Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

With 7 weeks to go before Scotland votes the latest three polls find voters opposed to another IndyR

245

Comments

  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,967
    Endillion said:

    alex_ said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I just read that H&M's interview was "devastating" for the reputation of the British Monarchy.

    I'm guessing the journalist didn't actually watch the interview, then.

    I think a lot of American commentary genuinely doesn't understand that the Royal Family is a fundamental part of the British state. They don't get the distinction between the "family" and the institution.

    It's not something that can just be easily disposed of on a whim, even if such a change was desired. Something has to take its place. Before pronouncing on its terminal decline, you would think a few of the commentators might stop to consider how come it is that the monarchy still exists in Australia and Canada.
    I always find it bizarre that UK dignitaries are formally greeted by an elected President, actively serving as head of the executive branch of government, when travelling to the US. I think that Americans find it similarly weird that their dignitaries are still met by the Queen, rather than the Prime Minister.
    Head of State vs. Head of Government. There are many countries where the role isn't merged into one person.
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,541

    To be pedantic, the actual question is whether Scotland should be independent rather than whether there should be another indyref. As a non-Scot I'm mildly in favour of allowing it in the coming decade - I don't think it can be put off indefinitely. But I'd hope the result will be "No". There will no doubt be others like me (and maybe some the reverse, who don't want a divisive new Indyref but would vote Yes if there is). So all one can really say is that opinion on independence itself is now narrowly against.

    Which places 4 fences in the way of independence for a bit:

    1 The generation argument and Boris's veto

    2 Getting a majority at Holyrood

    3 Getting sufficient support for it to be sane for the SNP to go for it

    4 Actually winning the referendum if held.

    Together that makes independence an unlikely outcome.
  • Options
    Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    Just my quick two minutes on today's Covid numbers, whilst I'm thinking about it. The rolling death rate is still on the way down, as is the case rate - for the time being... The hospital stats have finally caught up with themselves and the total number of patients is now down below 10,000. Home's no longer blank on the case map, but only because one half of the town has gone up from two cases in the last seven days to three. The vax numbers are still a bit pedestrian but since my understanding is that the supply is scheduled to ramp up considerably next week I'm not too bothered about that. It's all still quite positive.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,190

    Bugger, one of my favourite one cap wonder has died, he played in the test where Devon Malcolm took 9-57.

    https://twitter.com/TheCricketerMag/status/1369347408254091272

    That's sad news.

    Joey gave us a coaching session at my junior school c.1996. He was a really nice guy.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,125
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    That latest comres poll on independence is about where I expect the final result to come out but I'm not sure that the SNP will get a majority now. Unionists seem galvanised by Sturgeon abusing the power of the state. I think there was a state of relaxation and complacency around independence because of the 80 seat majority in Westminster denying any future referendums for a few years that has blown away over this. Suddenly who rules in Holyrood matters again of the FM has the ability to politically target enemies.

    The EU waiving the immunity of the Catalan separatists who are being prosecuted by Madrid won't help the momentum of the pro-EU independence case.

    https://twitter.com/France24_en/status/1369275527828226049
    That seems like a real retrograde decision but I'm not sure it will change things particular for Scotland given we're out. It may make Scotland's accession impossible if they go down the UDI route though.
    Boris will be delighted with the EU for once.

    UDI is not a runner.
  • Options
    Here's a thought.

    The increase in support for the Union is another vaccine bounce rather than the contretemps between Salmond and Sturgeon.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,750

    Here's a thought.

    The increase in support for the Union is another vaccine bounce rather than the contretemps between Salmond and Sturgeon.

    That's why we need constant vaccination programmes from now on, starting with booster shots in the autu....wait.
  • Options
    BluestBlueBluestBlue Posts: 4,556
    kinabalu said:

    TimT said:

    FPT TimT Posts: 2,683
    1:40PM
    Northern_Al said:
    » show previous quotes
    That's utter nonsense. He just wants the (culture) 'war' to continue for clicks, as do some on here. I've just read the statement - in case anybody hasn't, here it is:

    "The whole family is saddened to learn the full extent of how challenging the last few years have been for Harry and Meghan.
    "The issues raised, particularly that of race, are concerning. Whilst some recollections may vary, they are taken very seriously and will be addressed by the family privately.
    "Harry, Meghan and Archie will always be much loved family members."

    I just don't get how anybody could interpret that as a "fuck you" statement unless they were positively malign.

    PS. I'm really not at all interested in this, but felt provoked enough to comment.
    I'll translate:

    "The family does not understand what Meghan and Harry have to complain about.
    "The racism card is over-played and the comment made was not as reported.
    "We have already looked into this to the extent we intend to and will say nothing further.
    "Meghan and Harry are acting like little shits"

    Yes, @Northern_Al seems to require open vituperation of the sort so masterfully demonstrated in the 16th-century correspondence between Tsar Ivan IV and his self-exiled courtier Prince Kurbsky. But there's no need for that kind of unsubtle display here: we're British.
    On the contrary. His analysis is not skewed by the desperate need to see a "Fuck You Meghan" and is for this reason vastly superior to yours and your dim and tawdry crew.
    Well, there is text, there is context, and there is subtext. If the two premier lefties on the site are getting this upset about some fairly obvious implications, I rather suspect our dim crew may be on to something after all...
  • Options
    Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 49,299

    FPT

    We are in serious danger of Susanna Reid becoming the next Sir Keir.

    She is Susanna. She is not Susannah.

    I blame auto-erect...
  • Options
    sarissasarissa Posts: 1,783
    edited March 2021
    Mike, you better exclude discussion of the Sevanta ConRes Scotsman poll before you lose years of credibility.

    From Business for Scotland:

    “Savanta ComRes, who carried out the poll for the Scotsman organisation, excluded a weighting mechanism that changed a previous poll last month from a Yes minority to a majority of 53%.

    We spoke exclusively to Savanta ComRes who explained that the question of voting likelihood ”wasn’t asked purely because we knew we wouldn’t end up using it for weighting.”

    To be clear, a unionist newspaper commissioned a poll and agreed that it would not be carried out with the normal weighting procedure.”

    The raw figures are the same as the Feb poll by them which resulted in the 53% Yes vote after the standard weighting was applied.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    Here's a thought.

    The increase in support for the Union is another vaccine bounce rather than the contretemps between Salmond and Sturgeon.

    Vaccine boost combined with the EU embarrassing itself.
  • Options
    Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905

    Here's a thought.

    The increase in support for the Union is another vaccine bounce rather than the contretemps between Salmond and Sturgeon.

    Given the context (NHS is a devolved matter and Sturgeon appears to have done very well reputationally out of locking down five minutes earlier than Johnson has,) how much extra credit are the Evil Tories going to get for the jabs? I'm not convinced.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited March 2021

    Piers Morgan off to join Andrew Neil's right whinge TV?

    Its perfect for him...he gets to claim he has been cancelled by the woke brigade, despite having a hugely popular show and all the wokerati loved it when he stuck it to the government...and now I am here on GB News (or UK News) every night to tell it straight.

    He will try to turn it into a UK version of Tucker Carlson (and with a massive pay cheque).

    There has been plenty of talk that is what he has wanted to do, the cynic in my might think this is very convenient.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,238

    Here's a thought.

    The increase in support for the Union is another vaccine bounce rather than the contretemps between Salmond and Sturgeon.

    Did Johnson come to a special deal with Microsoft for bespoke programming?
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,065

    Here's a thought.

    The increase in support for the Union is another vaccine bounce rather than the contretemps between Salmond and Sturgeon.

