Salmond also had a women's problem during the indyref where women were much more sceptical about independence than men.
And people even question who is the smarter sex.
True. Amazing how Sturgeon has managed to turn this into a binary between him and her. For years she was his chief cheerleader and apologist ("not a sexist bone in his body".) And now butter wouldn't melt in her mouth. Nauseating. No wonder Eck is so beside himself.
I still don’t understand this whole sexist bones thing.
It was when Alex Salmond said something that was misogynistic towards Anna Soubry and Sturgeon said something along the lines of 'Alex Salmond doesn't have a sexist bone in his body',
Yes, yes, yes, but that was then. Now he is not fit for public office. Keep with the program for goodness sake.
If the Alba ruse actually works (I doubt it) then the obvious Unionist response would be for them to stand down in favour of the strongest party in the constituencies. It would take a lot for that to happen but could be transformative if it did.
That could ultimately be very good news for SLAB as the Tories would en masse transfer to them (not so much the other way round in the Tory-leaning areas) thus putting a lot of Central Belt seats into contention. However that's looking far ahead to Holyrood 2026. A lot could happen in the meantime!
Haven't you been keeping up with Murray Ross's communiques? He's suggested exactly that to a chorus of raspberries from SLab at least.
Something about this just seems wrong, and I doubt the voters will enjoy being told what candidate to vote for.
This is why we need AV to save the Union.
Unionists would rank the Unionists accordingly ergo Unionist majority at Holyrood.
#AVToSaveTheUnion
If only av will save the union then the union is not worth saving....its like saying if we cut the head off this dead body we can save him
Nah, the Union is worth saving.
I've written a thread, well writing a thread, on the subject of England relative to the size of the rest of the UK is just too big for the Parliament of the UK to work properly.
Perhaps we should go American senate style and allow each country to elect 25 senators to send to the replacement for the Lords with proper powers, or maybe a new House of Commons with 150 MPs elected from every member of the Union.
We should go for the Senate-style arrangement. Tho maybe every county should send two Lords?
Scotland actually has more counties than England - 33 over 27.....
That could work.
I REALLY hope Boris is reading this right now (hello Boris!)
We all know he is going to refuse a referendum, but there are different ways of refusing, some much better than others. Part of refusing MUST be the offer of a Royal Commission on All The Options, including your Federal idea (which I definitely agree with) and including a proper analysis of what Indy would really mean (currency, bank, etc)
A simple No is going to stoke resentment, a more nuanced answer is needed
Does Alba plan on running in the Airdrie and Shotts by-election? I can’t seem to find a definitive statement either way.
Surprisingly it is on the 13th May post Holyrood
Indeed. And, from what I gather, it should be a sure thing for the SNP - if Alba doesn't stand and split the vote. It might give some inkling on if Alba plans on being just an SNP cadet branch or if they really do plan on challenging the SNP for the Scottish nationalist vote in the longer run.
I wonder if the EU is beginning to join the dots.....
The news that the Novavax vaccine is going to go through a process known as fill and finish in the UK is an interesting development. Fill and finish is the process by which vaccines are packaged up in vials, ready to be sent out to vaccination clinics.
The original plan was for this to be done in Europe once the vaccine product was manufactured by plants in the north east. But a deal has been struck with drug firm GSK to do that here.
Officially, the government is saying that it is all part of their investment in the British life science industry. But given the threats from Europe about restricting exports of vaccines, it begs all sorts of other questions too.
No, they'll just ramp up the rhetoric even more when those start to filter through at the end of April and early May. Moderna is also licenced to fill and finish at Wockhart and can switch at very short notice from what I understand.
Their threats are going to become more and more loud as we just keep on keeping on getting through our population with 95% uptake and getting closer and closer to the day we can say goodbye to these restrictions.
"After the siege on the hotel, Alexander broke into a government vehicle and grabbed an AK-47, before proceeding to shoot dead two militants.
""He and two others from the car then ran to hide into the bushes with the gun. They were literally crawling through the bush until they were rescued""
"Spending days hiding out, he eventually found safety on Sunday and made contact with 29-year-old daughter Jayde in Johannesburg."
It does seem to me that Sturgeon and Salmond have very different agendas for Scotland post independence if it happens
This is the crazy thing... Usually this kind of split would happen AFTER independence once you have a consensus on their major raison d'etre: independence.
Salmond also had a women's problem during the indyref where women were much more sceptical about independence than men.
And people even question who is the smarter sex.
True. Amazing how Sturgeon has managed to turn this into a binary between him and her. For years she was his chief cheerleader and apologist ("not a sexist bone in his body".) And now butter wouldn't melt in her mouth. Nauseating. No wonder Eck is so beside himself.
I still don’t understand this whole sexist bones thing.
It was when Alex Salmond said something that was misogynistic towards Anna Soubry and Sturgeon said something along the lines of 'Alex Salmond doesn't have a sexist bone in his body'.
Edit - Here it is, from June 2015.
NICOLA Sturgeon has launched a bracing defence of Alex Salmond over charges of sexism after he told a Conservative MP to “behave yourself, woman”.
The First Minister took time out from her visit to the United States to insist her predecessor “has not got a sexist bone in his body”.
Sturgeon leapt to the Gordon MP’s defence after he sparked controversy during a House of Commons exchange with Enterprise Minister Anna Soubry last week.
During a debate on devolution, Salmond scolded the Treasury bench and said it should “behave better”.
Directly addressing Soubry, he added: “She should be setting an example to your new members, not cavorting about like some demented junior minister - behave yourself, woman.”
Soubry reacted with fury to the jibe, claiming Salmond thought women should be “seen and not heard” and insisting his attitude belonged “firmly in the 19th Century”.
Why do banks feel it safe to do business in the billions with ex cons ? https://www.finews.asia/people/34136-who-is-bill-hwang ...in 2001, Hwang established the former Tiger Asia Management which was established following his time as a "tiger cub" – a term to describe the dozen of hedge funds with roots that trace back to renowned hedge fund manager Julian Robertson and the 42-year old Tiger Management.
Tiger Asia grew to be a multi-billion dollar hedge fund and one of the largest investors in Asian financial markets but in 2012, the Securities and Exchange Commission charged Hwang and Tiger Asia with insider trading and manipulation of Chinese stocks. Hwang pleaded guilty, agreed to criminal and civil settlements of over $60 million and later closed the fund.
In 2013, Hwang converted the firm into a family office – Archegos Capital Management – which has reportedly grown to become larger than even many well-known hedge funds...
Been there, done that. I provided some of the key evidence to the SEC for that 2012 prosecution.
Tiger Management has quite a history. First came across them in 1995 when the French took actions against a number of firms for insider trading in relation to the 1994 Eurotunnel rights issue.
As to why banks overlook this, how long do you think the corporate memory in City firms is? Even mentioning that I was involved in a case in 1994 made people think I was some sort of female Methuselah.
Never ever overestimate the greed. Never ever underestimate the stupidity.
Still seems strange to me that they don’t take a bit more notice of their clients’ criminal histories.
I’d have you on permanent retainer.
I wish someone would!
They will have justified it to themselves by the fact that the fund is a separate legal entity, has separate management, a compliance function, the trader involved in the insider trading is no longer there, all a long time ago, increased surveillance and monitoring blah blah blah.
Remember too that there are a lot of people still allowed to trade by regulators despite some dodgy history. Some have even been appointed to important positions - see this paragraph in my header last June - https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/06/16/rewards-for-failure/. "Think the private sector is better? Think again. A CEO of a major European investment bank, under whose leadership the bank became the object of the UK’s biggest fraud by one of its traders and was heavily fined for its activities in the Libor-fixing and FX-rigging scandals (ca. $1.8 billion) would, you’d have thought, counted himself lucky to be allowed to fold his tent and creep off into the night. No. Both German and British regulators thought him suitable to be in charge of the proposed merged London and German stock exchange. (Stock exchanges are not simply businesses; they also have a regulatory function, something you’d hope the Boards and regulators would bear in mind when making and approving appointments.)
