vision for Scotland within the UK.
Most of the posters complaining about a "one-party state" seem to be ignoring the fact that Wales is easily the country in the UK for which that moniker holds true.
Again, it is worth comparing the Salmond affair with the (much more serious in terms of outcome) Sergeant affair. Nothing has ever been published about the murky suicide of Carl Sergeant. Nothing ever will.
In a real one-party state, the same party is always in power. Transition of power happens internally, when the leader of the party changes. All important posts (like the Ombudsman) are chosen from the membership of the party.
That is Wales.
Curiously, very few posters (and certainly no English Labour posters) have been at all worried about the one-party state that Labour has created west of Clawdd Offa.
Yep, and the same applied to the Labour fiefdom of Scotland for decades. This was the icing on the irony cake over the last few days.
It’s richly ironic, but that doesn’t mean we should just ignore it.
Scotland and Wales need proper PR, not the jerry-rigged and gerrymandered systems they have at present.
You seem to have missed the elephant in the room, perhaps you should cast your eye where you live, the biggest nest of crooks on the planet.
Hackney?
Yes, it also needs PR. The council is very well run by Labour, but they could do with more opposition scrutiny
Since you prefer to pontificate on other countries rather than ENGLAND sic UK sic Britain, I will point it out for you.
I’m not 100% persuaded by the case for PR at Westminster.
My annoyance with the Scottish (and Welsh) systems is that they pretend to be PR, but don’t deliver actual proportionality.
They’re fake.
Westminster system is well rigged and I agree on the fake PR systems made to keep Labour in power ( they made a mess of Scottish one ). However I think the Westminster one is far far worse than any of PR versions.
I'm quite happy to accept that Jews are an ethnic (minority) group. However, there's a bit of rewriting of history going on here today. I don't recall anybody ever referring to Ed Miliband or Michael Howard as party leaders of a minority ethnic background, despite the hints of anti-semitism in some commentary on both of them. Until today, on here.
Well you are wrong, people did mention it certainly of Ed M. Sadly it's also how I discovered by father was a racist based on how he referred to Ed M.
It's also completely immaterial whether people have been consistent as to whether something is a fact. The SLab position is not correct. I don't think there's anything sinister about that in the slightest, but whatever the motivation of people pointing it out that you wish to critique, the point being made is still correct.
Interesting point that imo can be overthought. Jewish - the race not the religion - is a minority ethnic grouping in the UK. That's a fact. But BAME has a black/brown/asian vibe for me, regardless of what the acronym stands for. BAME is not white. So, you ask me if a Jewish person here is a member of an ethnic minority, I'll say yes. But ask me if Ed Miliband is BAME and I'll instinctively say no. It feels wrong to say that.
So much of this comes from lazy societal constructs. None of it is logical or consistent and trying to say things like “well x is an ethnic group so why shouldn’t y be” misses the point.
BAME originated as an acronym, I know, but for me it's just become a word that means not white. When I use it, that's what I mean, and it can sometimes be a useful word. Like you, I find forensic debate around its exact technical meaning a bit tedious.
I'm quite happy to accept that Jews are an ethnic (minority) group. However, there's a bit of rewriting of history going on here today. I don't recall anybody ever referring to Ed Miliband or Michael Howard as party leaders of a minority ethnic background, despite the hints of anti-semitism in some commentary on both of them. Until today, on here.
Well you are wrong, people did mention it certainly of Ed M. Sadly it's also how I discovered by father was a racist based on how he referred to Ed M.
It's also completely immaterial whether people have been consistent as to whether something is a fact. The SLab position is not correct. I don't think there's anything sinister about that in the slightest, but whatever the motivation of people pointing it out that you wish to critique, the point being made is still correct.
Interesting point that imo can be overthought. Jewish - the race not the religion - is a minority ethnic grouping in the UK. That's a fact. But BAME has a black/brown/asian vibe for me, regardless of what the acronym stands for. BAME is not white. So, you ask me if a Jewish person here is a member of an ethnic minority, I'll say yes. But ask me if Ed Miliband is BAME and I'll instinctively say no. It feels wrong to say that.
That does make it sound like BAME is simply a currently polite way to say coloured. Maybe one to avoid using.
It is like your usual crap Americanisms, unbelievable that anyone would like being referred to as a BAME. As I said above it just creates jobs for useless gits and pigeon holes people without ever addressing the point it is supposed to.
No and she is not going to. There are 2 SNP muppets and an ex Green sock-puppet on the committee who will protect her regardless of the evidence. Fraser and Baillie are outgunned. The Lib Dems seem too stupid to contribute anything of note. At worst the head of our Civil Service will take early retirement on a generous package.
I'd like to think that this would cause both Sturgeon and her party real damage. It should. But it won't. People support the SNP because they want independence. Not because they are competent, honest, trustworthy or whatever. Its a very happy situation for a political party to be in.
Only the vague suspicion that Sturgeon is rather too fond of the trappings of office and doesn't want to risk a second referendum has caused murmurings in the ranks. A Sturgeon with a manifesto of a second referendum in the next Parliament will prevail over her domestic critics and all too probably over the opposing parties as well.
Is it even possible that the committee will get talked out until the Election?
Court challenge on something?
Very possible. The way things are going it is quite likely that Crown Office will demand changes to the report and who knows how long that might take?
A bit like the report on the desperate state of Scottish education that is on Swinney's desk but will not be published until after the election. These things happen in a one party state.
Amazing that the party of (minority) government in a one party state is allowing an election to take place in just over two months. Notwithstanding the whiny noises emanating from Unionist parties that the election should be postponed due to Covid, I’m sure they’re ready to grasp this opportunity with a raft of exciting new policies, talented pols and a vision for Scotland within the UK.
Most of the posters complaining about a "one-party state" seem to be ignoring the fact that Wales is easily the country in the UK for which that moniker holds true.
Again, it is worth comparing the Salmond affair with the (much more serious in terms of outcome) Sergeant affair. Nothing has ever been published about the murky suicide of Carl Sergeant. Nothing ever will.
In a real one-party state, the same party is always in power. Transition of power happens internally, when the leader of the party changes. All important posts (like the Ombudsman) are chosen from the membership of the party.
That is Wales.
Curiously, very few posters (and certainly no English Labour posters) have been at all worried about the one-party state that Labour has created west of Clawdd Offa.
Yep, and the same applied to the Labour fiefdom of Scotland for decades. This was the icing on the irony cake over the last few days.
It’s richly ironic, but that doesn’t mean we should just ignore it.
Scotland and Wales need proper PR, not the jerry-rigged and gerrymandered systems they have at present.
You seem to have missed the elephant in the room, perhaps you should cast your eye where you live, the biggest nest of crooks on the planet.
Hackney?
Yes, it also needs PR. The council is very well run by Labour, but they could do with more opposition scrutiny
Since you prefer to pontificate on other countries rather than ENGLAND sic UK sic Britain, I will point it out for you.
I’m not 100% persuaded by the case for PR at Westminster.
My annoyance with the Scottish (and Welsh) systems is that they pretend to be PR, but don’t deliver actual proportionality.
They’re fake.
Westminster system is well rigged and I agree on the fake PR systems made to keep Labour in power ( they made a mess of Scottish one ). However I think the Westminster one is far far worse than any of PR versions.
Oh I agree who is to blame. In fact I believe the Lib Dems had a role too.
Another one of those ironies that make you look at the Lib Dems and wonder what crack pipe they are on.
Ed Miliband been unpersoned in Scotland over 2015?
Is he the first Asian leader of a major UK political party ?
Yes, if you don’t count Johnson (which for all my mischievous trolling, you probably shouldn’t). And I fully agree that is a good thing. And I have no doubt he will be the first of many.
But ‘ethnic minority’ and ‘Asian’ are not quite the same thing. All Asians in this country are members of an ethnic minority, but not all ethnic minorities are Asian.
The annoying thing about this claim he is the first EM leader of a political party is it distracts from the real achievement that you highlight above.
Thanks I said yesterday ethnic minority my mistake . His family have done very well from coming to Scotland a few generations ago. From hearing his acceptance speech, which was good.
Hardly your mistake, it’s Labour that were pushing that line.
If Jews are BAMEs does that mean you can convert to BAMEhood?
It is almost impossible to ‘convert’ to Judaism. It is not like Islam or Christianity. The only effective way to do it is to marry somebody who is Jewish.
That's not true. It is possible but difficult. My cousin's daughter did so to marry her Jewish boyfriend and we all then had a very jolly Irish-Jewish wedding near Harrogate a few years back.
Could someone please explain - briefly - why Salmond and Sturgeon fell out. I thought they were best mates. So why would she be - allegedly - trying to put him in prison?
The former "first daughter" Ivanka Trump was a high-profile convert, of course. She might yet become the first Jewish president of the United States if she stands in 2024.
I think can help explain the depth of Salmond's fury, having listened to the 6hr testimony.
One issue is over harrassment policies.
The former harrassment policy had been introduced by Mr Salmond, via what he regarded as the proper process, consultation etc, back soon after the SNP became the Government (2007 ?). Can't recall all the details so I will not attempt to rehearse it here.
After #Metoo NS very rapidly introduced a modified policy, which brought complaints about Former Ministers in scope ie historic complaints. That new policy was not subject to consultations, done via legislation, Salmond was not consulted etc etc.
Very rapidly he was the subject of a number of historic complaints, up to attempted rape. And these appeared very suddenly.
Subsequently it went into an official ScotGov investigation, which the Civil Court found to have been unlawfully run. Not sure of the reasons given by the Court but this is part of the controversy around withheld evidence, forgotten about meetings etc. Salmond won that case (was it a Judicial Review?) and 500k+ of his costs (=85% which is a punitive level).
After that started but before it reached a verdict, a parallel police Criminal investigation started, which raised the possibility that it would overtake and rub out the Civil Court Action against the other case (to - allegedly - Sturgeon's advantage). There are allegations about the way this police investigation was generated.