    Given the context (NHS is a devolved matter and Sturgeon appears to have done very well reputationally out of locking down five minutes earlier than Johnson has,) how much extra credit are the Evil Tories going to get for the jabs? I'm not convinced.
    The Tories don't have to get any credit for it to knock the shine off the idea that joining the EU would be a safer bet.
  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,547
    edited March 2021
    ydoethur said:

    MaxPB said:

    That latest comres poll on independence is about where I expect the final result to come out but I'm not sure that the SNP will get a majority now. Unionists seem galvanised by Sturgeon abusing the power of the state. I think there was a state of relaxation and complacency around independence because of the 80 seat majority in Westminster denying any future referendums for a few years that has blown away over this. Suddenly who rules in Holyrood matters again of the FM has the ability to politically target enemies.

    The EU waiving the immunity of the Catalan separatists who are being prosecuted by Madrid won't help the momentum of the pro-EU independence case.

    https://twitter.com/France24_en/status/1369275527828226049
    Does that have any practical effect as long as the three of them stay away from Spain?
    They are elected MEPs who are now subject to arrest by the Government of their own country should they seek to talk to their constituents. Pretty incendiary I would think.

    The EU position has changed from non-intervention to backing the Spanish Government.

    I can't call all the implications for Scottish Politics and the SNP/EU relationship, but the SNP position has backed the Catalan right to 'self-determination'. Input needed from one of our Scottish Nationalist peeps.
    https://www.snp.org/policies/pb-what-is-the-snp-position-on-catalonia/

    In my conversations over the years Plaid have seemed to be more interested in Catalonia. But that may not be representative.

    There's a thread here:

    https://twitter.com/AdamHolesch/status/1369237448778280963
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,419

    Here's a thought.

    The increase in support for the Union is another vaccine bounce rather than the contretemps between Salmond and Sturgeon.

    Someone here posted a video today - quite a long one of the army helping with the Scottish vaccination programme. It occurred to me that as well as the publicity involved in the help given by the army seeming like a positive 'optic' for the Union, and therefore an undesirable one for the SNP, there is also the individual impact of those who are personally 'jabbed' by a member of the armed services. I'd imagine it makes a very positive impression.
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820

    Here's a thought.

    The increase in support for the Union is another vaccine bounce rather than the contretemps between Salmond and Sturgeon.

    Very likely.
  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,547

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    That latest comres poll on independence is about where I expect the final result to come out but I'm not sure that the SNP will get a majority now. Unionists seem galvanised by Sturgeon abusing the power of the state. I think there was a state of relaxation and complacency around independence because of the 80 seat majority in Westminster denying any future referendums for a few years that has blown away over this. Suddenly who rules in Holyrood matters again of the FM has the ability to politically target enemies.

    The EU waiving the immunity of the Catalan separatists who are being prosecuted by Madrid won't help the momentum of the pro-EU independence case.

    https://twitter.com/France24_en/status/1369275527828226049
    That seems like a real retrograde decision but I'm not sure it will change things particular for Scotland given we're out. It may make Scotland's accession impossible if they go down the UDI route though.
    Boris will be delighted with the EU for once.

    UDI is not a runner.
    That is the EP not the EU.
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,744

    RobD said:

    So they don't have an export ban. Glad we cleared that up.
    Neither did the EU, but it didnt stop 99% of this board stating they had a few weeks ago.
    Wrong. They tried and then only backed down because of the uproar over the NI border.

    And now that they don't have to worry about such nicities they are quite happy to impose an export ban on Australia. You are trying to defend the indefensible.
    I am not defending the EU, their actions were silly, unhelpful, and purely theatre for a domestic audience. I said so at the time, whilst also making it clear they would not block exports.

    I am pointing out the hypocrisy of criticising misleading commentary from the EU when many Brits are happy to dish such misinformation out freely if it suits their agenda.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    MattW said:

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    That latest comres poll on independence is about where I expect the final result to come out but I'm not sure that the SNP will get a majority now. Unionists seem galvanised by Sturgeon abusing the power of the state. I think there was a state of relaxation and complacency around independence because of the 80 seat majority in Westminster denying any future referendums for a few years that has blown away over this. Suddenly who rules in Holyrood matters again of the FM has the ability to politically target enemies.

    The EU waiving the immunity of the Catalan separatists who are being prosecuted by Madrid won't help the momentum of the pro-EU independence case.

    https://twitter.com/France24_en/status/1369275527828226049
    That seems like a real retrograde decision but I'm not sure it will change things particular for Scotland given we're out. It may make Scotland's accession impossible if they go down the UDI route though.
    Boris will be delighted with the EU for once.

    UDI is not a runner.
    That is the EP not the EU.
    The EP is not a part of the EU? 😕
  • Options
    JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 6,010
    sarissa said:

    Mike, you better exclude discussion of the Sevanta ConRes Scotsman poll before you lose years of credibility.

    From Business for Scotland:

    “Savanta ComRes, who carried out the poll for the Scotsman organisation, excluded a weighting mechanism that changed a previous poll last month from a Yes minority to a majority of 53%.

    We spoke exclusively to Savanta ComRes who explained that the question of voting likelihood ”wasn’t asked purely because we knew we wouldn’t end up using it for weighting.”

    To be clear, a unionist newspaper commissioned a poll and agreed that it would not be carried out with the normal weighting procedure.”

    The raw figures are the same as the Feb poll by them which resulted in the 53% Yes vote after the standard weighting was applied.

    I'm not sure why a question "Should Scotland be an independent country?" needs to be turnout weighted. And if it is, what turnout do you use? UK elections? Scottish elections? The last Indyref?
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,218
    edited March 2021

    kinabalu said:

    TimT said:

    FPT TimT Posts: 2,683
    1:40PM
    Northern_Al said:
    » show previous quotes
    That's utter nonsense. He just wants the (culture) 'war' to continue for clicks, as do some on here. I've just read the statement - in case anybody hasn't, here it is:

    "The whole family is saddened to learn the full extent of how challenging the last few years have been for Harry and Meghan.
    "The issues raised, particularly that of race, are concerning. Whilst some recollections may vary, they are taken very seriously and will be addressed by the family privately.
    "Harry, Meghan and Archie will always be much loved family members."

    I just don't get how anybody could interpret that as a "fuck you" statement unless they were positively malign.

    PS. I'm really not at all interested in this, but felt provoked enough to comment.
    I'll translate:

    "The family does not understand what Meghan and Harry have to complain about.
    "The racism card is over-played and the comment made was not as reported.
    "We have already looked into this to the extent we intend to and will say nothing further.
    "Meghan and Harry are acting like little shits"

    Yes, @Northern_Al seems to require open vituperation of the sort so masterfully demonstrated in the 16th-century correspondence between Tsar Ivan IV and his self-exiled courtier Prince Kurbsky. But there's no need for that kind of unsubtle display here: we're British.
    On the contrary. His analysis is not skewed by the desperate need to see a "Fuck You Meghan" and is for this reason vastly superior to yours and your dim and tawdry crew.
    Well, there is text, there is context, and there is subtext. If the two premier lefties on the site are getting this upset about some fairly obvious implications, I rather suspect our dim crew may be on to something after all...
    It's (once more!) meta. I'm fine with the palace statement. It's a skillful curtain draw. And for me the interview was a bit of a non-event, if you really want to know the truth. Non shockerooni. No, the problem is you guys - or let's just say you since it's you I'm talking to - hanging bumptious bow tie groupthink onto it to suit your preconceptions. You needed a pigeon to shit in your coffee again, is what I mean, and I was happy to be that bird.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,238
    MattW said:

    ydoethur said:

    MaxPB said:

    That latest comres poll on independence is about where I expect the final result to come out but I'm not sure that the SNP will get a majority now. Unionists seem galvanised by Sturgeon abusing the power of the state. I think there was a state of relaxation and complacency around independence because of the 80 seat majority in Westminster denying any future referendums for a few years that has blown away over this. Suddenly who rules in Holyrood matters again of the FM has the ability to politically target enemies.