Fortunately – in this case anyway – Brexit happened, the proposed merger collapsed and the CEO resigned. (The coda to this was the three-year investigation by German prosecutors into dealing by the CEO in the exchange’s shares, all eventually resolved with a fine for the exchange and repayment of €4.8 million by the CEO.) Such a bother for all concerned! Was there really no-one else available? The CEO is now chairing another FCA-regulated asset management firm and on the Board of a US wealth management company. Remember this when regulators tell you they have learnt lessons and the financial sector’s culture has improved."
When regulators behave like that how can they expect firms to behave better?
If the Alba ruse actually works (I doubt it) then the obvious Unionist response would be for them to stand down in favour of the strongest party in the constituencies. It would take a lot for that to happen but could be transformative if it did.
That could ultimately be very good news for SLAB as the Tories would en masse transfer to them (not so much the other way round in the Tory-leaning areas) thus putting a lot of Central Belt seats into contention. However that's looking far ahead to Holyrood 2026. A lot could happen in the meantime!
Haven't you been keeping up with Murray Ross's communiques? He's suggested exactly that to a chorus of raspberries from SLab at least.
Something about this just seems wrong, and I doubt the voters will enjoy being told what candidate to vote for.
This is why we need AV to save the Union.
Unionists would rank the Unionists accordingly ergo Unionist majority at Holyrood.
#AVToSaveTheUnion
If only av will save the union then the union is not worth saving....its like saying if we cut the head off this dead body we can save him
Nah, the Union is worth saving.
I've written a thread, well writing a thread, on the subject of England relative to the size of the rest of the UK is just too big for the Parliament of the UK to work properly.
Perhaps we should go American senate style and allow each country to elect 25 senators to send to the replacement for the Lords with proper powers, or maybe a new House of Commons with 150 MPs elected from every member of the Union.
Can you give a good reason for why the union is worth having? Never seen one advanced yet
Fucking brilliant flag. World-best brand.
If Scotland goes, tell them we are still keeping it. Fuck 'em.
If the Alba ruse actually works (I doubt it) then the obvious Unionist response would be for them to stand down in favour of the strongest party in the constituencies. It would take a lot for that to happen but could be transformative if it did.
That could ultimately be very good news for SLAB as the Tories would en masse transfer to them (not so much the other way round in the Tory-leaning areas) thus putting a lot of Central Belt seats into contention. However that's looking far ahead to Holyrood 2026. A lot could happen in the meantime!
Haven't you been keeping up with Murray Ross's communiques? He's suggested exactly that to a chorus of raspberries from SLab at least.
Something about this just seems wrong, and I doubt the voters will enjoy being told what candidate to vote for.
This is why we need AV to save the Union.
Unionists would rank the Unionists accordingly ergo Unionist majority at Holyrood.
#AVToSaveTheUnion
If only av will save the union then the union is not worth saving....its like saying if we cut the head off this dead body we can save him
Nah, the Union is worth saving.
I've written a thread, well writing a thread, on the subject of England relative to the size of the rest of the UK is just too big for the Parliament of the UK to work properly.
Perhaps we should go American senate style and allow each country to elect 25 senators to send to the replacement for the Lords with proper powers, or maybe a new House of Commons with 150 MPs elected from every member of the Union.
Maybe we should replace each devolved Parliament with the releavant Westminster MPs meeting in Cardiff, Stormont, Holyrood on Thu/Fri.
If the Alba ruse actually works (I doubt it) then the obvious Unionist response would be for them to stand down in favour of the strongest party in the constituencies. It would take a lot for that to happen but could be transformative if it did.
That could ultimately be very good news for SLAB as the Tories would en masse transfer to them (not so much the other way round in the Tory-leaning areas) thus putting a lot of Central Belt seats into contention. However that's looking far ahead to Holyrood 2026. A lot could happen in the meantime!
Haven't you been keeping up with Murray Ross's communiques? He's suggested exactly that to a chorus of raspberries from SLab at least.
It's a sensible strategy. He can offer, and when he's rebuffed claim that Labour and the Lib Dems aren't committed to the Union.
At a guess, about a fifth of the Scottish electorate is unionist (which is not at all the same thing as a No voter, of course.) Ultimately that's never going to get his party anywhere in terms of wielding power, because if anyone will work with them it's only ever going to be trading votes for a few minor concessions in a very hung parliament, but that's at least enough to keep about thirty Tory politicians in lucrative employment.
The problem is that there is a pro-Indy and anti-Indy vote; and there is a pro-Tory and an anti-Tory vote.
Generally, Tories are going to be hunting for other anti-Indy votes.
But Labour (and the Lib Dems) are, generally, fishing in the anti-Tory vote.
A cross-Unionist alliance will, all things being equal, actually push some voters toward pro-Indy parties.
From what I saw of the "Remain Alliance" at the GE, less than half of voters are willing to be directed to another party. Quite how the other half split between DNV, Labour or even the Tories was unknown, but it pretty heavily diluted the effect.
I think a Unionist Alliance would damage SLD and SLAB, so they are right not to support it. Indeed I have a hunch that SLAB will be the second party in Holyrood. A way to stick two fingers up to both Westminster and Holyrood governments must be tempting.
A fair percentage of the population are willing to vote tactically* but taking away the other options completely doesn't help much. It needs carrot not stick, at least until we get a better voting system.
*I note that Tories are much less likely to tactically vote for other parties.
Looks to be lots of ships quite close together. I haven't look at this before but I'm sure they must be much closer together than they would normally be.
Looks to be lots of ships quite close together. I haven't look at this before but I'm sure they must be much closer together than they would normally be.
So where's his right hand? Also playing pocket billiards?
Never mind that nonsense. What's that strange beige fourteen seater settee thing behind them? And the long row of blank white canvasses on a white wall?
If the Alba ruse actually works (I doubt it) then the obvious Unionist response would be for them to stand down in favour of the strongest party in the constituencies. It would take a lot for that to happen but could be transformative if it did.
That could ultimately be very good news for SLAB as the Tories would en masse transfer to them (not so much the other way round in the Tory-leaning areas) thus putting a lot of Central Belt seats into contention. However that's looking far ahead to Holyrood 2026. A lot could happen in the meantime!
Haven't you been keeping up with Murray Ross's communiques? He's suggested exactly that to a chorus of raspberries from SLab at least.
It's a sensible strategy. He can offer, and when he's rebuffed claim that Labour and the Lib Dems aren't committed to the Union.
At a guess, about a fifth of the Scottish electorate is unionist (which is not at all the same thing as a No voter, of course.) Ultimately that's never going to get his party anywhere in terms of wielding power, because if anyone will work with them it's only ever going to be trading votes for a few minor concessions in a very hung parliament, but that's at least enough to keep about thirty Tory politicians in lucrative employment.
The problem is that there is a pro-Indy and anti-Indy vote; and there is a pro-Tory and an anti-Tory vote.
Generally, Tories are going to be hunting for other anti-Indy votes.
But Labour (and the Lib Dems) are, generally, fishing in the anti-Tory vote.
A cross-Unionist alliance will, all things being equal, actually push some voters toward pro-Indy parties.
From what I saw of the "Remain Alliance" at the GE, less than half of voters are willing to be directed to another party. Quite how the other half split between DNV, Labour or even the Tories was unknown, but it pretty heavily diluted the effect.
I was willing to vote for the Liberal Democrats. Not the Greens. Bunch of third rate self righteous fascist hypocrites (well, the ones round here. Have some good friends in Aber who were Greens and normal people).