The Committee is investigating how the Scottish Gov handled these processes and the investigation, and seems to have been set up strangely (one afternoon a week, no Counsel), and evidence that seems relevant has been scoped out procedurally so they cannot consider it etc.
So it is all murky.
Without reaching any judgement, I think that Salmond faced up to years in prison would probably explain his determination / resolution. He feels he has been mugged via procedural politics with the possibility of his life being destroyed.
As for Sturgeon, various reasons have been suggested above. I have no comment in this post.
Only one bit wrong Matt, the complaints were manufactured , that is the evidence they are hiding , if the names came out it would be obvious. They even said as much in their whatsapp meetings whilst planning the stories supposedly but that too is being hidden. Amazing a government minister heading the Crown office can stop parliament seeing the evidence. Banana republic stuff.
To be fair to Salmond, had my previous friend looked to allegedly develop a situation that would ultimately see me imprisoned, then my political ideology would probably take a back seat.
I’ve no idea what the truth of the matter is, but the quality of Salmonds arguments on Friday were impressive
Especially if you had looked at previous ones , all civil servants and Murrel had to write back and say they had inadvertently told whoppers by mistake / forgetfulness to the inquiry after documentary evidence appeared and they now remembered that indeed the things had happened. Murrel kept looking to his left and Baillie eventually asked if he had someone in the room with him , he asked if she was suggesting conspiracy and that only thing there was a magpie, in the garden one presumes even though he was facing away from the windows.
I'm quite happy to accept that Jews are an ethnic (minority) group. However, there's a bit of rewriting of history going on here today. I don't recall anybody ever referring to Ed Miliband or Michael Howard as party leaders of a minority ethnic background, despite the hints of anti-semitism in some commentary on both of them. Until today, on here.
Well you are wrong, people did mention it certainly of Ed M. Sadly it's also how I discovered by father was a racist based on how he referred to Ed M.
It's also completely immaterial whether people have been consistent as to whether something is a fact. The SLab position is not correct. I don't think there's anything sinister about that in the slightest, but whatever the motivation of people pointing it out that you wish to critique, the point being made is still correct.
Interesting point that imo can be overthought. Jewish - the race not the religion - is a minority ethnic grouping in the UK. That's a fact. But BAME has a black/brown/asian vibe for me, regardless of what the acronym stands for. BAME is not white. So, you ask me if a Jewish person here is a member of an ethnic minority, I'll say yes. But ask me if Ed Miliband is BAME and I'll instinctively say no. It feels wrong to say that.
I think that is a fair point - the definition of BAME doesn't exclude white minority ethnic populations, but that is how it is generally talked about and treated.
But that rather illustrates the point that it is a poor acronym to use, as well as occasionally the difficulties with precise ethnic classification (the example used near me locally is people from generation to generation marking things differently in terms of ethnicity in the census, in respect of a sizable grouping which came over from Morocco). If it is meant to be a catch all for the non-white population, then it needs a different term.
Because there is a conflict here between recognising genuine ongoing issues with regards race, and an over focus on ethnicity on all issues at all times.
Well for me we do have that word for not white - it's Bame. No need for another. It started out as an acronym but is now a word. There are lots of acronyms that become words such that what the letters stand for - or originally stood for - is secondary or forgotten. Fiat.
I’m not 100% persuaded by the case for PR at Westminster.
My annoyance with the Scottish (and Welsh) systems is that they pretend to be PR, but don’t deliver actual proportionality.
They’re fake.
How you vote or the system you use is much less important than for what you are voting. The current UK system centralises power in Whitehall and Westminster to a frightening extent. In truth, the Mayor of London, the Mayor of Newham or the Leader of Surrey County Council have very little real authority - plenty of responsibility.
They are financially constrained by central Government, subject to constant direction and diktat and are basically little more than the contractor for central Government.
If local authorities had real financial and political power, that would, I believe, re-invigorate local democracy to the general benefit. Now, that will be the cue for Uncle Tom Cobley and all to come on and tell us all how useless local Councillors are and how it's fortunate none of them have any real power. I think if you provided real authority you'd get better decision making and better decision makers.
One of my pet peeves is economies of scale - who remembers Border, Westward, Grampian and Southern television? Genuine local voices but in the end all taken over by larger organisations and the local identity diluted and eventually lost. The same happened with local newspapers and you see the same in other sectors - economic driven homogeneity destroying local character and characteristics. It's cheaper for everything to be the same rather than for separate identities to exist.
Certainly now we know they have supplies they are not using the excuse for the slow rollout is being undermined.
In Spain they are sticking to the 2 dose approach which slows things down and AZN only for under 55s which makes it even slower. The Federal approach and excessive bureaucracy is not helping. I have 2 friends who are not eligible for the NHS and have been refused registration for the vaccine despite it being the official government policy! The combination of EU clusterfuck earlier and now the spanish bureaucracy is pretty toxic. In addition the lack of genomic sequencing has led to questions that a new wave may be just around the corner while Communities are busily rolling back restrictions in the hope of a bumper Easter.
Ed Miliband been unpersoned in Scotland over 2015?
Is he the first Asian leader of a major UK political party ?
Yes, if you don’t count Johnson (which for all my mischievous trolling, you probably shouldn’t). And I fully agree that is a good thing. And I have no doubt he will be the first of many.
But ‘ethnic minority’ and ‘Asian’ are not quite the same thing. All Asians in this country are members of an ethnic minority, but not all ethnic minorities are Asian.
The annoying thing about this claim he is the first EM leader of a political party is it distracts from the real achievement that you highlight above.
Thanks I said yesterday ethnic minority my mistake . His family have done very well from coming to Scotland a few generations ago. From hearing his acceptance speech, which was good.
Hardly your mistake, it’s Labour that were pushing that line.
If Jews are BAMEs does that mean you can convert to BAMEhood?
It is almost impossible to ‘convert’ to Judaism. It is not like Islam or Christianity. The only effective way to do it is to marry somebody who is Jewish.
That's not true. It is possible but difficult. My cousin's daughter did so to marry her Jewish boyfriend and we all then had a very jolly Irish-Jewish wedding near Harrogate a few years back.
Could someone please explain - briefly - why Salmond and Sturgeon fell out. I thought they were best mates. So why would she be - allegedly - trying to put him in prison?
The former "first daughter" Ivanka Trump was a high-profile convert, of course. She might yet become the first Jewish president of the United States if she stands in 2024.
I think can help explain the depth of Salmond's fury, having listened to the 6hr testimony.
One issue is over harrassment policies.
The former harrassment policy had been introduced by Mr Salmond, via what he regarded as the proper process, consultation etc, back soon after the SNP became the Government (2007 ?). Can't recall all the details so I will not attempt to rehearse it here.
After #Metoo NS very rapidly introduced a modified policy, which brought complaints about Former Ministers in scope ie historic complaints. That new policy was not subject to consultations, done via legislation, Salmond was not consulted etc etc.
Very rapidly he was the subject of a number of historic complaints, up to attempted rape. And these appeared very suddenly.
Subsequently it went into an official ScotGov investigation, which the Civil Court found to have been unlawfully run. Not sure of the reasons given by the Court but this is part of the controversy around withheld evidence, forgotten about meetings etc. Salmond won that case (was it a Judicial Review?) and 500k+ of his costs (=85% which is a punitive level).
After that started but before it reached a verdict, a parallel police Criminal investigation started, which raised the possibility that it would overtake and rub out the Civil Court Action against the other case (to - allegedly - Sturgeon's advantage). There are allegations about the way this police investigation was generated.
The Committee is investigating how the Scottish Gov handled these processes and the investigation, and seems to have been set up strangely (one afternoon a week, no Counsel), and evidence that seems relevant has been scoped out procedurally so they cannot consider it etc.
So it is all murky.
Without reaching any judgement, I think that Salmond faced up to years in prison would probably explain his determination / resolution. He feels he has been mugged via procedural politics with the possibility of his life being destroyed.
As for Sturgeon, various reasons have been suggested above. I have no comment in this post.
Only one bit wrong Matt, the complaints were manufactured , that is the evidence they are hiding , if the names came out it would be obvious. They even said as much in their whatsapp meetings whilst planning the stories supposedly but that too is being hidden. Amazing a government minister heading the Crown office can stop parliament seeing the evidence. Banana republic stuff.
Are you suggesting that the complaintants committed organised perjury?
Be careful.
No I am not saying that , I am saying that it was in newspapers that they had organised whatapp meetings to discuss their complaints, and the charges were all dismissed, Salmond was innocent on all counts , and some were shown by witnesses in court to not having actually been there, eye witnesses dismissed the claims as never happening. So someone got their ideas wrong, jury believed the defence witnesses versions. One would imagine if there had been perjury that the Crown would have acted on it. Regardless of that it does seem odd that 9 people can get it wrong at same time.
Wrt Salmond's account, he cited a number of text messages (not iirc between complainants) which had been circulating amongst civil servants about the Police Investigation after it has started. Including language of the type 'the enquiry getting what it needs'.
He asserted that there were many more much more damning in material he had relating to the trial and the case, and that he was prevented from giving those to the committee.
(He also asserted that he had many - 30 or 40 - relevant documents that had not been disclosed by ScotGov to the previous trial despite requirements to do so, and was under legal injunctions not to do so.)
(This can be found I think in the last hour of the hearing.)
But Rape Crisis Scotland assert in their statement that a Whatsapp group amongst the complainants was for mutual support.
If more is coming out here it will either be because the Scotland Act 1998 Section 23 Notice to Salmond's solicitor sticks, or because the Spectator or a n other gets hold of it and publishes it outside the jurisdiction.
The second of these will not result in it being in scope for the Committee.
And I'll shut up now, but a reminder that we have only heard one side.