    The EU waiving the immunity of the Catalan separatists who are being prosecuted by Madrid won't help the momentum of the pro-EU independence case.

    https://twitter.com/France24_en/status/1369275527828226049
    Does that have any practical effect as long as the three of them stay away from Spain?
    They are elected MEPs who are now subject to arrest by the Government of their own country should they seek to talk to their constituents. Pretty incendiary I would think.

    The EU position has changed from non-intervention to backing the Spanish Government.

    I can't call all the implications for Scottish Politics and the SNP/EU relationship, but the SNP position has backed the Catalan right to 'self-determination'. Input needed from one of our Scottish Nationalist peeps.
    https://www.snp.org/policies/pb-what-is-the-snp-position-on-catalonia/

    In my conversations over the years Plaid have seemed to be more interested in Catalonia. But that may not be representative.

    There's a thread here:

    https://twitter.com/AdamHolesch/status/1369237448778280963
    I didn’t realise they were MEPs.

    That’s pretty outrageous to be honest. Members of Parliament shouldn’t be subject to arrest or even the threat of arrest for espousing the view that their country is entitled to self-determination. Certainly in such circumstances their fellow parliamentarians shouldn’t be siding with their persecutors.
  • Options
    Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 7,540
    edited March 2021

    kinabalu said:

    TimT said:

    FPT TimT Posts: 2,683
    1:40PM
    Northern_Al said:
    » show previous quotes
    That's utter nonsense. He just wants the (culture) 'war' to continue for clicks, as do some on here. I've just read the statement - in case anybody hasn't, here it is:

    "The whole family is saddened to learn the full extent of how challenging the last few years have been for Harry and Meghan.
    "The issues raised, particularly that of race, are concerning. Whilst some recollections may vary, they are taken very seriously and will be addressed by the family privately.
    "Harry, Meghan and Archie will always be much loved family members."

    I just don't get how anybody could interpret that as a "fuck you" statement unless they were positively malign.

    PS. I'm really not at all interested in this, but felt provoked enough to comment.
    I'll translate:

    "The family does not understand what Meghan and Harry have to complain about.
    "The racism card is over-played and the comment made was not as reported.
    "We have already looked into this to the extent we intend to and will say nothing further.
    "Meghan and Harry are acting like little shits"

    Yes, @Northern_Al seems to require open vituperation of the sort so masterfully demonstrated in the 16th-century correspondence between Tsar Ivan IV and his self-exiled courtier Prince Kurbsky. But there's no need for that kind of unsubtle display here: we're British.
    On the contrary. His analysis is not skewed by the desperate need to see a "Fuck You Meghan" and is for this reason vastly superior to yours and your dim and tawdry crew.
    Well, there is text, there is context, and there is subtext. If the two premier lefties on the site are getting this upset about some fairly obvious implications, I rather suspect our dim crew may be on to something after all...
    You're behaving like one of those ultra-woke lefties who doesn't take stuff at face value but looks for a 'subtext' where the real meaning of the author can be seen, even if it was said/written in all innocence. So in this context 'saddened' becomes 'couldn't care less', 'concerned' becomes 'couldn't give a fuck', and 'much-loved family members' becomes 'we hate your guts'. It's really weird. Before you know it, you'll be deconstructing the sayings of B. Johnson to reveal the hidden offensiveness behind his liberal platitudes.

    Oh and by the way, in reference to an earlier post of yours, I don't take you personally at all. Really not bothered - I enjoy the cut and thrust. I merely replied to a response that you'd made to me, er, personally.
  • Options
    GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,079
    There's an argument that this polling is good for the SNP.

    It means that SNP voters who dislike Sturgeon may reluctantly vote for them anyway if they think there's a danger of losing the majority.

    If you establish the narrative that the SNP wont win a majority, and then they do, you risk more momentum towards independence.
  • Options
    Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 8,844

    RobD said:

    So they don't have an export ban. Glad we cleared that up.
    Neither did the EU, but it didnt stop 99% of this board stating they had a few weeks ago.
    They put in the legislation for it and a lot of us said it would be used.....are you claiming it hasn't been used? Australia might differ
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607

    Here's a thought.

    The increase in support for the Union is another vaccine bounce rather than the contretemps between Salmond and Sturgeon.

    I think an unwinding of brexit being the main thing on the news everyday, the success of the vaccine programme vs the failure of the EU programme is behind this. I think the Sturgeon vs Salmond stuff will be a much slower burn that and leech support away from them over a longer period of time as the two major Indy personalities continue to chuck buckets of horse shit over each other.
  • Options
    sarissasarissa Posts: 1,783

    malcolmg said:

    ydoethur said:

    Let us assume, hypothetically, that the SNP and Greens fall short of a majority.

    Let us also assume - and I think this is a very safe assumption - that the SNP remain the largest party.

    What sort of government could be formed?

    In Wales, I’m confident it will be Labour/Plaid because anything else is mathematically out of the question. But would Labour agree to a coalition with the SNP if (a) the referendum request was ditched and (b) Sturgeon quit to be replaced by somebody else?

    Under those circumstances, an SNP minority administration under a new leader. But there's no realistic prospect of a Unionist majority so the question is moot.
    Depends on how list goes, if the new independence parties do well, voting SNP on list is almost a wasted vote, then it could well be a majority for sure. Lots of pissed of independence supporters and given 750K wasted 2nd votes last time it could make a huge impact.
    So SNP+ Green doesn't equal a majority but SNP + Green + radical independence people does? I suppose that could be a thing...
    Tommy Sheridan may be recommending his (former) supporters to vote for AFI, but only as a tactic. They and the ISP are markedly less radical than the SNP.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,195

    rcs1000 said:

    I just read that H&M's interview was "devastating" for the reputation of the British Monarchy.

    I'm guessing the journalist didn't actually watch the interview, then.

    It's been fascinating to see how many Americans are invested in an anti-British monarchy position as part of their political identity.
    Also how obsessed they are with the UK monarchy. Period
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,744
    Pagan2 said:

    RobD said:

    So they don't have an export ban. Glad we cleared that up.
    Neither did the EU, but it didnt stop 99% of this board stating they had a few weeks ago.
    They put in the legislation for it and a lot of us said it would be used.....are you claiming it hasn't been used? Australia might differ
    Two key reasons I said they wouldnt block exports to the UK were the importance of the relationship and that the UK will be a net vaccine exporting country this year. Neither apply to Australia.
  • Options
    sarissasarissa Posts: 1,783

    sarissa said:

    Mike, you better exclude discussion of the Sevanta ConRes Scotsman poll before you lose years of credibility.

    From Business for Scotland:

    “Savanta ComRes, who carried out the poll for the Scotsman organisation, excluded a weighting mechanism that changed a previous poll last month from a Yes minority to a majority of 53%.

    We spoke exclusively to Savanta ComRes who explained that the question of voting likelihood ”wasn’t asked purely because we knew we wouldn’t end up using it for weighting.”

    To be clear, a unionist newspaper commissioned a poll and agreed that it would not be carried out with the normal weighting procedure.”

    The raw figures are the same as the Feb poll by them which resulted in the 53% Yes vote after the standard weighting was applied.

    I'm not sure why a question "Should Scotland be an independent country?" needs to be turnout weighted. And if it is, what turnout do you use? UK elections? Scottish elections? The last Indyref?
    Likelihood to vote for starters.
  • Options
    They really couldn't organise a pregnancy on a council estate.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,238

    They really couldn't organise a pregnancy on a council estate.
    Although they seem very good at organising a cockup in a boardroom.
  • Options
    stodgestodge Posts: 12,854
    Evening all :)

    To change the mood a little (and in lieu of posing down the pub which is several weeks away).

    I'm having a regular project call with a client from a county council who is in the office and is surrounded by boxes.

    I asked him about the boxes.