I’d actually have been slightly more willing to vote for Corbyn than Paul Woodhead.
I mean, it's not trolling. It just so happens that a majority of GSKs vaccine final fill capacity in the UK is at their Barnard Castle plant.
You know if Cummings had been as bright as I thought he would have used that as his excuse.
"I was on a fact finding mission to Barnard Castle to see if their facility was suitable for vaccine production."
There are many things I have reassessed in the last 15 months: Cummings brilliance is one of them.
Aiui, he gave the VTF it's VC style operating mandate so that's a pretty big tick in his column.
Yes, he did, from what I've read
Cummings saw how PHE and HMG and the NHS had completely cocked up PPE, so he personally made sure a new, autonomous body drove the vaccine effort
A grand irony at the end of all this. The most vilified man in the land might have saved thousands of lives, rescued a chunk of the economy, and also vindicated Brexit
So where's his right hand? Also playing pocket billiards?
Never mind that nonsense. What's that strange beige fourteen seater settee thing behind them? And the long row of blank white canvasses on a white wall?
It’s designed to be big enough to accommodate all the people who genuinely believe Nicola Sturgeon was telling the truth.
Is there a Scottish party that supports independence but doesn't support applying to join the EU?
I ask for two reasons: polls show there is a group of people who take that view. I'm not sure who they vote for.
Secondly because arguing for Scottish independence is perfectly sensible (though personally I don't back it). But arguing that pooling sovereignty with NI, England and Wales is so terrible that we are planning to pool sovereignty with Lithuania, Spain, Slovenia, Germany and 23 others instead doesn't kind of add up does it?
One pooling of sovereignty let's you decide if you want to continue pooling, the other doesn't, a pretty basic sum of just how much sovereignty you're surrendering I'd suggest.
I'll be fascinated to see how it works out when a country in the Euro decides to stop this pooling of sovereignty lark. As it seems to me Brexit and Article 50 was only possible - and then only with the greatest difficulty - because we were not in the Euro.
And as Scotland has just recently decided for itself that it wanted to stay in the pooled sovereignty with NI, E and W in a free vote, it doesn't sound quite like a system which doesn't let you decide on sovereignty.
So where's his right hand? Also playing pocket billiards?
Never mind that nonsense. What's that strange beige fourteen seater settee thing behind them? And the long row of blank white canvasses on a white wall?
The blank canvases are the SNP economic policies, I expect.
The reason to stay in the union is that we have a shared history, common ties, and we are stronger (in the world) and wealthier (as a single market) together.
England and Scotland are brothers.
The problem for Unionists to solve is how to reinforce and institutionalise a fraternal, rather than paternalistic, relationship.
I mean, it's not trolling. It just so happens that a majority of GSKs vaccine final fill capacity in the UK is at their Barnard Castle plant.
You know if Cummings had been as bright as I thought he would have used that as his excuse.
"I was on a fact finding mission to Barnard Castle to see if their facility was suitable for vaccine production."
There are many things I have reassessed in the last 15 months: Cummings brilliance is one of them.
Aiui, he gave the VTF it's VC style operating mandate so that's a pretty big tick in his column.
Yes, he did, from what I've read
Cummings saw how PHE and HMG and the NHS had completely cocked up PPE, so he personally made sure a new, autonomous body drove the vaccine effort
A grand irony at the end of all this. The most vilified man in the land might have saved thousands of lives, rescued a chunk of the economy, and also vindicated Brexit
Historians, to your quills
I thought Hancock got the idea from watching “Contagion”.
That's just adding insult to injury for poor Sir Keir: Boris is beating him on 'Tells the truth'...
And the comparisons across the board are appalling for Starmer
I wonder how the hapless Attlee would have fared against the political titan that was Winston Churchill in the early 1940s? It was hardly worth Attlee turning up for GE1945 was it?
Hats to piss on your chips, but... Labour led from 1943. The more charismatic leader closed the gap towards the end of the campaign
If the Alba ruse actually works (I doubt it) then the obvious Unionist response would be for them to stand down in favour of the strongest party in the constituencies. It would take a lot for that to happen but could be transformative if it did.
That could ultimately be very good news for SLAB as the Tories would en masse transfer to them (not so much the other way round in the Tory-leaning areas) thus putting a lot of Central Belt seats into contention. However that's looking far ahead to Holyrood 2026. A lot could happen in the meantime!
Haven't you been keeping up with Murray Ross's communiques? He's suggested exactly that to a chorus of raspberries from SLab at least.
The reason to stay in the union is that we have a shared history, common ties, and we are stronger (in the world) and wealthier (as a single market) together.
England and Scotland are brothers.
The problem for Unionists to solve is how to reinforce and institutionalise a fraternal, rather than paternalistic, relationship.
Yes, that is a good way to put it, but the absence of fraternity (eg @HYUFDs tanks, and denying a further referendum) is obvious. If Unionists are serious, it does require Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland to be listened to in Westminster. That just doesn't happen at present.
The reason to stay in the union is that we have a shared history, common ties, and we are stronger (in the world) and wealthier (as a single market) together.
England and Scotland are brothers.
The problem for Unionists to solve is how to reinforce and institutionalise a fraternal, rather than paternalistic, relationship.
TSE's proposals are sensible (with my amendment). A powerful, Federal Upper House, like the US Senate. Two Lords sent from each UK county.
It means W, S and NI will be seriously over-represented, compared to E, but that is necessary to secure them in a union where England, by dint of size, will always appear overbearing (and can never be out-voted in the Commons)
With devolved assemblies, as well, that is as far as England can go to make the UK work, without disenfranchising the English themselves
If it's not enough, then let Scotland Wales and NI vote on indy and let them Stay or Go, and if they Stay, then let there be no more constitutional wankery or plebiscites for 30 years, minimum
Looks to be lots of ships quite close together. I haven't look at this before but I'm sure they must be much closer together than they would normally be.
It's not an issue. They are all GPS-controlled these days. They never go off course. No, never.
That's just adding insult to injury for poor Sir Keir: Boris is beating him on 'Tells the truth'...
And the comparisons across the board are appalling for Starmer
I wonder how the hapless Attlee would have fared against the political titan that was Winston Churchill in the early 1940s? It was hardly worth Attlee turning up for GE1945 was it?
Hats to piss on your chips, but... Labour led from 1943. The more charismatic leader closed the gap towards the end of the campaign
I mean, it's not trolling. It just so happens that a majority of GSKs vaccine final fill capacity in the UK is at their Barnard Castle plant.
You know if Cummings had been as bright as I thought he would have used that as his excuse.
"I was on a fact finding mission to Barnard Castle to see if their facility was suitable for vaccine production."
There are many things I have reassessed in the last 15 months: Cummings brilliance is one of them.
Aiui, he gave the VTF it's VC style operating mandate so that's a pretty big tick in his column.
Yes, he did, from what I've read
Cummings saw how PHE and HMG and the NHS had completely cocked up PPE, so he personally made sure a new, autonomous body drove the vaccine effort
A grand irony at the end of all this. The most vilified man in the land might have saved thousands of lives, rescued a chunk of the economy, and also vindicated Brexit
Historians, to your quills
I thought Hancock got the idea from watching “Contagion”.
Different part of the process. Hancock was more focused on ensuring the UK had a domestic supply of vaccines but it was Cummings that pushed the idea of operating the VTF like a VC fund and the government acting like an investment partner with pharmaceutical companies. Novavax will be the most successful example of this as it was a small enough entity for the UK government to get in on the ground floor and they've made a huge long term commitment to the UK for a minimum of 15m doses per month to be made here and for an option to double that if there is enough high value demand outside of the US (which there will be). Valneva is another example of this and I'm almost certain it was a VTF objective to get GSK to partner with an mRNA firm so we'd have a domestically produced a mRNA vaccine for the long term.