Ed Miliband been unpersoned in Scotland over 2015?
Is he the first Asian leader of a major UK political party ?
Yes, if you don’t count Johnson (which for all my mischievous trolling, you probably shouldn’t). And I fully agree that is a good thing. And I have no doubt he will be the first of many.
But ‘ethnic minority’ and ‘Asian’ are not quite the same thing. All Asians in this country are members of an ethnic minority, but not all ethnic minorities are Asian.
The annoying thing about this claim he is the first EM leader of a political party is it distracts from the real achievement that you highlight above.
Thanks I said yesterday ethnic minority my mistake . His family have done very well from coming to Scotland a few generations ago. From hearing his acceptance speech, which was good.
Hardly your mistake, it’s Labour that were pushing that line.
If Jews are BAMEs does that mean you can convert to BAMEhood?
It is almost impossible to ‘convert’ to Judaism. It is not like Islam or Christianity. The only effective way to do it is to marry somebody who is Jewish.
That's not true. It is possible but difficult. My cousin's daughter did so to marry her Jewish boyfriend and we all then had a very jolly Irish-Jewish wedding near Harrogate a few years back.
Could someone please explain - briefly - why Salmond and Sturgeon fell out. I thought they were best mates. So why would she be - allegedly - trying to put him in prison?
The former "first daughter" Ivanka Trump was a high-profile convert, of course. She might yet become the first Jewish president of the United States if she stands in 2024.
I think can help explain the depth of Salmond's fury, having listened to the 6hr testimony.
One issue is over harrassment policies.
The former harrassment policy had been introduced by Mr Salmond, via what he regarded as the proper process, consultation etc, back soon after the SNP became the Government (2007 ?). Can't recall all the details so I will not attempt to rehearse it here.
After #Metoo NS very rapidly introduced a modified policy, which brought complaints about Former Ministers in scope ie historic complaints. That new policy was not subject to consultations, done via legislation, Salmond was not consulted etc etc.
Very rapidly he was the subject of a number of historic complaints, up to attempted rape. And these appeared very suddenly.
Subsequently it went into an official ScotGov investigation, which the Civil Court found to have been unlawfully run. Not sure of the reasons given by the Court but this is part of the controversy around withheld evidence, forgotten about meetings etc. Salmond won that case (was it a Judicial Review?) and 500k+ of his costs (=85% which is a punitive level).
After that started but before it reached a verdict, a parallel police Criminal investigation started, which raised the possibility that it would overtake and rub out the Civil Court Action against the other case (to - allegedly - Sturgeon's advantage). There are allegations about the way this police investigation was generated.
The Committee is investigating how the Scottish Gov handled these processes and the investigation, and seems to have been set up strangely (one afternoon a week, no Counsel), and evidence that seems relevant has been scoped out procedurally so they cannot consider it etc.
So it is all murky.
Without reaching any judgement, I think that Salmond faced up to years in prison would probably explain his determination / resolution. He feels he has been mugged via procedural politics with the possibility of his life being destroyed.
As for Sturgeon, various reasons have been suggested above. I have no comment in this post.
Only one bit wrong Matt, the complaints were manufactured , that is the evidence they are hiding , if the names came out it would be obvious. They even said as much in their whatsapp meetings whilst planning the stories supposedly but that too is being hidden. Amazing a government minister heading the Crown office can stop parliament seeing the evidence. Banana republic stuff.
To be fair to Salmond, had my previous friend looked to allegedly develop a situation that would ultimately see me imprisoned, then my political ideology would probably take a back seat.
I’ve no idea what the truth of the matter is, but the quality of Salmonds arguments on Friday were impressive
Especially if you had looked at previous ones , all civil servants and Murrel had to write back and say they had inadvertently told whoppers by mistake / forgetfulness to the inquiry after documentary evidence appeared and they now remembered that indeed the things had happened. Murrel kept looking to his left and Baillie eventually asked if he had someone in the room with him , he asked if she was suggesting conspiracy and that only thing there was a magpie, in the garden one presumes even though he was facing away from the windows.
Mark Twain's aphorism might well apply: If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything.
I've noticed in a couple of places the term BAME being phased out in favour of something vague and inoffensive, so maybe it is on the way to being cancelled.
Have to agree with @Gardenwalker, without minimising the reality of racism, which is of course present in our society we do appear so wrapped up in the whole thing as to miss the bigger picture... class, wealth.
I would suggest the experience of a Chinese person working in the City, black kid on a council estate, Asian factory worker in the midlands, Orthodox Jewish dude in North London, Indian doctor/Chancellor of the Exchequer (I could go on) are so diverse and varied as to make the term meaningless...
Interesting topic from court case in Guardian that shows witness on oath proves Sturgeon is telling porkie. Their lies are all catching up with them and as ever it is the cover up rather than the lies that will get them
As Jackson appeared to finish his questioning and walked towards his seat, Salmond leaned across in the dock and spoke to him quietly. Jackson returned to the lectern and asked Aberdein: “I’m reminded; tell me if I’m wrong. There was a meeting between you, [a complainant] and Nicola Sturgeon?”
I’m not 100% persuaded by the case for PR at Westminster.
My annoyance with the Scottish (and Welsh) systems is that they pretend to be PR, but don’t deliver actual proportionality.
They’re fake.
How you vote or the system you use is much less important than for what you are voting. The current UK system centralises power in Whitehall and Westminster to a frightening extent. In truth, the Mayor of London, the Mayor of Newham or the Leader of Surrey County Council have very little real authority - plenty of responsibility.
They are financially constrained by central Government, subject to constant direction and diktat and are basically little more than the contractor for central Government.
If local authorities had real financial and political power, that would, I believe, re-invigorate local democracy to the general benefit. Now, that will be the cue for Uncle Tom Cobley and all to come on and tell us all how useless local Councillors are and how it's fortunate none of them have any real power. I think if you provided real authority you'd get better decision making and better decision makers.
One of my pet peeves is economies of scale - who remembers Border, Westward, Grampian and Southern television? Genuine local voices but in the end all taken over by larger organisations and the local identity diluted and eventually lost. The same happened with local newspapers and you see the same in other sectors - economic driven homogeneity destroying local character and characteristics. It's cheaper for everything to be the same rather than for separate identities to exist.
This is also my pet peeve. Actually, more of an obsession.
Britain has decided to waste a massive amount of human capital by centralising the shit out of everything.
No and she is not going to. There are 2 SNP muppets and an ex Green sock-puppet on the committee who will protect her regardless of the evidence. Fraser and Baillie are outgunned. The Lib Dems seem too stupid to contribute anything of note. At worst the head of our Civil Service will take early retirement on a generous package.
I'd like to think that this would cause both Sturgeon and her party real damage. It should. But it won't. People support the SNP because they want independence. Not because they are competent, honest, trustworthy or whatever. Its a very happy situation for a political party to be in.
Only the vague suspicion that Sturgeon is rather too fond of the trappings of office and doesn't want to risk a second referendum has caused murmurings in the ranks. A Sturgeon with a manifesto of a second referendum in the next Parliament will prevail over her domestic critics and all too probably over the opposing parties as well.
Is it even possible that the committee will get talked out until the Election?
Court challenge on something?
Very possible. The way things are going it is quite likely that Crown Office will demand changes to the report and who knows how long that might take?
A bit like the report on the desperate state of Scottish education that is on Swinney's desk but will not be published until after the election. These things happen in a one party state.
Amazing that the party of (minority) government in a one party state is allowing an election to take place in just over two months. Notwithstanding the whiny noises emanating from Unionist parties that the election should be postponed due to Covid, I’m sure they’re ready to grasp this opportunity with a raft of exciting new policies, talented pols and a vision for Scotland within the UK.
Most of the posters complaining about a "one-party state" seem to be ignoring the fact that Wales is easily the country in the UK for which that moniker holds true.
Again, it is worth comparing the Salmond affair with the (much more serious in terms of outcome) Sergeant affair. Nothing has ever been published about the murky suicide of Carl Sergeant. Nothing ever will.
In a real one-party state, the same party is always in power. Transition of power happens internally, when the leader of the party changes. All important posts (like the Ombudsman) are chosen from the membership of the party.
That is Wales.
Curiously, very few posters (and certainly no English Labour posters) have been at all worried about the one-party state that Labour has created west of Clawdd Offa.
Yep, and the same applied to the Labour fiefdom of Scotland for decades. This was the icing on the irony cake over the last few days.
It’s richly ironic, but that doesn’t mean we should just ignore it.
Scotland and Wales need proper PR, not the jerry-rigged and gerrymandered systems they have at present.
You seem to have missed the elephant in the room, perhaps you should cast your eye where you live, the biggest nest of crooks on the planet.
Hackney?
Yes, it also needs PR. The council is very well run by Labour, but they could do with more opposition scrutiny
Since you prefer to pontificate on other countries rather than ENGLAND sic UK sic Britain, I will point it out for you.
I’m not 100% persuaded by the case for PR at Westminster.
My annoyance with the Scottish (and Welsh) systems is that they pretend to be PR, but don’t deliver actual proportionality.
They’re fake.
Westminster system is well rigged and I agree on the fake PR systems made to keep Labour in power ( they made a mess of Scottish one ). However I think the Westminster one is far far worse than any of PR versions.
Oh I agree who is to blame. In fact I believe the Lib Dems had a role too.
Another one of those ironies that make you look at the Lib Dems and wonder what crack pipe they are on.
I agree their one chance at getting PR in 2010 and they blew it. So did Blair in 1997 to do so when he had a massive majority. He should have kept his promise to Jenkins.and seen as magnanimous. It would have changed the country to a ore more modern democracy.
I've noticed in a couple of places the term BAME being phased out in favour of something vague and inoffensive, so maybe it is on the way to being cancelled.
Have to agree with @Gardenwalker, without minimising the reality of racism, which is of course present in our society we do appear so wrapped up in the whole thing as to miss the bigger picture... class, wealth.