    It seems the County Council he works for has ordered 4 pallets of skipping ropes, 5 pallets of chalk sticks and 18 cartons of balloons with further provision for 15,000 kit bags. This is apparently part of something called the Activity & Food Programme (a Government initiative but like most initiatives it will be local Councils who have to do the hard work) and the aim is to provide free activity bags for those children who have free school meals and these activity bags are for the forthcoming Easter holiday.

    On the day when an All-Party Parliamentary Group has been widely complimentary of the response of local Councils to the pandemic:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56324395

    I'm just asking the question - why should local councils have to waste so much of their time and effort responding not to what their residents might want but to what central Government dictates we apparently want or need? While it's good news for companies who make skipping ropes, chalk sticks and balloons, is this really what we should be providing to children in 2021? Is it a realistic vision of what children or their parents do or some romanticised throwback to what children might have done in the 60s and 70s (presumably when the senior civil servants involved were children themselves)?

    Is this the sort of thing on which Government and Councils should be spending your money and my money? Is the provision of activity bags for children a national priority? I don't know - I struggle with the time and effort this forces Councils to divert from other things at a time when many are dealing with the consequences of Covid in terms of domestic abuse, issues with vulnerable children and adults and housing problems?

    Just a change for those who aren't bothered with other issues.
  • Options
    Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 8,844

    RobD said:

    So they don't have an export ban. Glad we cleared that up.
    Neither did the EU, but it didnt stop 99% of this board stating they had a few weeks ago.
    Wrong. They tried and then only backed down because of the uproar over the NI border.

    And now that they don't have to worry about such nicities they are quite happy to impose an export ban on Australia. You are trying to defend the indefensible.
    I am not defending the EU, their actions were silly, unhelpful, and purely theatre for a domestic audience. I said so at the time, whilst also making it clear they would not block exports.

    I am pointing out the hypocrisy of criticising misleading commentary from the EU when many Brits are happy to dish such misinformation out freely if it suits their agenda.
    But they have blocked exports you silly sausage....you were wrong admit it. It doesn't hurt that much
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,744
    Pagan2 said:

    RobD said:

    So they don't have an export ban. Glad we cleared that up.
    Neither did the EU, but it didnt stop 99% of this board stating they had a few weeks ago.
    Wrong. They tried and then only backed down because of the uproar over the NI border.

    And now that they don't have to worry about such nicities they are quite happy to impose an export ban on Australia. You are trying to defend the indefensible.
    I am not defending the EU, their actions were silly, unhelpful, and purely theatre for a domestic audience. I said so at the time, whilst also making it clear they would not block exports.

    I am pointing out the hypocrisy of criticising misleading commentary from the EU when many Brits are happy to dish such misinformation out freely if it suits their agenda.
    But they have blocked exports you silly sausage....you were wrong admit it. It doesn't hurt that much
    They havent to the UK which is what the discussion and fearmongering was all about.
  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,547
    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    You know, I would like to think that at some point one of the brighter national leaders will tell the Commission to SHUT THE FUCK UP rather than keep drawing attention to their ineptitude in negotiating contracts and the abject failure of their vaccination strategy.
    Except the drawing attention to it doesn't seem to have hurt them any, they seem as confident as ever that they've done nothing wrong other than be misled by AZ (and only AZ apparently).

    It's the laziness that gets me - we know what someone picking a fight with the EU looks like, we've seen it enough, so we can easily spot how they have been trying to pick fights with the UK, which genuinely doesn't seem to be involved at all.
    The European Union is a moral crusade, or it is nothing.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,195
    They've turned into the UK government in about 2017-18, continuously humiliating itself over Brexit. Except this is waaaaay more important
  • Options
    Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 8,844

    Pagan2 said:

    RobD said:

    So they don't have an export ban. Glad we cleared that up.
    Neither did the EU, but it didnt stop 99% of this board stating they had a few weeks ago.
    Wrong. They tried and then only backed down because of the uproar over the NI border.

    And now that they don't have to worry about such nicities they are quite happy to impose an export ban on Australia. You are trying to defend the indefensible.
    I am not defending the EU, their actions were silly, unhelpful, and purely theatre for a domestic audience. I said so at the time, whilst also making it clear they would not block exports.

    I am pointing out the hypocrisy of criticising misleading commentary from the EU when many Brits are happy to dish such misinformation out freely if it suits their agenda.
    But they have blocked exports you silly sausage....you were wrong admit it. It doesn't hurt that much
    They havent to the UK which is what the discussion and fearmongering was all about.
    No it was they put in rules that allowed them to block exports...people like you said it was only for monitoring purposes and wouldn't be used to block exports. The only time individual countries were mentioned was commenting on why places like australia and the uk were not on the exemption list. You were wrong no point shifting those goalposts now
  • Options

    There's an argument that this polling is good for the SNP.

    It means that SNP voters who dislike Sturgeon may reluctantly vote for them anyway if they think there's a danger of losing the majority.

    If you establish the narrative that the SNP wont win a majority, and then they do, you risk more momentum towards independence.

    I'm still of the view that despite the cabaret of the competing testimonies last week that this isn't bad for the SNP.

    The people who despise her/them say "told you so". The people who like her/them think its a fuss about nothing. The people who don't pay much attention to politics? Isn't Nicola standing up to the age old problem of powerful men with grabby hands?

    Remember that in the current polity, even being proven to be a devious liar isn't necessarily a negative - seems to be a positive for Boris Johnson...
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,967

    Pagan2 said:

    RobD said:

    So they don't have an export ban. Glad we cleared that up.
    Neither did the EU, but it didnt stop 99% of this board stating they had a few weeks ago.
    Wrong. They tried and then only backed down because of the uproar over the NI border.

    And now that they don't have to worry about such nicities they are quite happy to impose an export ban on Australia. You are trying to defend the indefensible.
    I am not defending the EU, their actions were silly, unhelpful, and purely theatre for a domestic audience. I said so at the time, whilst also making it clear they would not block exports.

    I am pointing out the hypocrisy of criticising misleading commentary from the EU when many Brits are happy to dish such misinformation out freely if it suits their agenda.
    But they have blocked exports you silly sausage....you were wrong admit it. It doesn't hurt that much
    They havent to the UK which is what the discussion and fearmongering was all about.
    But they do have an export ban.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    This is amusing from the 4:40 mark, from 2018.

    https://youtu.be/Huab6p5HW0E
  • Options
    EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    RobD said:

    Endillion said:

    alex_ said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I just read that H&M's interview was "devastating" for the reputation of the British Monarchy.

    I'm guessing the journalist didn't actually watch the interview, then.

    I think a lot of American commentary genuinely doesn't understand that the Royal Family is a fundamental part of the British state. They don't get the distinction between the "family" and the institution.

    It's not something that can just be easily disposed of on a whim, even if such a change was desired. Something has to take its place. Before pronouncing on its terminal decline, you would think a few of the commentators might stop to consider how come it is that the monarchy still exists in Australia and Canada.
    I always find it bizarre that UK dignitaries are formally greeted by an elected President, actively serving as head of the executive branch of government, when travelling to the US. I think that Americans find it similarly weird that their dignitaries are still met by the Queen, rather than the Prime Minister.
    Head of State vs. Head of Government. There are many countries where the role isn't merged into one person.
    Sure, but Americans tend to do exceptionally badly with understanding that not every country operates like theirs does.
  • Options
    Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 8,844
    RobD said:

    Pagan2 said:

    RobD said:

    So they don't have an export ban. Glad we cleared that up.
    Neither did the EU, but it didnt stop 99% of this board stating they had a few weeks ago.
    Wrong. They tried and then only backed down because of the uproar over the NI border.

    And now that they don't have to worry about such nicities they are quite happy to impose an export ban on Australia. You are trying to defend the indefensible.
    I am not defending the EU, their actions were silly, unhelpful, and purely theatre for a domestic audience. I said so at the time, whilst also making it clear they would not block exports.