It's probably going to go down as his lasting success, rebuilding a huge part of the UK pharmaceutical manufacturing chain for basically no money at the most critical time in recent history.
The reason to stay in the union is that we have a shared history, common ties, and we are stronger (in the world) and wealthier (as a single market) together.
England and Scotland are brothers.
The problem for Unionists to solve is how to reinforce and institutionalise a fraternal, rather than paternalistic, relationship.
TSE's proposals are sensible (with my amendment). A powerful, Federal Upper House, like the US Senate. Two Lords sent from each UK county.
It means W, S and NI will be seriously over-represented, compared to E, but that is necessary to secure them in a union where England, by dint of size, will always appear overbearing (and can never be out-voted in the Commons)
With devolved assemblies, as well, that is as far as England can go to make the UK work, without disenfranchising the English themselves
If it's not enough, then let Scotland Wales and NI vote on indy and let them Stay or Go, and if they Stay, then let there be no more constitutional wankery or plebiscites for 30 years, minimum
Something like this, yes.
Another radical idea. With Westminster out of action for refurbishment, why not sent the Parliament to Edinburgh?
I mean, it's not trolling. It just so happens that a majority of GSKs vaccine final fill capacity in the UK is at their Barnard Castle plant.
You know if Cummings had been as bright as I thought he would have used that as his excuse.
"I was on a fact finding mission to Barnard Castle to see if their facility was suitable for vaccine production."
There are many things I have reassessed in the last 15 months: Cummings brilliance is one of them.
Aiui, he gave the VTF it's VC style operating mandate so that's a pretty big tick in his column.
Yes, he did, from what I've read
Cummings saw how PHE and HMG and the NHS had completely cocked up PPE, so he personally made sure a new, autonomous body drove the vaccine effort
A grand irony at the end of all this. The most vilified man in the land might have saved thousands of lives, rescued a chunk of the economy, and also vindicated Brexit
Historians, to your quills
I thought Hancock got the idea from watching “Contagion”.
I've read a lot (like Max it seems) and what I grasp (it could be wrong) is this: Hancock was keen on vaccines from the start, he persuaded Boris to take them seriously, but it was Cummings who envisaged the actual structure of the VTF, and how it must have autonomy, and would therefore be superior to PHE etc
That's just adding insult to injury for poor Sir Keir: Boris is beating him on 'Tells the truth'...
And the comparisons across the board are appalling for Starmer
I wonder how the hapless Attlee would have fared against the political titan that was Winston Churchill in the early 1940s? It was hardly worth Attlee turning up for GE1945 was it?
Hats to piss on your chips, but... Labour led from 1943. The more charismatic leader closed the gap towards the end of the campaign
That's just adding insult to injury for poor Sir Keir: Boris is beating him on 'Tells the truth'...
And the comparisons across the board are appalling for Starmer
I wonder how the hapless Attlee would have fared against the political titan that was Winston Churchill in the early 1940s? It was hardly worth Attlee turning up for GE1945 was it?
Hats to piss on your chips, but... Labour led from 1943. The more charismatic leader closed the gap towards the end of the campaign
Oh dear. Looks like the 'Attlee Defence' just went up in a puff of smoke, didn't it? Not sure why you're so sceptical about opinion polls that showed a consistent double-digit lead for Labour in the run-up to 1945 when the 1945 election result was, er, a double-digit lead for Labour...
I've read a lot (like Max it seems) and what I grasp (it could be wrong) is this: Hancock was keen on vaccines from the start, he persuaded Boris to take them seriously, but it was Cummings who envisaged the actual structure of the VTF, and how it must have autonomy, and would therefore be superior to PHE etc
I've read a lot (like Max it seems) and what I grasp (it could be wrong) is this: Hancock was keen on vaccines from the start, he persuaded Boris to take them seriously, but it was Cummings who envisaged the actual structure of the VTF, and how it must have autonomy, and would therefore be superior to PHE etc
Looks to be lots of ships quite close together. I haven't look at this before but I'm sure they must be much closer together than they would normally be.
The reason to stay in the union is that we have a shared history, common ties, and we are stronger (in the world) and wealthier (as a single market) together.
England and Scotland are brothers.
The problem for Unionists to solve is how to reinforce and institutionalise a fraternal, rather than paternalistic, relationship.
TSE's proposals are sensible (with my amendment). A powerful, Federal Upper House, like the US Senate. Two Lords sent from each UK county.
It means W, S and NI will be seriously over-represented, compared to E, but that is necessary to secure them in a union where England, by dint of size, will always appear overbearing (and can never be out-voted in the Commons)
With devolved assemblies, as well, that is as far as England can go to make the UK work, without disenfranchising the English themselves
If it's not enough, then let Scotland Wales and NI vote on indy and let them Stay or Go, and if they Stay, then let there be no more constitutional wankery or plebiscites for 30 years, minimum
Something like this, yes.
Another radical idea. With Westminster out of action for refurbishment, why not sent the Parliament to Edinburgh?
It is essentially, the second capital, after all.
Yes, we now see that MPs and Lords can speak and vote remotely. So, make the parliament mobile. Esp the new House of Lords (and of course we ditch the dukes and bishops).
Some "Lords" may prefer to travel and attend personally. Some may do it via Zoom. But let the Lords move from London, to Edinburgh, to Belfast to Cardiff. Each season. Or each year. Or every election. Why not?
Creative thinking is required. We have just endured a plague, and Brexit. This is the moment to reset things.
That's just adding insult to injury for poor Sir Keir: Boris is beating him on 'Tells the truth'...
And the comparisons across the board are appalling for Starmer
I wonder how the hapless Attlee would have fared against the political titan that was Winston Churchill in the early 1940s? It was hardly worth Attlee turning up for GE1945 was it?
Hats to piss on your chips, but... Labour led from 1943. The more charismatic leader closed the gap towards the end of the campaign
I've read a lot (like Max it seems) and what I grasp (it could be wrong) is this: Hancock was keen on vaccines from the start, he persuaded Boris to take them seriously, but it was Cummings who envisaged the actual structure of the VTF, and how it must have autonomy, and would therefore be superior to PHE etc
Did you read it on Cummings blog perhaps?
No, in the Guardian and the Times
The fact I read it twice in two very different papers (neither of them especially friendly to Dom C) inclines me to believe it
It does seem to me that Sturgeon and Salmond have very different agendas for Scotland post independence if it happens
Every day Eck goes more and more Trump... He has a franchise with angry, blue collar men over 50. Trouble is, so does the SNP. He is not breaking into new voters.
A lot of folk are increasingly turned off by the angry face of nationalism and the obvious bitterness between Salmond and Sturgeon is not likely to swing more hearts and minds their way,
So, Instead of getting a super majority, I think a bare minority is now the most likely result. I´d be very interested to see how things are going in Airdrie and Shotts.
I mean, it's not trolling. It just so happens that a majority of GSKs vaccine final fill capacity in the UK is at their Barnard Castle plant.
You know if Cummings had been as bright as I thought he would have used that as his excuse.
"I was on a fact finding mission to Barnard Castle to see if their facility was suitable for vaccine production."
There are many things I have reassessed in the last 15 months: Cummings brilliance is one of them.
Aiui, he gave the VTF it's VC style operating mandate so that's a pretty big tick in his column.
Yes, he did, from what I've read
Cummings saw how PHE and HMG and the NHS had completely cocked up PPE, so he personally made sure a new, autonomous body drove the vaccine effort
A grand irony at the end of all this. The most vilified man in the land might have saved thousands of lives, rescued a chunk of the economy, and also vindicated Brexit
Historians, to your quills
I thought Hancock got the idea from watching “Contagion”.