I would suggest the experience of a Chinese person working in the City, black kid on a council estate, Asian factory worker in the midlands, Orthodox Jewish dude in North London, Indian doctor/Chancellor of the Exchequer (I could go on) are so diverse and varied as to make the term meaningless...
I guess the term "BAME" is just about tenable when using it to cover basic prejudice against minorities. But it falls apart once analysis is widened to cover outcomes linked to social deprivation, employment status, health outcomes, educational attainment etc etc (where a key the poorer outcomes for particular minority groups are often derivative, and no directly or indirectly based on racial prejudice.
And also causes problems when applying "targets" or "key indicators" eg. based on improving eg. employment outcomes. Because the targets can often be achieved, without actually doing anything to seriously address the underlying perceived problems.
I've noticed in a couple of places the term BAME being phased out in favour of something vague and inoffensive, so maybe it is on the way to being cancelled.
Have to agree with @Gardenwalker, without minimising the reality of racism, which is of course present in our society we do appear so wrapped up in the whole thing as to miss the bigger picture... class, wealth.
I would suggest the experience of a Chinese person working in the City, black kid on a council estate, Asian factory worker in the midlands, Orthodox Jewish dude in North London, Indian doctor/Chancellor of the Exchequer (I could go on) are so diverse and varied as to make the term meaningless...
Yes, it's another way for liberals to make non whites feel disempowered and othered so that they can harness the continued victimhood into votes.
I'm quite happy to accept that Jews are an ethnic (minority) group. However, there's a bit of rewriting of history going on here today. I don't recall anybody ever referring to Ed Miliband or Michael Howard as party leaders of a minority ethnic background, despite the hints of anti-semitism in some commentary on both of them. Until today, on here.
Well you are wrong, people did mention it certainly of Ed M. Sadly it's also how I discovered by father was a racist based on how he referred to Ed M.
It's also completely immaterial whether people have been consistent as to whether something is a fact. The SLab position is not correct. I don't think there's anything sinister about that in the slightest, but whatever the motivation of people pointing it out that you wish to critique, the point being made is still correct.
Interesting point that imo can be overthought. Jewish - the race not the religion - is a minority ethnic grouping in the UK. That's a fact. But BAME has a black/brown/asian vibe for me, regardless of what the acronym stands for. BAME is not white. So, you ask me if a Jewish person here is a member of an ethnic minority, I'll say yes. But ask me if Ed Miliband is BAME and I'll instinctively say no. It feels wrong to say that.
I think that is a fair point - the definition of BAME doesn't exclude white minority ethnic populations, but that is how it is generally talked about and treated.
But that rather illustrates the point that it is a poor acronym to use, as well as occasionally the difficulties with precise ethnic classification (the example used near me locally is people from generation to generation marking things differently in terms of ethnicity in the census, in respect of a sizable grouping which came over from Morocco). If it is meant to be a catch all for the non-white population, then it needs a different term.
Because there is a conflict here between recognising genuine ongoing issues with regards race, and an over focus on ethnicity on all issues at all times.
Well for me we do have that word for not white - it's Bame. No need for another. It started out as an acronym but is now a word. There are lots of acronyms that become words such that what the letters stand for - or originally stood for - is secondary or forgotten. Fiat.
I really don't think that is reasonable when it is still used widely as an official classification. I'm fine with people redefining words over time, but if an official report used BAME it means what the official definition means, and if, say, a politician were to respond to a report using their own personal definition of what it means that would be needlessly confusing.
You, for instance, would read an announcement about BAME communities and decide, entirely incorrectly, that it only applied to non white people. How would that be sensible or reasonable, if you then used those erroneous conclusions to make a point?
The acronym, being an HR thing, is not secondary or forgotten, in fact BAME is quite recent as not that long ago it was simply BME for a start. So I find the assertion its meaning could have been forgotten or become secondary to be rather ridiculous.
Why use a term for non-white which at the very least used to include some number of white people, when you just want to say non-white? That seems needlessly confusing, like picking a slogan that has another meaning as well, rather than using one which does not have another meaning.
I can see it leading to hordes of Naomi Wolf like misunderstandings, as people read all about BAME stats in reports and and data, and conclude it means something it does not, all because you don't want to say non-white when referring to non-white and so coopted it to mean something else?
There is something like that in any such situation, as people will rely on some pretty precise detail with impressive recall, at the same time and even involving the same issues as something they claim to be pretty vague about. Granted, the human memory is a pretty bizarre thing, I can recall quotes from some movies I've seen once in 20 years, yet not what I had for breakfast 2 weeks, but it does always make the certainty of a lot of claims, in defence or attack, seem questionable.
Hague is a numpty, failed dog food salesman trying to pretend he is an economist. When will unionists realise using absolute clowns like that don't help their cause, just makes them look like the shifty slime balls they are.
Hague got a first class honours in PPE from Magdalen College, Oxford and an MBA from INSEAD. Just saying.
I wonder if he’ll threaten to close down his business in Scotland and put his employees out of work when the next referendum comes around? Just saying.
Once again, I am forced to look beyond the euphoria of the vaccination figures and look at some of the realities beneath the statistics.
1 million people over 16 in Devon and nearly 400,000 have had first vaccinations so a respectable 40%. In Newham, 275,000 people over 16 - only 43,670 have had a first dose so that's 14%.
There needs to be a significant diversion of resources and logistics into those areas lagging behind to make sure we are all in the same position as restrictions are eased. It will be fine for those who are vaccinated to move more freely but if areas have significant numbers of unvaccinated people still at risk there's a potential problem.
Once again, I am forced to look beyond the euphoria of the vaccination figures and look at some of the realities beneath the statistics.
1 million people over 16 in Devon and nearly 400,000 have had first vaccinations so a respectable 40%. In Newham, 275,000 people over 16 - only 43,670 have had a first dose so that's 14%.
There needs to be a significant diversion of resources and logistics into those areas lagging behind to make sure we are all in the same position as restrictions are eased. It will be fine for those who are vaccinated to move more freely but if areas have significant numbers of unvaccinated people still at risk there's a potential problem.
Out of interest how are these population statistics produced? Not saying there isn't an issue, but i suspect the figures for Newham are likely to be far less accurate than those for Devon.
Once again, I am forced to look beyond the euphoria of the vaccination figures and look at some of the realities beneath the statistics.
1 million people over 16 in Devon and nearly 400,000 have had first vaccinations so a respectable 40%. In Newham, 275,000 people over 16 - only 43,670 have had a first dose so that's 14%.
There needs to be a significant diversion of resources and logistics into those areas lagging behind to make sure we are all in the same position as restrictions are eased. It will be fine for those who are vaccinated to move more freely but if areas have significant numbers of unvaccinated people still at risk there's a potential problem.
What is the age demographic of Newham be Devon? What is the difference in ethnic backgrounds? How efficient are local services in Newham?
Once again, I am forced to look beyond the euphoria of the vaccination figures and look at some of the realities beneath the statistics.
1 million people over 16 in Devon and nearly 400,000 have had first vaccinations so a respectable 40%. In Newham, 275,000 people over 16 - only 43,670 have had a first dose so that's 14%.
There needs to be a significant diversion of resources and logistics into those areas lagging behind to make sure we are all in the same position as restrictions are eased. It will be fine for those who are vaccinated to move more freely but if areas have significant numbers of unvaccinated people still at risk there's a potential problem.
What is the age demographic of Newham be Devon? What is the difference in ethnic backgrounds? How efficient are local services in Newham?
Good point also. The key indicator should be % of priority groups vaccinated, not % of overall population.
My crystal ball forecasts a quick swivel from a sotto voce ‘you’re not getting a referendum cos you’d win it’ to a bellow of ‘you’re not getting a referendum cos you’d lose it, what’s the point?’
There’s no swivel. You’re just not getting a referendum.
Interesting topic from court case in Guardian that shows witness on oath proves Sturgeon is telling porkie. Their lies are all catching up with them and as ever it is the cover up rather than the lies that will get them
As Jackson appeared to finish his questioning and walked towards his seat, Salmond leaned across in the dock and spoke to him quietly. Jackson returned to the lectern and asked Aberdein: “I’m reminded; tell me if I’m wrong. There was a meeting between you, [a complainant] and Nicola Sturgeon?”
Aberdein submitted a statement to the Enquiry, but they have refused to publish it on their website.
The Herald says they have also refused to consider it (on the basis I assume that the Crown Office - chief prosecution authority - refuse to allow evidence from the case to be considered by the Parliamentary Enquiry).
Salmond also said he had 3 letters from them instructing him not to give material (such as mentioned previously) on pain of being in Contempt of Court (I think that was the one).
Once again, I am forced to look beyond the euphoria of the vaccination figures and look at some of the realities beneath the statistics.
1 million people over 16 in Devon and nearly 400,000 have had first vaccinations so a respectable 40%. In Newham, 275,000 people over 16 - only 43,670 have had a first dose so that's 14%.
There needs to be a significant diversion of resources and logistics into those areas lagging behind to make sure we are all in the same position as restrictions are eased. It will be fine for those who are vaccinated to move more freely but if areas have significant numbers of unvaccinated people still at risk there's a potential problem.
Do we know why so few have had it in Newham? I would think that is the first task: find out what the problem is so it can be dealt with.
Devon does seem to be doing very well: my step-mother has had both jabs already, with the first being given to her before Christmas. She is over 80, but it was still pretty rapid.
Ed Miliband been unpersoned in Scotland over 2015?
Is he the first Asian leader of a major UK political party ?
Yes, if you don’t count Johnson (which for all my mischievous trolling, you probably shouldn’t). And I fully agree that is a good thing. And I have no doubt he will be the first of many.
But ‘ethnic minority’ and ‘Asian’ are not quite the same thing. All Asians in this country are members of an ethnic minority, but not all ethnic minorities are Asian.