    I am pointing out the hypocrisy of criticising misleading commentary from the EU when many Brits are happy to dish such misinformation out freely if it suits their agenda.
    But they have blocked exports you silly sausage....you were wrong admit it. It doesn't hurt that much
    They havent to the UK which is what the discussion and fearmongering was all about.
    But they do have an export ban.
    And one suspects the only reason they havent blocked exports to us is because they know we will just turn around and say then no chemicals to make vaccines for you. Plus we have our own manufacturing facilities in any case
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,750
    edited March 2021

    Pagan2 said:

    RobD said:

    So they don't have an export ban. Glad we cleared that up.
    Neither did the EU, but it didnt stop 99% of this board stating they had a few weeks ago.
    Wrong. They tried and then only backed down because of the uproar over the NI border.

    And now that they don't have to worry about such nicities they are quite happy to impose an export ban on Australia. You are trying to defend the indefensible.
    I am not defending the EU, their actions were silly, unhelpful, and purely theatre for a domestic audience. I said so at the time, whilst also making it clear they would not block exports.

    I am pointing out the hypocrisy of criticising misleading commentary from the EU when many Brits are happy to dish such misinformation out freely if it suits their agenda.
    But they have blocked exports you silly sausage....you were wrong admit it. It doesn't hurt that much
    They havent to the UK which is what the discussion and fearmongering was all about.
    That's a highly specific reading to hang your hat on. HYUFD-esque. The odds that everyone involved was so highly specific that there would be no blocks to the UK but that blocks to other people was totally fine, strikes me as improbable compared to the proportion who likely said things like 'there won't be export bans/there will be a ban'. Given the improbability that everyone was commenting in such a specific and limited way as you set out, it seems bold to define the entire rambling discourse as only being on the specific point you want it to be.
  • Options
    Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 7,540
    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    To change the mood a little (and in lieu of posing down the pub which is several weeks away).

    I'm having a regular project call with a client from a county council who is in the office and is surrounded by boxes.

    I asked him about the boxes.

    It seems the County Council he works for has ordered 4 pallets of skipping ropes, 5 pallets of chalk sticks and 18 cartons of balloons with further provision for 15,000 kit bags. This is apparently part of something called the Activity & Food Programme (a Government initiative but like most initiatives it will be local Councils who have to do the hard work) and the aim is to provide free activity bags for those children who have free school meals and these activity bags are for the forthcoming Easter holiday.

    On the day when an All-Party Parliamentary Group has been widely complimentary of the response of local Councils to the pandemic:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56324395

    I'm just asking the question - why should local councils have to waste so much of their time and effort responding not to what their residents might want but to what central Government dictates we apparently want or need? While it's good news for companies who make skipping ropes, chalk sticks and balloons, is this really what we should be providing to children in 2021? Is it a realistic vision of what children or their parents do or some romanticised throwback to what children might have done in the 60s and 70s (presumably when the senior civil servants involved were children themselves)?

    Is this the sort of thing on which Government and Councils should be spending your money and my money? Is the provision of activity bags for children a national priority? I don't know - I struggle with the time and effort this forces Councils to divert from other things at a time when many are dealing with the consequences of Covid in terms of domestic abuse, issues with vulnerable children and adults and housing problems?

    Just a change for those who aren't bothered with other issues.

    I think it's clear that Gavin Williamson is behind this DfE instruction. He likes playing with skipping ropes, chalk sticks and balloons, and assumes other children will as well.

    On the point - I agree with you, councils have better things to do and to spend on.
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,744
    RobD said:

    Pagan2 said:

    RobD said:

    So they don't have an export ban. Glad we cleared that up.
    Neither did the EU, but it didnt stop 99% of this board stating they had a few weeks ago.
    Wrong. They tried and then only backed down because of the uproar over the NI border.

    And now that they don't have to worry about such nicities they are quite happy to impose an export ban on Australia. You are trying to defend the indefensible.
    I am not defending the EU, their actions were silly, unhelpful, and purely theatre for a domestic audience. I said so at the time, whilst also making it clear they would not block exports.

    I am pointing out the hypocrisy of criticising misleading commentary from the EU when many Brits are happy to dish such misinformation out freely if it suits their agenda.
    But they have blocked exports you silly sausage....you were wrong admit it. It doesn't hurt that much
    They havent to the UK which is what the discussion and fearmongering was all about.
    But they do have an export ban.
    It is Italy that have banned an export shipment to Australia, not the EU, but details dont matter. EU bad, UK good, I get it.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,627
    edited March 2021
    Leon said:

    They've turned into the UK government in about 2017-18, continuously humiliating itself over Brexit. Except this is waaaaay more important
    It really is amazing how a supposedly rational body has behaved so irrationally in recent weeks. I can't explain it.
  • Options
    Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 8,844

    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    To change the mood a little (and in lieu of posing down the pub which is several weeks away).

    I'm having a regular project call with a client from a county council who is in the office and is surrounded by boxes.

    I asked him about the boxes.

    It seems the County Council he works for has ordered 4 pallets of skipping ropes, 5 pallets of chalk sticks and 18 cartons of balloons with further provision for 15,000 kit bags. This is apparently part of something called the Activity & Food Programme (a Government initiative but like most initiatives it will be local Councils who have to do the hard work) and the aim is to provide free activity bags for those children who have free school meals and these activity bags are for the forthcoming Easter holiday.

    On the day when an All-Party Parliamentary Group has been widely complimentary of the response of local Councils to the pandemic:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56324395

    I'm just asking the question - why should local councils have to waste so much of their time and effort responding not to what their residents might want but to what central Government dictates we apparently want or need? While it's good news for companies who make skipping ropes, chalk sticks and balloons, is this really what we should be providing to children in 2021? Is it a realistic vision of what children or their parents do or some romanticised throwback to what children might have done in the 60s and 70s (presumably when the senior civil servants involved were children themselves)?

    Is this the sort of thing on which Government and Councils should be spending your money and my money? Is the provision of activity bags for children a national priority? I don't know - I struggle with the time and effort this forces Councils to divert from other things at a time when many are dealing with the consequences of Covid in terms of domestic abuse, issues with vulnerable children and adults and housing problems?

    Just a change for those who aren't bothered with other issues.

    I think it's clear that Gavin Williamson is behind this DfE instruction. He likes playing with skipping ropes, chalk sticks and balloons, and assumes other children will as well.

    On the point - I agree with you, councils have better things to do and to spend on.
    Well checked up a little here and not sure its the government mandating what they buy

    https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/holiday-activities-and-food-programme/holiday-activities-and-food-programme-2021

    looks to me like they provide some funding and the council within limits chooses how to spend it
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,967

    RobD said:

    Pagan2 said:

    RobD said:

    So they don't have an export ban. Glad we cleared that up.
    Neither did the EU, but it didnt stop 99% of this board stating they had a few weeks ago.
    Wrong. They tried and then only backed down because of the uproar over the NI border.

    And now that they don't have to worry about such nicities they are quite happy to impose an export ban on Australia. You are trying to defend the indefensible.
    I am not defending the EU, their actions were silly, unhelpful, and purely theatre for a domestic audience. I said so at the time, whilst also making it clear they would not block exports.

    I am pointing out the hypocrisy of criticising misleading commentary from the EU when many Brits are happy to dish such misinformation out freely if it suits their agenda.
    But they have blocked exports you silly sausage....you were wrong admit it. It doesn't hurt that much
    They havent to the UK which is what the discussion and fearmongering was all about.
    But they do have an export ban.
    It is Italy that have banned an export shipment to Australia, not the EU, but details dont matter. EU bad, UK good, I get it.
    Using an EU law. To argue that the EU has nothing to do with it is totally absurd.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    To change the mood a little (and in lieu of posing down the pub which is several weeks away).