I've read a lot (like Max it seems) and what I grasp (it could be wrong) is this: Hancock was keen on vaccines from the start, he persuaded Boris to take them seriously, but it was Cummings who envisaged the actual structure of the VTF, and how it must have autonomy, and would therefore be superior to PHE etc
Yes, it was hugely controversial at the time because the health bods all saw it as centralising the vaccine rollout to No. 10 and cutting the DoH out of the loop. It is exactly what he did, of course, and with good reason as the DoH operating remit would have been constricted by civil service and tendering regulations. The VTF operated without any of those constraints and worked directly with the Treasury to get sign off, cutting PHE and the DoH out of the decision making process.
One of the anecdotes I heard at the time was that the NHS bods were worried about how much we were relying on AZ and Pfizer, and that we should have placed our bigger order with GSK/Sanofi at 100m rather than with AZ. They also wanted to bet on Moderna rather than Pfizer but the VTF went with Pfizer becuase they could guarantee a delivery schedule whole Moderna weren't able to guarantee shipments from out of the US and also didn't, at the time, have any non-US production either directly or under licence. If we'd gone for 100m of Sanofi and 40m of Moderna instead of 100m AZ and 40m Pfizer the rollout would have been completely different and much slower.
The deals with Novavax and Valneva would never have happened either IMO as the VTF followed the VC playbook for them.
The reason to stay in the union is that we have a shared history, common ties, and we are stronger (in the world) and wealthier (as a single market) together.
England and Scotland are brothers.
The problem for Unionists to solve is how to reinforce and institutionalise a fraternal, rather than paternalistic, relationship.
TSE's proposals are sensible (with my amendment). A powerful, Federal Upper House, like the US Senate. Two Lords sent from each UK county.
It means W, S and NI will be seriously over-represented, compared to E, but that is necessary to secure them in a union where England, by dint of size, will always appear overbearing (and can never be out-voted in the Commons)
With devolved assemblies, as well, that is as far as England can go to make the UK work, without disenfranchising the English themselves
If it's not enough, then let Scotland Wales and NI vote on indy and let them Stay or Go, and if they Stay, then let there be no more constitutional wankery or plebiscites for 30 years, minimum
Something like this, yes.
Another radical idea. With Westminster out of action for refurbishment, why not sent the Parliament to Edinburgh?
It is essentially, the second capital, after all.
Yes, we now see that MPs and Lords can speak and vote remotely. So, make the parliament mobile. Esp the new House of Lords (and of course we ditch the dukes and bishops).
Some "Lords" may prefer to travel and attend personally. Some may do it via Zoom. But let the Lords move from London, to Edinburgh, to Belfast to Cardiff. Each season. Or each year. Or every election. Why not?
Creative thinking is required. We have just endured a plague, and Brexit. This is the moment to reset things.
By the way, under your suggestion a population of just 7,000 people (and even fewer electors) in Cromartyshire would be entitled to two members of the HoL.
The reason to stay in the union is that we have a shared history, common ties, and we are stronger (in the world) and wealthier (as a single market) together.
England and Scotland are brothers.
The problem for Unionists to solve is how to reinforce and institutionalise a fraternal, rather than paternalistic, relationship.
You probably can't. The best route to go down is to federalise and distribute as much power as possible down to the four states, but that would still leave external relations, defence and security, the currency, the borders, probably state pensions and certainly the system of transfer payments to be run by the centre. The nationalists outside of England would then continue to insist loudly that nobody was paying them enough attention, and why would the English electorate countenance (as per various madcap proposals advanced on this site this evening) some kind of balancing chamber in which half or more of the members were chosen by 14% of the people?
Anyway, it's all academic. The Union is dying because the British constitute a smaller and smaller percentage of its population. At some point, if Scotland doesn't blow the whole thing up first, British identity will cease being merely a minority interest and start being an #FBPE style sect, and the relationship between the Home Nations will become entirely transactional. And that'll be the end of that.
The reason to stay in the union is that we have a shared history, common ties, and we are stronger (in the world) and wealthier (as a single market) together.
England and Scotland are brothers.
The problem for Unionists to solve is how to reinforce and institutionalise a fraternal, rather than paternalistic, relationship.
You probably can't. The best route to go down is to federalise and distribute as much power as possible down to the four states, but that would still leave external relations, defence and security, the currency, the borders, probably state pensions and certainly the system of transfer payments to be run by the centre. The nationalists outside of England would then continue to insist loudly that nobody was paying them enough attention, and why would the English electorate countenance (as per various madcap proposals advanced on this site this evening) some kind of balancing chamber in which half or more of the members were chosen by 14% of the people?
Anyway, it's all academic. The Union is dying because the British constitute a smaller and smaller percentage of its population. At some point, if Scotland doesn't blow the whole thing up first, British identity will cease being merely a minority interest and start being an #FBPE style sect, and the relationship between the Home Nations will become entirely transactional. And that'll be the end of that.
This is a counsel of despair.
Also you make the classic “mistake” in thinking that the “solution” is more devolution.
The reason to stay in the union is that we have a shared history, common ties, and we are stronger (in the world) and wealthier (as a single market) together.
England and Scotland are brothers.
The problem for Unionists to solve is how to reinforce and institutionalise a fraternal, rather than paternalistic, relationship.
TSE's proposals are sensible (with my amendment). A powerful, Federal Upper House, like the US Senate. Two Lords sent from each UK county.
It means W, S and NI will be seriously over-represented, compared to E, but that is necessary to secure them in a union where England, by dint of size, will always appear overbearing (and can never be out-voted in the Commons)
With devolved assemblies, as well, that is as far as England can go to make the UK work, without disenfranchising the English themselves
If it's not enough, then let Scotland Wales and NI vote on indy and let them Stay or Go, and if they Stay, then let there be no more constitutional wankery or plebiscites for 30 years, minimum
Something like this, yes.
Another radical idea. With Westminster out of action for refurbishment, why not sent the Parliament to Edinburgh?
It is essentially, the second capital, after all.
Yes, we now see that MPs and Lords can speak and vote remotely. So, make the parliament mobile. Esp the new House of Lords (and of course we ditch the dukes and bishops).
Some "Lords" may prefer to travel and attend personally. Some may do it via Zoom. But let the Lords move from London, to Edinburgh, to Belfast to Cardiff. Each season. Or each year. Or every election. Why not?
Creative thinking is required. We have just endured a plague, and Brexit. This is the moment to reset things.
By the way, under your suggestion a population of just 7,000 people (and even fewer electors) in Cromartyshire would be entitled to two members of the HoL.
The same as Yorkshire, with over 5m people.
But I like the general sentiment.
As an Englishman I am Ok with that, because I accept the Scottish have a valid grievance: that the huge relative size of England, compared to the other home nations, means England can never be over-ruled in the Commons, and England generally gets the government it wants, electorally
This would address that.
It's just following the logic of the Founding Fathers who realised that to create a stable American union, they needed to give each state equal dignity and sway, whatever the populations (which might change)
It worked in America, which, despite huge problems, has endured for nearly 250 years, becoming the most powerful nation in human history, even as it is now surpassed by China
Let's reimport the native British wisdom of those Founding Fathers, and apply it to the UK
The reason to stay in the union is that we have a shared history, common ties, and we are stronger (in the world) and wealthier (as a single market) together.
England and Scotland are brothers.
The problem for Unionists to solve is how to reinforce and institutionalise a fraternal, rather than paternalistic, relationship.
TSE's proposals are sensible (with my amendment). A powerful, Federal Upper House, like the US Senate. Two Lords sent from each UK county.