The annoying thing about this claim he is the first EM leader of a political party is it distracts from the real achievement that you highlight above.
Thanks I said yesterday ethnic minority my mistake . His family have done very well from coming to Scotland a few generations ago. From hearing his acceptance speech, which was good.
Hardly your mistake, it’s Labour that were pushing that line.
If Jews are BAMEs does that mean you can convert to BAMEhood?
It is almost impossible to ‘convert’ to Judaism. It is not like Islam or Christianity. The only effective way to do it is to marry somebody who is Jewish.
That's not true. It is possible but difficult. My cousin's daughter did so to marry her Jewish boyfriend and we all then had a very jolly Irish-Jewish wedding near Harrogate a few years back.
Could someone please explain - briefly - why Salmond and Sturgeon fell out. I thought they were best mates. So why would she be - allegedly - trying to put him in prison?
The former "first daughter" Ivanka Trump was a high-profile convert, of course. She might yet become the first Jewish president of the United States if she stands in 2024.
I think can help explain the depth of Salmond's fury, having listened to the 6hr testimony.
One issue is over harrassment policies.
The former harrassment policy had been introduced by Mr Salmond, via what he regarded as the proper process, consultation etc, back soon after the SNP became the Government (2007 ?). Can't recall all the details so I will not attempt to rehearse it here.
After #Metoo NS very rapidly introduced a modified policy, which brought complaints about Former Ministers in scope ie historic complaints. That new policy was not subject to consultations, done via legislation, Salmond was not consulted etc etc.
Very rapidly he was the subject of a number of historic complaints, up to attempted rape. And these appeared very suddenly.
Subsequently it went into an official ScotGov investigation, which the Civil Court found to have been unlawfully run. Not sure of the reasons given by the Court but this is part of the controversy around withheld evidence, forgotten about meetings etc. Salmond won that case (was it a Judicial Review?) and 500k+ of his costs (=85% which is a punitive level).
After that started but before it reached a verdict, a parallel police Criminal investigation started, which raised the possibility that it would overtake and rub out the Civil Court Action against the other case (to - allegedly - Sturgeon's advantage). There are allegations about the way this police investigation was generated.
The Committee is investigating how the Scottish Gov handled these processes and the investigation, and seems to have been set up strangely (one afternoon a week, no Counsel), and evidence that seems relevant has been scoped out procedurally so they cannot consider it etc.
So it is all murky.
Without reaching any judgement, I think that Salmond faced up to years in prison would probably explain his determination / resolution. He feels he has been mugged via procedural politics with the possibility of his life being destroyed.
As for Sturgeon, various reasons have been suggested above. I have no comment in this post.
Only one bit wrong Matt, the complaints were manufactured , that is the evidence they are hiding , if the names came out it would be obvious. They even said as much in their whatsapp meetings whilst planning the stories supposedly but that too is being hidden. Amazing a government minister heading the Crown office can stop parliament seeing the evidence. Banana republic stuff.
To be fair to Salmond, had my previous friend looked to allegedly develop a situation that would ultimately see me imprisoned, then my political ideology would probably take a back seat.
I’ve no idea what the truth of the matter is, but the quality of Salmonds arguments on Friday were impressive
Especially if you had looked at previous ones , all civil servants and Murrel had to write back and say they had inadvertently told whoppers by mistake / forgetfulness to the inquiry after documentary evidence appeared and they now remembered that indeed the things had happened. Murrel kept looking to his left and Baillie eventually asked if he had someone in the room with him , he asked if she was suggesting conspiracy and that only thing there was a magpie, in the garden one presumes even though he was facing away from the windows.
The magpie thing was just a piss take. A more robust Parliament would have had him for contempt.
Ed Miliband been unpersoned in Scotland over 2015?
Is he the first Asian leader of a major UK political party ?
Yes, if you don’t count Johnson (which for all my mischievous trolling, you probably shouldn’t). And I fully agree that is a good thing. And I have no doubt he will be the first of many.
But ‘ethnic minority’ and ‘Asian’ are not quite the same thing. All Asians in this country are members of an ethnic minority, but not all ethnic minorities are Asian.
The annoying thing about this claim he is the first EM leader of a political party is it distracts from the real achievement that you highlight above.
Thanks I said yesterday ethnic minority my mistake . His family have done very well from coming to Scotland a few generations ago. From hearing his acceptance speech, which was good.
Hardly your mistake, it’s Labour that were pushing that line.
If Jews are BAMEs does that mean you can convert to BAMEhood?
It is almost impossible to ‘convert’ to Judaism. It is not like Islam or Christianity. The only effective way to do it is to marry somebody who is Jewish.
That's not true. It is possible but difficult. My cousin's daughter did so to marry her Jewish boyfriend and we all then had a very jolly Irish-Jewish wedding near Harrogate a few years back.
Could someone please explain - briefly - why Salmond and Sturgeon fell out. I thought they were best mates. So why would she be - allegedly - trying to put him in prison?
The former "first daughter" Ivanka Trump was a high-profile convert, of course. She might yet become the first Jewish president of the United States if she stands in 2024.
I think can help explain the depth of Salmond's fury, having listened to the 6hr testimony.
One issue is over harrassment policies.
The former harrassment policy had been introduced by Mr Salmond, via what he regarded as the proper process, consultation etc, back soon after the SNP became the Government (2007 ?). Can't recall all the details so I will not attempt to rehearse it here.
After #Metoo NS very rapidly introduced a modified policy, which brought complaints about Former Ministers in scope ie historic complaints. That new policy was not subject to consultations, done via legislation, Salmond was not consulted etc etc.
Very rapidly he was the subject of a number of historic complaints, up to attempted rape. And these appeared very suddenly.
Subsequently it went into an official ScotGov investigation, which the Civil Court found to have been unlawfully run. Not sure of the reasons given by the Court but this is part of the controversy around withheld evidence, forgotten about meetings etc. Salmond won that case (was it a Judicial Review?) and 500k+ of his costs (=85% which is a punitive level).
After that started but before it reached a verdict, a parallel police Criminal investigation started, which raised the possibility that it would overtake and rub out the Civil Court Action against the other case (to - allegedly - Sturgeon's advantage). There are allegations about the way this police investigation was generated.
The Committee is investigating how the Scottish Gov handled these processes and the investigation, and seems to have been set up strangely (one afternoon a week, no Counsel), and evidence that seems relevant has been scoped out procedurally so they cannot consider it etc.
So it is all murky.
Without reaching any judgement, I think that Salmond faced up to years in prison would probably explain his determination / resolution. He feels he has been mugged via procedural politics with the possibility of his life being destroyed.
As for Sturgeon, various reasons have been suggested above. I have no comment in this post.
Only one bit wrong Matt, the complaints were manufactured , that is the evidence they are hiding , if the names came out it would be obvious. They even said as much in their whatsapp meetings whilst planning the stories supposedly but that too is being hidden. Amazing a government minister heading the Crown office can stop parliament seeing the evidence. Banana republic stuff.
To be fair to Salmond, had my previous friend looked to allegedly develop a situation that would ultimately see me imprisoned, then my political ideology would probably take a back seat.
I’ve no idea what the truth of the matter is, but the quality of Salmonds arguments on Friday were impressive
Especially if you had looked at previous ones , all civil servants and Murrel had to write back and say they had inadvertently told whoppers by mistake / forgetfulness to the inquiry after documentary evidence appeared and they now remembered that indeed the things had happened. Murrel kept looking to his left and Baillie eventually asked if he had someone in the room with him , he asked if she was suggesting conspiracy and that only thing there was a magpie, in the garden one presumes even though he was facing away from the windows.
Once again, I am forced to look beyond the euphoria of the vaccination figures and look at some of the realities beneath the statistics.
1 million people over 16 in Devon and nearly 400,000 have had first vaccinations so a respectable 40%. In Newham, 275,000 people over 16 - only 43,670 have had a first dose so that's 14%.
There needs to be a significant diversion of resources and logistics into those areas lagging behind to make sure we are all in the same position as restrictions are eased. It will be fine for those who are vaccinated to move more freely but if areas have significant numbers of unvaccinated people still at risk there's a potential problem.
Out of interest how are these population statistics produced? Not saying there isn't an issue, but i suspect the figures for Newham are likely to be far less accurate than those for Devon.
How many residents of Newham do not have settled addresses. Idon'yt mean homeless, but are moving from bed-sit to bed-sit every couple of months. Come to that, how many homeless are there. All compared with Devon. Both sets are difficult to reach by officialdom, sometimes by design!
Interesting (as usual) piece from Andrew Tickell (forgive me if it has been flagged up, I've been out on DIY this sunny morning). Seems the complainant anonymity issue ramifies further than many realise.
Once again, I am forced to look beyond the euphoria of the vaccination figures and look at some of the realities beneath the statistics.
1 million people over 16 in Devon and nearly 400,000 have had first vaccinations so a respectable 40%. In Newham, 275,000 people over 16 - only 43,670 have had a first dose so that's 14%.
There needs to be a significant diversion of resources and logistics into those areas lagging behind to make sure we are all in the same position as restrictions are eased. It will be fine for those who are vaccinated to move more freely but if areas have significant numbers of unvaccinated people still at risk there's a potential problem.
Is there evidence that the logistics and resources are not there? Unless you wish to introduce an element of compulsion there has to be a limit on what can be done surely.
Once again, I am forced to look beyond the euphoria of the vaccination figures and look at some of the realities beneath the statistics.
1 million people over 16 in Devon and nearly 400,000 have had first vaccinations so a respectable 40%. In Newham, 275,000 people over 16 - only 43,670 have had a first dose so that's 14%.
There needs to be a significant diversion of resources and logistics into those areas lagging behind to make sure we are all in the same position as restrictions are eased. It will be fine for those who are vaccinated to move more freely but if areas have significant numbers of unvaccinated people still at risk there's a potential problem.