    I'm having a regular project call with a client from a county council who is in the office and is surrounded by boxes.

    I asked him about the boxes.

    It seems the County Council he works for has ordered 4 pallets of skipping ropes, 5 pallets of chalk sticks and 18 cartons of balloons with further provision for 15,000 kit bags. This is apparently part of something called the Activity & Food Programme (a Government initiative but like most initiatives it will be local Councils who have to do the hard work) and the aim is to provide free activity bags for those children who have free school meals and these activity bags are for the forthcoming Easter holiday.

    On the day when an All-Party Parliamentary Group has been widely complimentary of the response of local Councils to the pandemic:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56324395

    I'm just asking the question - why should local councils have to waste so much of their time and effort responding not to what their residents might want but to what central Government dictates we apparently want or need? While it's good news for companies who make skipping ropes, chalk sticks and balloons, is this really what we should be providing to children in 2021? Is it a realistic vision of what children or their parents do or some romanticised throwback to what children might have done in the 60s and 70s (presumably when the senior civil servants involved were children themselves)?

    Is this the sort of thing on which Government and Councils should be spending your money and my money? Is the provision of activity bags for children a national priority? I don't know - I struggle with the time and effort this forces Councils to divert from other things at a time when many are dealing with the consequences of Covid in terms of domestic abuse, issues with vulnerable children and adults and housing problems?

    Just a change for those who aren't bothered with other issues.

    Last year my daughter, then in Year One, was given a bag from the County Council containing similar items. She absolutely loved it and was playing outside through the Easter holidays with the stuff, drawing hopscotch and other activities on the paving stones in our garden and jumping around lots.

    She loved it so much that afterwards we bought a big tub of chalk sticks for her to use going forwards. Whenever the weather gets nice she loves to do it.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,750
    edited March 2021

    This is amusing from the 4:40 mark, from 2018.

    https://youtu.be/Huab6p5HW0E

    John Oliver is very very funny, I watch his show every week, but on some issues he doesn't like, like the royal family, he does have a tendency to get lazy and take easy cheap shots which the american audience are less likely toc are about (I recall one example where the Queen was caught complaining about the Chinese ambassador being rude, and his take, and presumably reason to even bring it up, was to whinge about British imperialism in the past as a reason for why she shouldn't have said it, as if that had anything to do with whether said ambassadors were rude). Not that he was wrong about what marrying into the royal family could end up being like.
  • Options

    RobD said:

    Pagan2 said:

    RobD said:

    So they don't have an export ban. Glad we cleared that up.
    Neither did the EU, but it didnt stop 99% of this board stating they had a few weeks ago.
    Wrong. They tried and then only backed down because of the uproar over the NI border.

    And now that they don't have to worry about such nicities they are quite happy to impose an export ban on Australia. You are trying to defend the indefensible.
    I am not defending the EU, their actions were silly, unhelpful, and purely theatre for a domestic audience. I said so at the time, whilst also making it clear they would not block exports.

    I am pointing out the hypocrisy of criticising misleading commentary from the EU when many Brits are happy to dish such misinformation out freely if it suits their agenda.
    But they have blocked exports you silly sausage....you were wrong admit it. It doesn't hurt that much
    They havent to the UK which is what the discussion and fearmongering was all about.
    But they do have an export ban.
    It is Italy that have banned an export shipment to Australia, not the EU, but details dont matter. EU bad, UK good, I get it.
    If you are a member of the EU you are a slave to Brussels apparently.
  • Options
    Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    To change the mood a little (and in lieu of posing down the pub which is several weeks away).

    I'm having a regular project call with a client from a county council who is in the office and is surrounded by boxes.

    I asked him about the boxes.

    It seems the County Council he works for has ordered 4 pallets of skipping ropes, 5 pallets of chalk sticks and 18 cartons of balloons with further provision for 15,000 kit bags. This is apparently part of something called the Activity & Food Programme (a Government initiative but like most initiatives it will be local Councils who have to do the hard work) and the aim is to provide free activity bags for those children who have free school meals and these activity bags are for the forthcoming Easter holiday.

    On the day when an All-Party Parliamentary Group has been widely complimentary of the response of local Councils to the pandemic:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56324395

    I'm just asking the question - why should local councils have to waste so much of their time and effort responding not to what their residents might want but to what central Government dictates we apparently want or need? While it's good news for companies who make skipping ropes, chalk sticks and balloons, is this really what we should be providing to children in 2021? Is it a realistic vision of what children or their parents do or some romanticised throwback to what children might have done in the 60s and 70s (presumably when the senior civil servants involved were children themselves)?

    Is this the sort of thing on which Government and Councils should be spending your money and my money? Is the provision of activity bags for children a national priority? I don't know - I struggle with the time and effort this forces Councils to divert from other things at a time when many are dealing with the consequences of Covid in terms of domestic abuse, issues with vulnerable children and adults and housing problems?

    Just a change for those who aren't bothered with other issues.

    Pity the poor sods who have to sort all of that lot into individual bags and distribute them - and to what effect? Some kids do still like to chalk walls and pavements so I guess that'll be mildly diverting for them, but the balloons will last about ten seconds before turning into yet more litter and skipping ropes had already gone out with the Ark when I was a kiddie in the 1980s.

    If the Government's that concerned about plummeting physical activity levels then it'd be better off doling out grants to sports clubs, a substantial fraction of which fear that they will be wiped out by the effects of Plague.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,065
    The OECD has revised up its forecast for global growth and is predicting that the UK will grow faster than the Eurozone in 2021 and 2022.

    https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/economics/oecd-economic-outlook/volume-2020/issue-2_34bfd999-en
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,967

    Don't worry Comical Dave is on the story.

    https://twitter.com/DaveKeating/status/1369351351063506952

    Because the EU was months later than the UK at ordering. They only have themselves to blame.
  • Options
    Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 8,844
    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    Pagan2 said:

    RobD said:

    So they don't have an export ban. Glad we cleared that up.
    Neither did the EU, but it didnt stop 99% of this board stating they had a few weeks ago.
    Wrong. They tried and then only backed down because of the uproar over the NI border.

    And now that they don't have to worry about such nicities they are quite happy to impose an export ban on Australia. You are trying to defend the indefensible.
    I am not defending the EU, their actions were silly, unhelpful, and purely theatre for a domestic audience. I said so at the time, whilst also making it clear they would not block exports.

    I am pointing out the hypocrisy of criticising misleading commentary from the EU when many Brits are happy to dish such misinformation out freely if it suits their agenda.
    But they have blocked exports you silly sausage....you were wrong admit it. It doesn't hurt that much
    They havent to the UK which is what the discussion and fearmongering was all about.
    But they do have an export ban.
    It is Italy that have banned an export shipment to Australia, not the EU, but details dont matter. EU bad, UK good, I get it.
    Using an EU law. To argue that the EU has nothing to do with it is totally absurd.
    When even williamglenn is saying the eu done bad it makes you wonder just how blinkered this poster is and what the eu would have to do to make them say "Oh I say thats a bit much...".
  • Options
    FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,046
    I was thinking it had been a while since Moron was sacked. Don't know why some people are getting excited. He always comes back stronger.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,750
    edited March 2021

    RobD said:

    Pagan2 said:

    RobD said:

    So they don't have an export ban. Glad we cleared that up.
    Neither did the EU, but it didnt stop 99% of this board stating they had a few weeks ago.
    Wrong. They tried and then only backed down because of the uproar over the NI border.

    And now that they don't have to worry about such nicities they are quite happy to impose an export ban on Australia. You are trying to defend the indefensible.
    I am not defending the EU, their actions were silly, unhelpful, and purely theatre for a domestic audience. I said so at the time, whilst also making it clear they would not block exports.