It means W, S and NI will be seriously over-represented, compared to E, but that is necessary to secure them in a union where England, by dint of size, will always appear overbearing (and can never be out-voted in the Commons)
With devolved assemblies, as well, that is as far as England can go to make the UK work, without disenfranchising the English themselves
If it's not enough, then let Scotland Wales and NI vote on indy and let them Stay or Go, and if they Stay, then let there be no more constitutional wankery or plebiscites for 30 years, minimum
Something like this, yes.
Another radical idea. With Westminster out of action for refurbishment, why not sent the Parliament to Edinburgh?
It is essentially, the second capital, after all.
Yes, we now see that MPs and Lords can speak and vote remotely. So, make the parliament mobile. Esp the new House of Lords (and of course we ditch the dukes and bishops).
Some "Lords" may prefer to travel and attend personally. Some may do it via Zoom. But let the Lords move from London, to Edinburgh, to Belfast to Cardiff. Each season. Or each year. Or every election. Why not?
Creative thinking is required. We have just endured a plague, and Brexit. This is the moment to reset things.
By the way, under your suggestion a population of just 7,000 people (and even fewer electors) in Cromartyshire would be entitled to two members of the HoL.
The same as Yorkshire, with over 5m people.
But I like the general sentiment.
There are about a dozen counties in Yorkshire. It’s just most of them are now Unitaries.
BTW, there are far more than 27 counties in England.
No idea, but with Jess you always get the gist. And she is great too, and funny. If you write her a vile anonymous letter she might let the world read it on Twitter. She is capable of getting people to take Labour seriously. When she speaks you would love to believe that her party is one of principle that truly wants a better life for the dispossessed.
It does seem to me that Sturgeon and Salmond have very different agendas for Scotland post independence if it happens
Every day Eck goes more and more Trump... He has a franchise with angry, blue collar men over 50. Trouble is, so does the SNP. He is not breaking into new voters.
A lot of folk are increasingly turned off by the angry face of nationalism and the obvious bitterness between Salmond and Sturgeon is not likely to swing more hearts and minds their way,
So, Instead of getting a super majority, I think a bare minority is now the most likely result. I´d be very interested to see how things are going in Airdrie and Shotts.
I expect a majority SNP post Holyrood and then a long and bloody fight between each side of the SNP/Alba and very different views of Scotland if independence is won
And the Airdrie by election is on the 13th May post Holyrood
I and my wife who is Scots are very saddened to see the civil war in Scottish politics and as her late Father used to say Independence is not in Scotland's best interests
The caption given by Reuters, whose photographer was actually there, says "police restrain woman during protest"
If they are indeed stripping her for no reason, that is deeply wrong, and deliberately humiliating. But I have my doubts.
You are also retweeting Louise Raw, who is a classic SWP Corbynite often accused of anti-Semitism. I do not know if she is guilty, but some caution required
I've read a lot (like Max it seems) and what I grasp (it could be wrong) is this: Hancock was keen on vaccines from the start, he persuaded Boris to take them seriously, but it was Cummings who envisaged the actual structure of the VTF, and how it must have autonomy, and would therefore be superior to PHE etc
Did you read it on Cummings blog perhaps?
Impossible. Cummings’s blog is unreadable.
That's why he needed an eye test in Barnard Castle.
The reason to stay in the union is that we have a shared history, common ties, and we are stronger (in the world) and wealthier (as a single market) together.
England and Scotland are brothers.
The problem for Unionists to solve is how to reinforce and institutionalise a fraternal, rather than paternalistic, relationship.
TSE's proposals are sensible (with my amendment). A powerful, Federal Upper House, like the US Senate. Two Lords sent from each UK county.
It means W, S and NI will be seriously over-represented, compared to E, but that is necessary to secure them in a union where England, by dint of size, will always appear overbearing (and can never be out-voted in the Commons)
With devolved assemblies, as well, that is as far as England can go to make the UK work, without disenfranchising the English themselves
If it's not enough, then let Scotland Wales and NI vote on indy and let them Stay or Go, and if they Stay, then let there be no more constitutional wankery or plebiscites for 30 years, minimum
Something like this, yes.
Another radical idea. With Westminster out of action for refurbishment, why not sent the Parliament to Edinburgh?
It is essentially, the second capital, after all.
Yes, we now see that MPs and Lords can speak and vote remotely. So, make the parliament mobile. Esp the new House of Lords (and of course we ditch the dukes and bishops).
Some "Lords" may prefer to travel and attend personally. Some may do it via Zoom. But let the Lords move from London, to Edinburgh, to Belfast to Cardiff. Each season. Or each year. Or every election. Why not?
Creative thinking is required. We have just endured a plague, and Brexit. This is the moment to reset things.
By the way, under your suggestion a population of just 7,000 people (and even fewer electors) in Cromartyshire would be entitled to two members of the HoL.
The reason to stay in the union is that we have a shared history, common ties, and we are stronger (in the world) and wealthier (as a single market) together.
England and Scotland are brothers.
The problem for Unionists to solve is how to reinforce and institutionalise a fraternal, rather than paternalistic, relationship.
TSE's proposals are sensible (with my amendment). A powerful, Federal Upper House, like the US Senate. Two Lords sent from each UK county.
It means W, S and NI will be seriously over-represented, compared to E, but that is necessary to secure them in a union where England, by dint of size, will always appear overbearing (and can never be out-voted in the Commons)
With devolved assemblies, as well, that is as far as England can go to make the UK work, without disenfranchising the English themselves
If it's not enough, then let Scotland Wales and NI vote on indy and let them Stay or Go, and if they Stay, then let there be no more constitutional wankery or plebiscites for 30 years, minimum
Something like this, yes.
Another radical idea. With Westminster out of action for refurbishment, why not sent the Parliament to Edinburgh?
It is essentially, the second capital, after all.
Yes, we now see that MPs and Lords can speak and vote remotely. So, make the parliament mobile. Esp the new House of Lords (and of course we ditch the dukes and bishops).
Some "Lords" may prefer to travel and attend personally. Some may do it via Zoom. But let the Lords move from London, to Edinburgh, to Belfast to Cardiff. Each season. Or each year. Or every election. Why not?
Creative thinking is required. We have just endured a plague, and Brexit. This is the moment to reset things.
By the way, under your suggestion a population of just 7,000 people (and even fewer electors) in Cromartyshire would be entitled to two members of the HoL.
The same as Yorkshire, with over 5m people.
But I like the general sentiment.
As an Englishman I am Ok with that, because I accept the Scottish have a valid grievance: that the huge relative size of England, compared to the other home nations, means England can never be over-ruled in the Commons, and England generally gets the government it wants, electorally
This would address that.
It's just following the logic of the Founding Fathers who realised that to create a stable American union, they needed to give each state equal dignity and sway, whatever the populations (which might change)
It worked in America, which, despite huge problems, has endured for nearly 250 years, becoming the most powerful nation in human history, even as it is now surpassed by China
Let's reimport the native British wisdom of those Founding Fathers, and apply it to the UK
If there had only been four colonies and one of them was six times the size of all the others combined, then the constitutional convention might not necessarily have arrived at exactly the same solution.
The reason to stay in the union is that we have a shared history, common ties, and we are stronger (in the world) and wealthier (as a single market) together.
England and Scotland are brothers.
The problem for Unionists to solve is how to reinforce and institutionalise a fraternal, rather than paternalistic, relationship.
TSE's proposals are sensible (with my amendment). A powerful, Federal Upper House, like the US Senate. Two Lords sent from each UK county.
It means W, S and NI will be seriously over-represented, compared to E, but that is necessary to secure them in a union where England, by dint of size, will always appear overbearing (and can never be out-voted in the Commons)
With devolved assemblies, as well, that is as far as England can go to make the UK work, without disenfranchising the English themselves
If it's not enough, then let Scotland Wales and NI vote on indy and let them Stay or Go, and if they Stay, then let there be no more constitutional wankery or plebiscites for 30 years, minimum
Something like this, yes.