What is the age demographic of Newham be Devon? What is the difference in ethnic backgrounds? How efficient are local services in Newham?
Why is there not a chorus of complaints from Newham from people who haven't had the vaccine, despite being in the various groups?
I'm quite happy to accept that Jews are an ethnic (minority) group. However, there's a bit of rewriting of history going on here today. I don't recall anybody ever referring to Ed Miliband or Michael Howard as party leaders of a minority ethnic background, despite the hints of anti-semitism in some commentary on both of them. Until today, on here.
Well you are wrong, people did mention it certainly of Ed M. Sadly it's also how I discovered by father was a racist based on how he referred to Ed M.
It's also completely immaterial whether people have been consistent as to whether something is a fact. The SLab position is not correct. I don't think there's anything sinister about that in the slightest, but whatever the motivation of people pointing it out that you wish to critique, the point being made is still correct.
Interesting point that imo can be overthought. Jewish - the race not the religion - is a minority ethnic grouping in the UK. That's a fact. But BAME has a black/brown/asian vibe for me, regardless of what the acronym stands for. BAME is not white. So, you ask me if a Jewish person here is a member of an ethnic minority, I'll say yes. But ask me if Ed Miliband is BAME and I'll instinctively say no. It feels wrong to say that.
I think that is a fair point - the definition of BAME doesn't exclude white minority ethnic populations, but that is how it is generally talked about and treated.
But that rather illustrates the point that it is a poor acronym to use, as well as occasionally the difficulties with precise ethnic classification (the example used near me locally is people from generation to generation marking things differently in terms of ethnicity in the census, in respect of a sizable grouping which came over from Morocco). If it is meant to be a catch all for the non-white population, then it needs a different term.
Because there is a conflict here between recognising genuine ongoing issues with regards race, and an over focus on ethnicity on all issues at all times.
Well for me we do have that word for not white - it's Bame. No need for another. It started out as an acronym but is now a word. There are lots of acronyms that become words such that what the letters stand for - or originally stood for - is secondary or forgotten. Fiat.
I really don't think that is reasonable when it is still used widely as an official classification. I'm fine with people redefining words over time, but if an official report used BAME it means what the official definition means, and if, say, a politician were to respond to a report using their own personal definition of what it means that would be needlessly confusing.
You, for instance, would read an announcement about BAME communities and decide, entirely incorrectly, that it only applied to non white people. How would that be sensible or reasonable, if you then used those erroneous conclusions to make a point?
The acronym, being an HR thing, is not secondary or forgotten, in fact BAME is quite recent as not that long ago it was simply BME for a start. So I find the assertion its meaning could have been forgotten or become secondary to be rather ridiculous.
Why use a term for non-white which at the very least used to include some number of white people, when you just want to say non-white? That seems needlessly confusing, like picking a slogan that has another meaning as well, rather than using one which does not have another meaning.
I can see it leading to hordes of Naomi Wolf like misunderstandings, as people read all about BAME stats in reports and and data, and conclude it means something it does not, all because you don't want to say non-white when referring to non-white and so coopted it to mean something else?
Not sure there is much of a difference between "not white" and "Bame" as per how most of the stats are done. Drop it in favour of "not white"? No problem as far as I'm concerned. I'm white anyway.
I'm quite happy to accept that Jews are an ethnic (minority) group. However, there's a bit of rewriting of history going on here today. I don't recall anybody ever referring to Ed Miliband or Michael Howard as party leaders of a minority ethnic background, despite the hints of anti-semitism in some commentary on both of them. Until today, on here.
Well you are wrong, people did mention it certainly of Ed M. Sadly it's also how I discovered by father was a racist based on how he referred to Ed M.
It's also completely immaterial whether people have been consistent as to whether something is a fact. The SLab position is not correct. I don't think there's anything sinister about that in the slightest, but whatever the motivation of people pointing it out that you wish to critique, the point being made is still correct.
Interesting point that imo can be overthought. Jewish - the race not the religion - is a minority ethnic grouping in the UK. That's a fact. But BAME has a black/brown/asian vibe for me, regardless of what the acronym stands for. BAME is not white. So, you ask me if a Jewish person here is a member of an ethnic minority, I'll say yes. But ask me if Ed Miliband is BAME and I'll instinctively say no. It feels wrong to say that.
I think that is a fair point - the definition of BAME doesn't exclude white minority ethnic populations, but that is how it is generally talked about and treated.
But that rather illustrates the point that it is a poor acronym to use, as well as occasionally the difficulties with precise ethnic classification (the example used near me locally is people from generation to generation marking things differently in terms of ethnicity in the census, in respect of a sizable grouping which came over from Morocco). If it is meant to be a catch all for the non-white population, then it needs a different term.
Because there is a conflict here between recognising genuine ongoing issues with regards race, and an over focus on ethnicity on all issues at all times.
Well for me we do have that word for not white - it's Bame. No need for another. It started out as an acronym but is now a word. There are lots of acronyms that become words such that what the letters stand for - or originally stood for - is secondary or forgotten. Fiat.
It is quite literally not what the word means.
The word has a literal meaning and is used in statistics etc so understanding what a word actually means is important and not to be flippantly thrown away.
Once again, I am forced to look beyond the euphoria of the vaccination figures and look at some of the realities beneath the statistics.
1 million people over 16 in Devon and nearly 400,000 have had first vaccinations so a respectable 40%. In Newham, 275,000 people over 16 - only 43,670 have had a first dose so that's 14%.
There needs to be a significant diversion of resources and logistics into those areas lagging behind to make sure we are all in the same position as restrictions are eased. It will be fine for those who are vaccinated to move more freely but if areas have significant numbers of unvaccinated people still at risk there's a potential problem.
I'm strongly of the view that it's more important that the rollout is fast, than that we are vaccinated in an ideal order. So a degree of uneveness is to be expected.
But if we want to get as close to 100% as possible we do have to look ahead to where the most difficult 10% or so will be. And that's places like your patch.
What we don't want to see is doses sitting in fridges unused because we're trying to make sure areas of the country aren't left behind.
TL;DR - around half of Newham's underperformance is directly explained by age. Some of the remainder may also be, but there does seem to be reduced takeup among ethnic minority communities.
In Newham, 24.4% (86,068) of the population are under 18 years, 67.9% (239,838) are aged 18 to 64 years and 7.7% (27,228) are aged 65 years and older.
Across the UK as a whole, an estimated 18.9% of the population were under 16 years old (for some reason I couldn't easily find 18) and 62.9% were aged 16 to 64 years, with 18.2% over 65.
If the UK has vaccinated (first dose) 36%, then about half of those people are over 65, a percentage which is consistent with Newham. However the absolute difference is not fully explained by age, since even if we add 11% to the Newham figure, we get 25%, well short of the 36% nationally.
Some of that gap is likely to be explained by a lower median age (both now we have started 60-64 vaccinations, plus high risk individuals generally) for Newham within the 18-64 band, as evidenced by a lower median age (Newham: 32.3 years, UK, 40.5).
I still don't think it is fully explained, which is consistent with other data (e.g. NHS staff) showing lower ethnic minority takeup, even where everyone is offered a vaccine. It's just not quite as dramatic as suggested.
These areas should still be on track to hit 70%+ takeup, compared to 90%+ (!!) nationally.
I'm quite happy to accept that Jews are an ethnic (minority) group. However, there's a bit of rewriting of history going on here today. I don't recall anybody ever referring to Ed Miliband or Michael Howard as party leaders of a minority ethnic background, despite the hints of anti-semitism in some commentary on both of them. Until today, on here.
Well you are wrong, people did mention it certainly of Ed M. Sadly it's also how I discovered by father was a racist based on how he referred to Ed M.
It's also completely immaterial whether people have been consistent as to whether something is a fact. The SLab position is not correct. I don't think there's anything sinister about that in the slightest, but whatever the motivation of people pointing it out that you wish to critique, the point being made is still correct.
Interesting point that imo can be overthought. Jewish - the race not the religion - is a minority ethnic grouping in the UK. That's a fact. But BAME has a black/brown/asian vibe for me, regardless of what the acronym stands for. BAME is not white. So, you ask me if a Jewish person here is a member of an ethnic minority, I'll say yes. But ask me if Ed Miliband is BAME and I'll instinctively say no. It feels wrong to say that.
I think that is a fair point - the definition of BAME doesn't exclude white minority ethnic populations, but that is how it is generally talked about and treated.
But that rather illustrates the point that it is a poor acronym to use, as well as occasionally the difficulties with precise ethnic classification (the example used near me locally is people from generation to generation marking things differently in terms of ethnicity in the census, in respect of a sizable grouping which came over from Morocco). If it is meant to be a catch all for the non-white population, then it needs a different term.
Because there is a conflict here between recognising genuine ongoing issues with regards race, and an over focus on ethnicity on all issues at all times.
Well for me we do have that word for not white - it's Bame. No need for another. It started out as an acronym but is now a word. There are lots of acronyms that become words such that what the letters stand for - or originally stood for - is secondary or forgotten. Fiat.
It is quite literally not what the word means.
The word has a literal meaning and is used in statistics etc so understanding what a word actually means is important and not to be flippantly thrown away.
It's close enough to what it means to be what it means - and acronyms do sometimes develop into common currency words with a wider or narrower meaning than they started out as.
Vaccines can get us to herd immunity, despite the variants
“What we’re seeing is that these variants don’t seem to affect T-cell immunity all that much and they [the T-cells] seem to be as effective in recognizing these variants as they do the original virus,” Alter said. “What that means is that we actually have very important backup mechanisms built into our vaccines that will continue to provide protection against these newly emerging variants.”
...