    I am pointing out the hypocrisy of criticising misleading commentary from the EU when many Brits are happy to dish such misinformation out freely if it suits their agenda.
    But they have blocked exports you silly sausage....you were wrong admit it. It doesn't hurt that much
    They havent to the UK which is what the discussion and fearmongering was all about.
    But they do have an export ban.
    It is Italy that have banned an export shipment to Australia, not the EU, but details dont matter. EU bad, UK good, I get it.
    That's not the case at all, you are setting up a defence which enables you to disregard any critique before it is even made, and no matter whether the critique is nuanced or not.

    As has been repeatedly demonstrated on this particular issue it is perfectly possible to think that, overall, the EU is good, but that there have been issues on this issue, and that their statements and behaviour have not been very good either. That doesn't require some childish EU bad, UK good, analysis. If you aren't defending the EU, as you state, for their silly and unhelpful actions, I don't know why you object to people objecting to when they make misleading statements.

    Unless we're all whiter than white there's bound to be some past comment from the EU/UK which should have been criticised but wasn't, does that mean no one can ever criticise things happening now?

    If there's an assessment overall over time, perhaps the UK comes out worse, but commenting on a current news story where the press statements have been knowingly false - as shown by roll back to tantamount to and de facto - it hardly seems unfair, in this moment, to focus on the misleading stuff being said at this moment.

    That's like a minister caught in a lie pointing to an old lie by an opponent. Sure, that's important, but is it the most important lie right now?
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,779
    RobD said:

    Don't worry Comical Dave is on the story.

    https://twitter.com/DaveKeating/status/1369351351063506952

    Because the EU was months later than the UK at ordering. They only have themselves to blame.
    If this sort of shit gets translated into proper English it could be important.
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,967
    Except the opening paragraph states it is primarily because of demand.
  • Options
    RobD said:

    Don't worry Comical Dave is on the story.

    https://twitter.com/DaveKeating/status/1369351351063506952

    Because the EU was months later than the UK at ordering. They only have themselves to blame.
    I still cannot comprehend that the EU prioritised price over speed when it came to the vaccine.
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 24,981
    It's almost like the UK know what they had to do and did it both well and quickly (albeit by paying the asking price).

    The EU argued over price and last months while they did so and now can't quite grasp that difficult processes take time to get right before you can maximise production.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,750
    Andy_JS said:

    Leon said:

    They've turned into the UK government in about 2017-18, continuously humiliating itself over Brexit. Except this is waaaaay more important
    It really is amazing how a supposedly rational body has behaved so irrationally in recent weeks. I can't explain it.
    It's made up of people, who are under pressure, and people act irrationally under pressure. In a few weeks/months when supplies are plentiful equanimity will return. But the moral high ground has been lost - push come to shove, they've acted in a manner you'd expect of Boris.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,335
    edited March 2021
    Omnium said:

    To be pedantic, the actual question is whether Scotland should be independent rather than whether there should be another indyref. As a non-Scot I'm mildly in favour of allowing it in the coming decade - I don't think it can be put off indefinitely. But I'd hope the result will be "No". There will no doubt be others like me (and maybe some the reverse, who don't want a divisive new Indyref but would vote Yes if there is). So all one can really say is that opinion on independence itself is now narrowly against.

    Would you put a limit on the frequency of such polls?

    Personally I'd have it as just one per parliament. Clearly a very low threshold, but one that I think is fair.
    Personally I'd say one in 10 years, but there's clearly room for argument. Every 5 years feels a bit frequent, given the agonising that accompanies them. The Yes side only has to win once, and they might strike a patch of temporary fedupness. But perhaps combine the option of frequent polls with a requirement for a 60% majority, so that it would never happen on a 52% whim like Bre...er, I forget what I was going to say...
  • Options
    geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,153
     

    The OECD has revised up its forecast for global growth and is predicting that the UK will grow faster than the Eurozone in 2021 and 2022.

    https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/economics/oecd-economic-outlook/volume-2020/issue-2_34bfd999-en

    The OECD economics dept was known as the Treasury in exile when I was there - donkeys years ago, admittedly.

  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,125
    OK Remainers, you have permission to cringe.

    Yes, you put all that faith in these EU people. You really did.

    To be fair to you, the alternative was Nigel Farage. But still - bloody embarrassing isn't it?
  • Options
    RobD said:

    Except the opening paragraph states it is primarily because of demand.
    Read the article... More people own pets so demand is up. The problem is that the industry cannot increase supply - at least thats what the Pet Food Manufacturers Association say:

    "The PFMA also warned that the impact of Brexit on supplies had been "more challenging that we thought" with shipments delayed at borders due to paperwork not being in order.

    Michael Bellingham, Chief Executive, said: "It turns out that, in the main, this is not due to lack of preparation by exporters, but faulty guidance by government to the vets who sign off the certificates.

    "This will hopefully be sorted out over time, but time is not what companies have right now as the cost of having product stuck at the border is very high.

    "It will be some time before the dust settles.""

    We've still had enough of experts apparently.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,750
    'Statement lacking nuance' is a great euphemism for being wrong, I may use that.
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 24,981

    RobD said:

    Don't worry Comical Dave is on the story.

    https://twitter.com/DaveKeating/status/1369351351063506952

    Because the EU was months later than the UK at ordering. They only have themselves to blame.
    I still cannot comprehend that the EU prioritised price over speed when it came to the vaccine.
    Because the only thing they could offer their members was lower prices after waiting so long to get started
  • Options
    OmniumOmnium Posts: 9,779

    RobD said:

    Don't worry Comical Dave is on the story.

    https://twitter.com/DaveKeating/status/1369351351063506952

    Because the EU was months later than the UK at ordering. They only have themselves to blame.
    I still cannot comprehend that the EU prioritised price over speed when it came to the vaccine.
    They didn't. They found themselves last and firmly so, they then decided to save face by going hard on price.
  • Options
    FishingFishing Posts: 4,561

    The OECD has revised up its forecast for global growth and is predicting that the UK will grow faster than the Eurozone in 2021 and 2022.

    https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/economics/oecd-economic-outlook/volume-2020/issue-2_34bfd999-en

    We should offer to boost their growth by giving them access to our Single Market.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,238

    Don't worry Comical Dave is on the story.
    https://twitter.com/DaveKeating/status/1369351349683556357

    It’s a while since I saw it, but as I recall that is absolutely not what the EU contract says. It says that they would merely treat U.K. plants as EU ones for the purposes of export licenses, to avoid border checks and certification.

    Has Keating just crossed the line from ridiculously partisan spin to actual dishonesty there?
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    RobD said:

    So they don't have an export ban. Glad we cleared that up.
    Neither did the EU, but it didnt stop 99% of this board stating they had a few weeks ago.
    Although within the last few days they banned the export label of vaccines to Australia

    ... move along... nothing to see
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,238

    RobD said:

    Don't worry Comical Dave is on the story.

    https://twitter.com/DaveKeating/status/1369351351063506952

    Because the EU was months later than the UK at ordering. They only have themselves to blame.
    I still cannot comprehend that the EU prioritised price over speed when it came to the vaccine.
    Because it was negotiated within parameters set by Ursula von der Leyen and all she cares about is the headline price.
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 48,065
    edited March 2021

    RobD said:

    Don't worry Comical Dave is on the story.

    https://twitter.com/DaveKeating/status/1369351351063506952

    Because the EU was months later than the UK at ordering. They only have themselves to blame.
    I still cannot comprehend that the EU prioritised price over speed when it came to the vaccine.
    They thought being able to negotiate a discount would show the value of the EU. They didn't place an order with Pfizer until November 2020 and were boasting about paying less than the Americans.

    https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-eu-pfizer-idUSKBN27R1IF

    The European Union has struck a deal to initially pay less for Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine candidate than the United States, an EU official told Reuters as the bloc announced on Wednesday
  • Options
    Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 8,844

    Omnium said:

    To be pedantic, the actual question is whether Scotland should be independent rather than whether there should be another indyref. As a non-Scot I'm mildly in favour of allowing it in the coming decade - I don't think it can be put off indefinitely. But I'd hope the result will be "No". There will no doubt be others like me (and maybe some the reverse, who don't want a divisive new Indyref but would vote Yes if there is). So all one can really say is that opinion on independence itself is now narrowly against.