Another radical idea. With Westminster out of action for refurbishment, why not sent the Parliament to Edinburgh?
It is essentially, the second capital, after all.
Yes, we now see that MPs and Lords can speak and vote remotely. So, make the parliament mobile. Esp the new House of Lords (and of course we ditch the dukes and bishops).
Some "Lords" may prefer to travel and attend personally. Some may do it via Zoom. But let the Lords move from London, to Edinburgh, to Belfast to Cardiff. Each season. Or each year. Or every election. Why not?
Creative thinking is required. We have just endured a plague, and Brexit. This is the moment to reset things.
By the way, under your suggestion a population of just 7,000 people (and even fewer electors) in Cromartyshire would be entitled to two members of the HoL.
The reason to stay in the union is that we have a shared history, common ties, and we are stronger (in the world) and wealthier (as a single market) together.
England and Scotland are brothers.
The problem for Unionists to solve is how to reinforce and institutionalise a fraternal, rather than paternalistic, relationship.
TSE's proposals are sensible (with my amendment). A powerful, Federal Upper House, like the US Senate. Two Lords sent from each UK county.
It means W, S and NI will be seriously over-represented, compared to E, but that is necessary to secure them in a union where England, by dint of size, will always appear overbearing (and can never be out-voted in the Commons)
With devolved assemblies, as well, that is as far as England can go to make the UK work, without disenfranchising the English themselves
If it's not enough, then let Scotland Wales and NI vote on indy and let them Stay or Go, and if they Stay, then let there be no more constitutional wankery or plebiscites for 30 years, minimum
Something like this, yes.
Another radical idea. With Westminster out of action for refurbishment, why not sent the Parliament to Edinburgh?
It is essentially, the second capital, after all.
Yes, we now see that MPs and Lords can speak and vote remotely. So, make the parliament mobile. Esp the new House of Lords (and of course we ditch the dukes and bishops).
Some "Lords" may prefer to travel and attend personally. Some may do it via Zoom. But let the Lords move from London, to Edinburgh, to Belfast to Cardiff. Each season. Or each year. Or every election. Why not?
Creative thinking is required. We have just endured a plague, and Brexit. This is the moment to reset things.
By the way, under your suggestion a population of just 7,000 people (and even fewer electors) in Cromartyshire would be entitled to two members of the HoL.
The same as Yorkshire, with over 5m people.
But I like the general sentiment.
Where is Cromartyshire
Former county, now abolished. Interestingly it had exclaves all over the place.
The reason to stay in the union is that we have a shared history, common ties, and we are stronger (in the world) and wealthier (as a single market) together.
England and Scotland are brothers.
The problem for Unionists to solve is how to reinforce and institutionalise a fraternal, rather than paternalistic, relationship.
TSE's proposals are sensible (with my amendment). A powerful, Federal Upper House, like the US Senate. Two Lords sent from each UK county.
It means W, S and NI will be seriously over-represented, compared to E, but that is necessary to secure them in a union where England, by dint of size, will always appear overbearing (and can never be out-voted in the Commons)
With devolved assemblies, as well, that is as far as England can go to make the UK work, without disenfranchising the English themselves
If it's not enough, then let Scotland Wales and NI vote on indy and let them Stay or Go, and if they Stay, then let there be no more constitutional wankery or plebiscites for 30 years, minimum
Something like this, yes.
Another radical idea. With Westminster out of action for refurbishment, why not sent the Parliament to Edinburgh?
It is essentially, the second capital, after all.
Yes, we now see that MPs and Lords can speak and vote remotely. So, make the parliament mobile. Esp the new House of Lords (and of course we ditch the dukes and bishops).
Some "Lords" may prefer to travel and attend personally. Some may do it via Zoom. But let the Lords move from London, to Edinburgh, to Belfast to Cardiff. Each season. Or each year. Or every election. Why not?
Creative thinking is required. We have just endured a plague, and Brexit. This is the moment to reset things.
By the way, under your suggestion a population of just 7,000 people (and even fewer electors) in Cromartyshire would be entitled to two members of the HoL.
The same as Yorkshire, with over 5m people.
But I like the general sentiment.
Where is Cromartyshire
A peculiar antique unit of local government in Northern Scotland. Later amalgamated with Ross-shire to form Ross & Cromarty.
The reason to stay in the union is that we have a shared history, common ties, and we are stronger (in the world) and wealthier (as a single market) together.
England and Scotland are brothers.
The problem for Unionists to solve is how to reinforce and institutionalise a fraternal, rather than paternalistic, relationship.
TSE's proposals are sensible (with my amendment). A powerful, Federal Upper House, like the US Senate. Two Lords sent from each UK county.
It means W, S and NI will be seriously over-represented, compared to E, but that is necessary to secure them in a union where England, by dint of size, will always appear overbearing (and can never be out-voted in the Commons)
With devolved assemblies, as well, that is as far as England can go to make the UK work, without disenfranchising the English themselves
If it's not enough, then let Scotland Wales and NI vote on indy and let them Stay or Go, and if they Stay, then let there be no more constitutional wankery or plebiscites for 30 years, minimum
Something like this, yes.
Another radical idea. With Westminster out of action for refurbishment, why not sent the Parliament to Edinburgh?
It is essentially, the second capital, after all.
Yes, we now see that MPs and Lords can speak and vote remotely. So, make the parliament mobile. Esp the new House of Lords (and of course we ditch the dukes and bishops).
Some "Lords" may prefer to travel and attend personally. Some may do it via Zoom. But let the Lords move from London, to Edinburgh, to Belfast to Cardiff. Each season. Or each year. Or every election. Why not?
Creative thinking is required. We have just endured a plague, and Brexit. This is the moment to reset things.
By the way, under your suggestion a population of just 7,000 people (and even fewer electors) in Cromartyshire would be entitled to two members of the HoL.
The reason to stay in the union is that we have a shared history, common ties, and we are stronger (in the world) and wealthier (as a single market) together.
England and Scotland are brothers.
The problem for Unionists to solve is how to reinforce and institutionalise a fraternal, rather than paternalistic, relationship.
TSE's proposals are sensible (with my amendment). A powerful, Federal Upper House, like the US Senate. Two Lords sent from each UK county.
It means W, S and NI will be seriously over-represented, compared to E, but that is necessary to secure them in a union where England, by dint of size, will always appear overbearing (and can never be out-voted in the Commons)
With devolved assemblies, as well, that is as far as England can go to make the UK work, without disenfranchising the English themselves
If it's not enough, then let Scotland Wales and NI vote on indy and let them Stay or Go, and if they Stay, then let there be no more constitutional wankery or plebiscites for 30 years, minimum
Something like this, yes.
Another radical idea. With Westminster out of action for refurbishment, why not sent the Parliament to Edinburgh?
It is essentially, the second capital, after all.
Yes, we now see that MPs and Lords can speak and vote remotely. So, make the parliament mobile. Esp the new House of Lords (and of course we ditch the dukes and bishops).
Some "Lords" may prefer to travel and attend personally. Some may do it via Zoom. But let the Lords move from London, to Edinburgh, to Belfast to Cardiff. Each season. Or each year. Or every election. Why not?
Creative thinking is required. We have just endured a plague, and Brexit. This is the moment to reset things.
By the way, under your suggestion a population of just 7,000 people (and even fewer electors) in Cromartyshire would be entitled to two members of the HoL.
The same as Yorkshire, with over 5m people.
But I like the general sentiment.
As an Englishman I am Ok with that, because I accept the Scottish have a valid grievance: that the huge relative size of England, compared to the other home nations, means England can never be over-ruled in the Commons, and England generally gets the government it wants, electorally
This would address that.