“That doesn’t mean the road ahead will be easy, Alter said. She acknowledged that the lower level of effectiveness against the variants means that more people will have to be vaccinated to achieve the same population-wide protective effects. Earlier estimates based on highly effective vaccines held that 50 percent to 60 percent of the population would have to be vaccinated in order to create herd effects. At 70 percent effectiveness, she said, the threshold will rise to roughly 75 percent, significantly higher, but nonetheless still achievable.”
...
“The toll in lives has been extraordinary and the economic loss, also staggering,” Daley said. “While we in the medical community are guardedly hopeful and optimistic that the vaccines promise the end of the current pandemic, there is cause for concern that with the appearance of viral variants across the globe, we might be facing a decidedly novel stage of the contagion: COVID 2.0.”
It’s also worth noting that outsiders have always regarded Jewish people as an ethnic group. Even after conversion, Conversios in Spain were still subject to repression by the Inquisition, and one could not convert one’s way to safety under the Nazis. Debates about whether or not they actually are are somewhat otiose in that context.
In 1492 the Jews in Spain were given the choice between becoming Christians and leaving the country. If they decided to remain, they were Catholics, and it was as such that the Holy Inquisition took an interest in them, to make sure that they were not still practising their old religion. They were hardly "repressed", still less persecuted on the basis of their skin colour.
So they faced particular negative attention despite now being catholics, on the basis of their ethnicity as (former) jews? And they faced that choice in the first place because of their ethnoreligious position?
Not ethnicity at all, I think. Just signs of their previous religion, since they were supposed to have given it up. The Inquisition was interested in anybody who claimed to be a Christian (Catholic) who was not completely aligned with the correct version. It was also pretty strong in its moves against Protestants - there were some in Spain, you know - but they were soon eliminated.
Boris Johnson was very quick to remove Conservative politicians who did not share his version of the truth. This received wide acclaim from the true believers among the PB Tories. And I think something similar happens in the Labour Party from time to time.
Once again, I am forced to look beyond the euphoria of the vaccination figures and look at some of the realities beneath the statistics.
1 million people over 16 in Devon and nearly 400,000 have had first vaccinations so a respectable 40%. In Newham, 275,000 people over 16 - only 43,670 have had a first dose so that's 14%.
There needs to be a significant diversion of resources and logistics into those areas lagging behind to make sure we are all in the same position as restrictions are eased. It will be fine for those who are vaccinated to move more freely but if areas have significant numbers of unvaccinated people still at risk there's a potential problem.
I'm strongly of the view that it's more important that the rollout is fast, than that we are vaccinated in an ideal order. So a degree of uneveness is to be expected.
But if we want to get as close to 100% as possible we do have to look ahead to where the most difficult 10% or so will be. And that's places like your patch.
What we don't want to see is doses sitting in fridges unused because we're trying to make sure areas of the country aren't left behind.
I’d argue that vaccination in Devon is, for the same reason vaccination in New Zealand will be, even more important than places like East London and Kent. A significantly higher percentage of people over here have had the bug and thus some degree of immunity. On the South West Peninsula that proportion is much much lower.
No and she is not going to. There are 2 SNP muppets and an ex Green sock-puppet on the committee who will protect her regardless of the evidence. Fraser and Baillie are outgunned. The Lib Dems seem too stupid to contribute anything of note. At worst the head of our Civil Service will take early retirement on a generous package.
I'd like to think that this would cause both Sturgeon and her party real damage. It should. But it won't. People support the SNP because they want independence. Not because they are competent, honest, trustworthy or whatever. Its a very happy situation for a political party to be in.
Only the vague suspicion that Sturgeon is rather too fond of the trappings of office and doesn't want to risk a second referendum has caused murmurings in the ranks. A Sturgeon with a manifesto of a second referendum in the next Parliament will prevail over her domestic critics and all too probably over the opposing parties as well.
Is it even possible that the committee will get talked out until the Election?
Court challenge on something?
Very possible. The way things are going it is quite likely that Crown Office will demand changes to the report and who knows how long that might take?
A bit like the report on the desperate state of Scottish education that is on Swinney's desk but will not be published until after the election. These things happen in a one party state.
Amazing that the party of (minority) government in a one party state is allowing an election to take place in just over two months. Notwithstanding the whiny noises emanating from Unionist parties that the election should be postponed due to Covid, I’m sure they’re ready to grasp this opportunity with a raft of exciting new policies, talented pols and a vision for Scotland within the UK.
Most of the posters complaining about a "one-party state" seem to be ignoring the fact that Wales is easily the country in the UK for which that moniker holds true.
Again, it is worth comparing the Salmond affair with the (much more serious in terms of outcome) Sergeant affair. Nothing has ever been published about the murky suicide of Carl Sergeant. Nothing ever will.
In a real one-party state, the same party is always in power. Transition of power happens internally, when the leader of the party changes. All important posts (like the Ombudsman) are chosen from the membership of the party.
That is Wales.
Curiously, very few posters (and certainly no English Labour posters) have been at all worried about the one-party state that Labour has created west of Clawdd Offa.
Yep, and the same applied to the Labour fiefdom of Scotland for decades. This was the icing on the irony cake over the last few days.
It’s richly ironic, but that doesn’t mean we should just ignore it.
Scotland and Wales need proper PR, not the jerry-rigged and gerrymandered systems they have at present.
You seem to have missed the elephant in the room, perhaps you should cast your eye where you live, the biggest nest of crooks on the planet.
Hackney?
Yes, it also needs PR. The council is very well run by Labour, but they could do with more opposition scrutiny
Since you prefer to pontificate on other countries rather than ENGLAND sic UK sic Britain, I will point it out for you.
I’m not 100% persuaded by the case for PR at Westminster.
My annoyance with the Scottish (and Welsh) systems is that they pretend to be PR, but don’t deliver actual proportionality.
They’re fake.
Westminster system is well rigged and I agree on the fake PR systems made to keep Labour in power ( they made a mess of Scottish one ). However I think the Westminster one is far far worse than any of PR versions.
Oh I agree who is to blame. In fact I believe the Lib Dems had a role too.
Another one of those ironies that make you look at the Lib Dems and wonder what crack pipe they are on.
I agree their one chance at getting PR in 2010 and they blew it. So did Blair in 1997 to do so when he had a massive majority. He should have kept his promise to Jenkins.and seen as magnanimous. It would have changed the country to a ore more modern democracy.
PR would have ensured no more Tory majority governments but also would have meant that Corbyn would not have got as close to power in 2017 as he did.
Instead the LDs would hold the balance of power in almost every general election (bar 2015 when UKIP would have been the Kingmakers) and the Coalition of 2010 to 2015 would become the norm, indeed Blair himself would have needed the LDs to form a government in 1997
Comments
Not so sure about the goose cooking though and the closer she can run this to an election the more likely it is that the party will rally around her.
Are you aware how the housing market works in chains? So long as the plan is for owner occupiers only and not buying second homes there's no problem including existing owners . . . if they are moving.
Put it this way, lets say someone buys a home using the scheme in Newcastle. Then they get a job offer in Plymouth and they wish to relocate. The only way to do so is to sell their home in Newcastle and buy a new home in Plymouth . . . but that may entail requiring to use the scheme again in order to do so. Why should they be deliberately excluded?
If you exclude them from the scheme then potentially you're forcing them to rent somewhere in Plymouth which can only be afforded by them letting out their own home in Newcastle, so rather than 2 homes sold to owner occupiers you now have 2 homes let out by landlords. Do you consider that better?
Especially in the medium term with no chance of Johnson approving an official one.
Plus many on the edge of supporting a yes vote might not think the country is ready now.
Remarkable.
BAME is a term designed to be used by non-BAME people.
But yes, a tool.
For example, a number of the speeches/articles about Thatcher would be viewed as instant-resignation-grade misogyny, today.
The Labour position on it is complicated by the attempted mapping of race onto politics - in this view all member of "BAME" are the downtrodden, automatically. The evident problems with this view of the world, such as existence of Rishi Sunak, leads to comedy such as the recent Guardian article.
The problem for some at least of us is that when the inevitable political catastrophe hits him, we'll all suffer.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2005/feb/01/advertising.politicsandthemedia
Yes, it also needs PR.
The council is very well run by Labour, but they could do with more opposition scrutiny
Just saying.
I for one will not vote for SNP if she is still there and will be someone else on list.
Lots of people whilst desperate for independence have morals and principles.
Remarkable coincidence ...
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2005/feb/01/advertising.politicsandthemedia
"Both Mr Howard and Mr Letwin are Jewish and according to their faith pigs are unclean.
The other poster featured Mr Howard swinging a pocket watch on a chain and the strapline, "I can spend the same money twice."
The pose has been likened to that of Jewish pickpocket Fagin from Charles Dickens' Oliver and money lender Shylock from Shakespeare's The Merchant of Venice.
Jewish Labour MPs said they did not believe the posters were deliberately anti-semitic but found them offensive nonetheless."
https://twitter.com/kevverage/status/1315618031444295680?s=20
Just saying.
Be careful.
I love this notion Wales is a "one party state". The same can be said for England and for Scotland and of course it's completely wrong.
It's not even "one party Government" in Wales or even Scotland and to be fair it's only been 2015-17 and 2019 onwards that has been the case in the UK.
If you want a better example of a "one party State", I give you the London Borough of Newham. 60 Councillors, all Labour. I have no problem with Labour running the Council seeing as they got 65% of the vote but, unlike in Wales, Scotland and elsewhere, the 35% who didn't vote Labour are completely unrepresented.
Even if there were 10 Opposition Councillors, it would mean other voices were heard, other options considered and the Borough would be better for it but the current voting system doesn't allow for the representation of minorities unless there are any areas where they are majorities.
Needless to say, even Newham isn't really a one Party State. It's a one Party Government but to be fair the Conservatives, Lib Dems, Greens and others have every right to organise and campaign. Their lack of (or inability to obtain) representation may or may not be a flaw depending on your perspective but that doesn't mean they can't put up candidates.