    Would you put a limit on the frequency of such polls?

    Personally I'd have it as just one per parliament. Clearly a very low threshold, but one that I think is fair.
    Personally I'd say one in 10 years, but there's clearly toom for argument. Every 5 years feels a bit frequent, given the agonising that accompanies them. The Yes side only has to win once, and they might strike a patch of temporary fedupness. But perhaps combine the option of frequent polls with a requirement for a 60% majority, so that it would never happen on a 52% whim like Bre...er, I forget what I was going to say...
    If the people of scotland give a 50%+ vote to parties which have a referendum as part of their manifesto then in my view they have grounds for having one. If the scots don't want a referendum every five years they just dont vote for parties that have that.

    Alternatively have an extra box on the holyrood voting slip which you can tick for a referendum this parliament. Then you can still vote snp or green and just not tick the box
  • Options
    dodradedodrade Posts: 595
    edited March 2021
    RobD said:

    Endillion said:

    alex_ said:

    rcs1000 said:

    I just read that H&M's interview was "devastating" for the reputation of the British Monarchy.

    I'm guessing the journalist didn't actually watch the interview, then.

    I think a lot of American commentary genuinely doesn't understand that the Royal Family is a fundamental part of the British state. They don't get the distinction between the "family" and the institution.

    It's not something that can just be easily disposed of on a whim, even if such a change was desired. Something has to take its place. Before pronouncing on its terminal decline, you would think a few of the commentators might stop to consider how come it is that the monarchy still exists in Australia and Canada.
    I always find it bizarre that UK dignitaries are formally greeted by an elected President, actively serving as head of the executive branch of government, when travelling to the US. I think that Americans find it similarly weird that their dignitaries are still met by the Queen, rather than the Prime Minister.
    Head of State vs. Head of Government. There are many countries where the role isn't merged into one person.
    I thought combining the Chairman and Chief Executive roles was largely frowned upon in business these days? The US lumbered with an 18th century system ironically more monarchical than the UK has today.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    ydoethur said:

    RobD said:

    Don't worry Comical Dave is on the story.

    https://twitter.com/DaveKeating/status/1369351351063506952

    Because the EU was months later than the UK at ordering. They only have themselves to blame.
    I still cannot comprehend that the EU prioritised price over speed when it came to the vaccine.
    Because it was negotiated within parameters set by Ursula von der Leyen and all she cares about is the headline price.
    They were even boasting widely that they had got it for cheaper than the UK.

    Until the UK started rolling out.

    Oops.
  • Options
    FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 9,046

    The OECD has revised up its forecast for global growth and is predicting that the UK will grow faster than the Eurozone in 2021 and 2022.

    https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/economics/oecd-economic-outlook/volume-2020/issue-2_34bfd999-en

    I don't think that is a very interesting metric on its own. Only in relation to the fall in output from before covid. The thing I would be looking for is when output recovers to pre-covid.

    Of course if we are able to get back on our feet earlier due to vaccines etc that will help
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,238

    RobD said:

    Don't worry Comical Dave is on the story.

    https://twitter.com/DaveKeating/status/1369351351063506952

    Because the EU was months later than the UK at ordering. They only have themselves to blame.
    I still cannot comprehend that the EU prioritised price over speed when it came to the vaccine.
    They thought being able to negotiate a discount would show the value of the EU. They didn't place an order with Pfizer until November 2020 and were boasting about paying less than the Americans.

    https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-eu-pfizer-idUSKBN27R1IF

    The European Union has struck a deal to initially pay less for Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine candidate than the United States, an EU official told Reuters as the bloc announced on Wednesday
    They struck a bargain to pay cheap and will pay far more than twice in consequence.
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 24,981
    Charles said:

    RobD said:

    So they don't have an export ban. Glad we cleared that up.
    Neither did the EU, but it didnt stop 99% of this board stating they had a few weeks ago.
    Although within the last few days they banned the export label of vaccines to Australia

    ... move along... nothing to see
    We know Italy banned the export - but was it as the EUs behest.

    And what will the consequences of it be? I can see other companies being very tentative about accepting orders from the EU let alone manufacturing within it.
  • Options
    squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,352

    FPT

    We are in serious danger of Susanna Reid becoming the next Sir Keir.

    She is Susanna. She is not Susannah.

    I blame auto-erect...
    I dont watch daytime so it makes no difference who ever is presenting. GMB is designed for the feeble minded.

    The only think worth daytime attention is at 10.30 on RADIO 2.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,992

    The OECD has revised up its forecast for global growth and is predicting that the UK will grow faster than the Eurozone in 2021 and 2022.

    https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/economics/oecd-economic-outlook/volume-2020/issue-2_34bfd999-en

    I would be staggered if we didn't grow a lot quicker than them (at least 3 percentage points) this year, as we (a) are leaving this faster, and (b) had a bigger dip last year.

    By contrast, because the EU is going to have a terrible Q1 and Q2 of this year, it would be extremely surprising if they didn't manage a faster number for next year.

    Imagine if normal quarterly output is 100.

    We might have:

    90, 100, 102, 102 - this year

    and

    103, 103, 103, 103 - next year


    For the Eurozone, they would likely have something like

    90, 90, 100, 101 - this year

    and even if they barely reached normal output next year, i.e. something like

    101, 101, 101, 101 - next year

    They would still (mathematically) have faster growth than us, because they have one more period from this year with is CV19 riven than us.
  • Options
    kle4 said:

    'Statement lacking nuance' is a great euphemism for being wrong, I may use that.
    On the rare, usually once a decade, occasion I am wrong the euphemism I go for is

    'Whilst my logic was unimpeachable, I was misinformed by the interpretation of the events/data by other parties.'

    Or I might use a variation of this from Four Lions.

    'The report makes crystal clear that the police shot the right man, but as far as I'm aware, the wrong man exploded. Is that clear?'
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,332
    I just wish @malcolmg had drafted the the Buckingham Palace statement.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,125
    The reality of the EU failure on vaccines.

    This.

    For many weeks still to come.

  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,238

    I just wish @malcolmg had drafted the the Buckingham Palace statement.

    That would have been a turnip for the books.

    Good night.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,285
    edited March 2021

    The reality of the EU failure on vaccines.

    This.

    For many weeks still to come.

    French GP doing 30 a week, on a good week....compare to the scenes here.

    https://youtu.be/_kfC6EbWxRc
  • Options
    GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,079
    Just had 3 Apache Gunships fly overhead. :#
  • Options
    FairlieredFairliered Posts: 3,988
    sarissa said:

    Mike, you better exclude discussion of the Sevanta ConRes Scotsman poll before you lose years of credibility.

    From Business for Scotland:

    “Savanta ComRes, who carried out the poll for the Scotsman organisation, excluded a weighting mechanism that changed a previous poll last month from a Yes minority to a majority of 53%.

    We spoke exclusively to Savanta ComRes who explained that the question of voting likelihood ”wasn’t asked purely because we knew we wouldn’t end up using it for weighting.”

    To be clear, a unionist newspaper commissioned a poll and agreed that it would not be carried out with the normal weighting procedure.”

    The raw figures are the same as the Feb poll by them which resulted in the 53% Yes vote after the standard weighting was applied.

    Didn’t stop Sarah Smith having multiple orgasms about it.
This discussion has been closed.