At least I know I can express my opinion and that my vote will be counted even if it makes no difference to the overall result - that's infinitely better than is the case for all too many people elsewhere.
But that rather illustrates the point that it is a poor acronym to use, as well as occasionally the difficulties with precise ethnic classification (the example used near me locally is people from generation to generation marking things differently in terms of ethnicity in the census, in respect of a sizable grouping which came over from Morocco). If it is meant to be a catch all for the non-white population, then it needs a different term.
Because there is a conflict here between recognising genuine ongoing issues with regards race, and an over focus on ethnicity on all issues at all times.
Regardless of that it does seem odd that 9 people can get it wrong at same time.
My annoyance with the Scottish (and Welsh) systems is that they pretend to be PR, but don’t deliver actual proportionality.
They’re fake.
I’ve no idea what the truth of the matter is, but the quality of Salmonds arguments on Friday were impressive
It screams public sector box ticking.
Why do we even need such a term?
It’s essentially a bureaucratically friendly way of saying non-white.
Except when you say, “non-white” the sheer awfulness of distinguishing between different colours of people is laid bare.
It’s tragic we are so wrapped up in race when class (and wealth) remain the key inequality in society.
In fact I believe the Lib Dems had a role too.
Another one of those ironies that make you look at the Lib Dems and wonder what crack pipe they are on.
I don’t think this is end of Sturgeon.
But it is surely the beginning of the end.
Her apogee is over. She is holed beneath the water line.
I still expect the SNP to gain an outright majority in the May elections, but I can’t see Sturgeon lasting the whole of the next term.
They are financially constrained by central Government, subject to constant direction and diktat and are basically little more than the contractor for central Government.
If local authorities had real financial and political power, that would, I believe, re-invigorate local democracy to the general benefit. Now, that will be the cue for Uncle Tom Cobley and all to come on and tell us all how useless local Councillors are and how it's fortunate none of them have any real power. I think if you provided real authority you'd get better decision making and better decision makers.
One of my pet peeves is economies of scale - who remembers Border, Westward, Grampian and Southern television? Genuine local voices but in the end all taken over by larger organisations and the local identity diluted and eventually lost. The same happened with local newspapers and you see the same in other sectors - economic driven homogeneity destroying local character and characteristics. It's cheaper for everything to be the same rather than for separate identities to exist.
He asserted that there were many more much more damning in material he had relating to the trial and the case, and that he was prevented from giving those to the committee.
(He also asserted that he had many - 30 or 40 - relevant documents that had not been disclosed by ScotGov to the previous trial despite requirements to do so, and was under legal injunctions not to do so.)
(This can be found I think in the last hour of the hearing.)
But Rape Crisis Scotland assert in their statement that a Whatsapp group amongst the complainants was for mutual support.
If more is coming out here it will either be because the Scotland Act 1998
Section 23 Notice to Salmond's solicitor sticks, or because the Spectator or a n other gets hold of it and publishes it outside the jurisdiction.
The second of these will not result in it being in scope for the Committee.
And I'll shut up now, but a reminder that we have only heard one side.
Have to agree with @Gardenwalker, without minimising the reality of racism, which is of course present in our society we do appear so wrapped up in the whole thing as to miss the bigger picture... class, wealth.
I would suggest the experience of a Chinese person working in the City, black kid on a council estate, Asian factory worker in the midlands, Orthodox Jewish dude in North London, Indian doctor/Chancellor of the Exchequer (I could go on) are so diverse and varied as to make the term meaningless...
As Jackson appeared to finish his questioning and walked towards his seat, Salmond leaned across in the dock and spoke to him quietly. Jackson returned to the lectern and asked Aberdein: “I’m reminded; tell me if I’m wrong. There was a meeting between you, [a complainant] and Nicola Sturgeon?”
Aberdein confirmed a meeting had taken place in Sturgeon’s office. Asked if that complainant had given “any hint of any personal involvement” in issues around the misconduct at a further meeting, Aberdein said “never”.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/mar/18/alex-salmond-trial-told-sturgeon-took-part-in-meeting-with-complainant
Actually, more of an obsession.
Britain has decided to waste a massive amount of human capital by centralising the shit out of everything.
So did Blair in 1997 to do so when he had a massive majority.
He should have kept his promise to Jenkins.and seen as magnanimous.
It would have changed the country to a ore more modern democracy.
And also causes problems when applying "targets" or "key indicators" eg. based on improving eg. employment outcomes. Because the targets can often be achieved, without actually doing anything to seriously address the underlying perceived problems.
You, for instance, would read an announcement about BAME communities and decide, entirely incorrectly, that it only applied to non white people. How would that be sensible or reasonable, if you then used those erroneous conclusions to make a point?
The acronym, being an HR thing, is not secondary or forgotten, in fact BAME is quite recent as not that long ago it was simply BME for a start. So I find the assertion its meaning could have been forgotten or become secondary to be rather ridiculous.
Why use a term for non-white which at the very least used to include some number of white people, when you just want to say non-white? That seems needlessly confusing, like picking a slogan that has another meaning as well, rather than using one which does not have another meaning.
I can see it leading to hordes of Naomi Wolf like misunderstandings, as people read all about BAME stats in reports and and data, and conclude it means something it does not, all because you don't want to say non-white when referring to non-white and so coopted it to mean something else?
1 million people over 16 in Devon and nearly 400,000 have had first vaccinations so a respectable 40%. In Newham, 275,000 people over 16 - only 43,670 have had a first dose so that's 14%.
There needs to be a significant diversion of resources and logistics into those areas lagging behind to make sure we are all in the same position as restrictions are eased. It will be fine for those who are vaccinated to move more freely but if areas have significant numbers of unvaccinated people still at risk there's a potential problem.
The Herald says they have also refused to consider it (on the basis I assume that the Crown Office - chief prosecution authority - refuse to allow evidence from the case to be considered by the Parliamentary Enquiry).
Salmond also said he had 3 letters from them instructing him not to give material (such as mentioned previously) on pain of being in Contempt of Court (I think that was the one).
https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/alex-salmond-inquiry-key-evidence-former-chief-staff-withdrawn-3107960
Devon does seem to be doing very well: my step-mother has had both jabs already, with the first being given to her before Christmas. She is over 80, but it was still pretty rapid.
Both sets are difficult to reach by officialdom, sometimes by design!
Interesting (as usual) piece from Andrew Tickell (forgive me if it has been flagged up, I've been out on DIY this sunny morning). Seems the complainant anonymity issue ramifies further than many realise.
Below Gaitskell above Callaghan i think
https://twitter.com/Think_Blue_Sky/status/1365921114241835017/photo/1
The word has a literal meaning and is used in statistics etc so understanding what a word actually means is important and not to be flippantly thrown away.
But if we want to get as close to 100% as possible we do have to look ahead to where the most difficult 10% or so will be. And that's places like your patch.
What we don't want to see is doses sitting in fridges unused because we're trying to make sure areas of the country aren't left behind.
In Newham, 24.4% (86,068) of the population are under 18 years, 67.9% (239,838) are aged 18 to 64 years and 7.7% (27,228) are aged 65 years and older.
Across the UK as a whole, an estimated 18.9% of the population were under 16 years old (for some reason I couldn't easily find 18) and 62.9% were aged 16 to 64 years, with 18.2% over 65.
If the UK has vaccinated (first dose) 36%, then about half of those people are over 65, a percentage which is consistent with Newham. However the absolute difference is not fully explained by age, since even if we add 11% to the Newham figure, we get 25%, well short of the 36% nationally.
Some of that gap is likely to be explained by a lower median age (both now we have started 60-64 vaccinations, plus high risk individuals generally) for Newham within the 18-64 band, as evidenced by a lower median age (Newham: 32.3 years, UK, 40.5).
I still don't think it is fully explained, which is consistent with other data (e.g. NHS staff) showing lower ethnic minority takeup, even where everyone is offered a vaccine. It's just not quite as dramatic as suggested.
These areas should still be on track to hit 70%+ takeup, compared to 90%+ (!!) nationally.
As a result, his micro-brained anti-vax followers have been lambasting him by the hundreds since yesterday, and it is delightful:
https://twitter.com/CubicZirconia88/status/1365807875445190657
https://twitter.com/a_webb/status/1365807837977452544
https://twitter.com/G0odL1fe/status/1365797315781554176
“What we’re seeing is that these variants don’t seem to affect T-cell immunity all that much and they [the T-cells] seem to be as effective in recognizing these variants as they do the original virus,” Alter said. “What that means is that we actually have very important backup mechanisms built into our vaccines that will continue to provide protection against these newly emerging variants.”
...
“That doesn’t mean the road ahead will be easy, Alter said. She acknowledged that the lower level of effectiveness against the variants means that more people will have to be vaccinated to achieve the same population-wide protective effects. Earlier estimates based on highly effective vaccines held that 50 percent to 60 percent of the population would have to be vaccinated in order to create herd effects. At 70 percent effectiveness, she said, the threshold will rise to roughly 75 percent, significantly higher, but nonetheless still achievable.”
...
“The toll in lives has been extraordinary and the economic loss, also staggering,” Daley said. “While we in the medical community are guardedly hopeful and optimistic that the vaccines promise the end of the current pandemic, there is cause for concern that with the appearance of viral variants across the globe, we might be facing a decidedly novel stage of the contagion: COVID 2.0.”
https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2021/02/vaccines-should-end-the-pandemic-despite-the-variants-say-experts/
Boris Johnson was very quick to remove Conservative politicians who did not share his version of the truth. This received wide acclaim from the true believers among the PB Tories. And I think something similar happens in the Labour Party from time to time.
Instead the LDs would hold the balance of power in almost every general election (bar 2015 when UKIP would have been the Kingmakers) and the Coalition of 2010 to 2015 would become the norm, indeed Blair himself would have needed the LDs to form a government in 1997