It's just following the logic of the Founding Fathers who realised that to create a stable American union, they needed to give each state equal dignity and sway, whatever the populations (which might change)
It worked in America, which, despite huge problems, has endured for nearly 250 years, becoming the most powerful nation in human history, even as it is now surpassed by China
Let's reimport the native British wisdom of those Founding Fathers, and apply it to the UK
If there had only been four colonies and one of them was six times the size of all the others combined, then the constitutional convention might not necessarily have arrived at exactly the same solution.
Perhaps you might like to offer your creative solutions, then?
If it consists of throwing your hands in the air, rending your garments, gnashing your teeth, and saying "the union is doomed, DOOMED!" then, with all due respect, you've said that about 97 times so you REALLY don't need to say it again
That's just adding insult to injury for poor Sir Keir: Boris is beating him on 'Tells the truth'...
And the comparisons across the board are appalling for Starmer
I wonder how the hapless Attlee would have fared against the political titan that was Winston Churchill in the early 1940s? It was hardly worth Attlee turning up for GE1945 was it?
Hats to piss on your chips, but... Labour led from 1943. The more charismatic leader closed the gap towards the end of the campaign
Oh dear. Looks like the 'Attlee Defence' just went up in a puff of smoke, didn't it? Not sure why you're so sceptical about opinion polls that showed a consistent double-digit lead for Labour in the run-up to 1945 when the 1945 election result was, er, a double-digit lead for Labour...
Comments
We all know he is going to refuse a referendum, but there are different ways of refusing, some much better than others. Part of refusing MUST be the offer of a Royal Commission on All The Options, including your Federal idea (which I definitely agree with) and including a proper analysis of what Indy would really mean (currency, bank, etc)
A simple No is going to stoke resentment, a more nuanced answer is needed
Their threats are going to become more and more loud as we just keep on keeping on getting through our population with 95% uptake and getting closer and closer to the day we can say goodbye to these restrictions.
https://www.ladbible.com/news/news-ex-police-officer-kills-two-isis-militants-with-ak-47-during-siege-20210329
"After the siege on the hotel, Alexander broke into a government vehicle and grabbed an AK-47, before proceeding to shoot dead two militants.
""He and two others from the car then ran to hide into the bushes with the gun. They were literally crawling through the bush until they were rescued""
"Spending days hiding out, he eventually found safety on Sunday and made contact with 29-year-old daughter Jayde in Johannesburg."
They will have justified it to themselves by the fact that the fund is a separate legal entity, has separate management, a compliance function, the trader involved in the insider trading is no longer there, all a long time ago, increased surveillance and monitoring blah blah blah.
Remember too that there are a lot of people still allowed to trade by regulators despite some dodgy history. Some have even been appointed to important positions - see this paragraph in my header last June - https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2020/06/16/rewards-for-failure/.
"Think the private sector is better? Think again. A CEO of a major European investment bank, under whose leadership the bank became the object of the UK’s biggest fraud by one of its traders and was heavily fined for its activities in the Libor-fixing and FX-rigging scandals (ca. $1.8 billion) would, you’d have thought, counted himself lucky to be allowed to fold his tent and creep off into the night. No. Both German and British regulators thought him suitable to be in charge of the proposed merged London and German stock exchange. (Stock exchanges are not simply businesses; they also have a regulatory function, something you’d hope the Boards and regulators would bear in mind when making and approving appointments.)
Fortunately – in this case anyway – Brexit happened, the proposed merger collapsed and the CEO resigned. (The coda to this was the three-year investigation by German prosecutors into dealing by the CEO in the exchange’s shares, all eventually resolved with a fine for the exchange and repayment of €4.8 million by the CEO.) Such a bother for all concerned! Was there really no-one else available? The CEO is now chairing another FCA-regulated asset management firm and on the Board of a US wealth management company. Remember this when regulators tell you they have learnt lessons and the financial sector’s culture has improved."
When regulators behave like that how can they expect firms to behave better?
If Scotland goes, tell them we are still keeping it. Fuck 'em.
I think a Unionist Alliance would damage SLD and SLAB, so they are right not to support it. Indeed I have a hunch that SLAB will be the second party in Holyrood. A way to stick two fingers up to both Westminster and Holyrood governments must be tempting.
A fair percentage of the population are willing to vote tactically* but taking away the other options completely doesn't help much. It needs carrot not stick, at least until we get a better voting system.
*I note that Tories are much less likely to tactically vote for other parties.
https://www.thelocal.fr/20210328/macron-french-covid-jabs-will-catch-up-with-britain-in-a-few-weeks/
https://twitter.com/alexarthur1/status/1219950098286891008?s=21
https://twitter.com/alexarthur1/status/1365283888118059008?s=21
Looks to be lots of ships quite close together. I haven't look at this before but I'm sure they must be much closer together than they would normally be.
Indeed, if anything I was slightly more inclined to consider he might have an IQ above room temperature level due to the sheer brazenness of his lies.
I’d actually have been slightly more willing to vote for Corbyn than Paul Woodhead.
He lasted five minutes, and everything he touched turned to shite.
HL Mencken
Cummings saw how PHE and HMG and the NHS had completely cocked up PPE, so he personally made sure a new, autonomous body drove the vaccine effort
A grand irony at the end of all this. The most vilified man in the land might have saved thousands of lives, rescued a chunk of the economy, and also vindicated Brexit
Historians, to your quills
And have a bit of space left over.
And as Scotland has just recently decided for itself that it wanted to stay in the pooled sovereignty with NI, E and W in a free vote, it doesn't sound quite like a system which doesn't let you decide on sovereignty.
England and Scotland are brothers.
The problem for Unionists to solve is how to reinforce and institutionalise a fraternal, rather than paternalistic, relationship.
It means W, S and NI will be seriously over-represented, compared to E, but that is necessary to secure them in a union where England, by dint of size, will always appear overbearing (and can never be out-voted in the Commons)
With devolved assemblies, as well, that is as far as England can go to make the UK work, without disenfranchising the English themselves
If it's not enough, then let Scotland Wales and NI vote on indy and let them Stay or Go, and if they Stay, then let there be no more constitutional wankery or plebiscites for 30 years, minimum
It's probably going to go down as his lasting success, rebuilding a huge part of the UK pharmaceutical manufacturing chain for basically no money at the most critical time in recent history.
Another radical idea. With Westminster out of action for refurbishment, why not sent the Parliament to Edinburgh?
It is essentially, the second capital, after all.
Based on the Eminem song 'Stan' about an obsessive fan.
Stans is the plural of Stan.
So she's saying Salmond's obsessive fans say the English/Scotland border means the ghastly English cannot comment on the affairs of Scotland.
According to Salmond stans [, the] border means
Oh sorry, what am I looking at?
Some "Lords" may prefer to travel and attend personally. Some may do it via Zoom. But let the Lords move from London, to Edinburgh, to Belfast to Cardiff. Each season. Or each year. Or every election. Why not?
Creative thinking is required. We have just endured a plague, and Brexit. This is the moment to reset things.
The fact I read it twice in two very different papers (neither of them especially friendly to Dom C) inclines me to believe it
A lot of folk are increasingly turned off by the angry face of nationalism and the obvious bitterness between Salmond and Sturgeon is not likely to swing more hearts and minds their way,
So, Instead of getting a super majority, I think a bare minority is now the most likely result. I´d be very interested to see how things are going in Airdrie and Shotts.
One of the anecdotes I heard at the time was that the NHS bods were worried about how much we were relying on AZ and Pfizer, and that we should have placed our bigger order with GSK/Sanofi at 100m rather than with AZ. They also wanted to bet on Moderna rather than Pfizer but the VTF went with Pfizer becuase they could guarantee a delivery schedule whole Moderna weren't able to guarantee shipments from out of the US and also didn't, at the time, have any non-US production either directly or under licence. If we'd gone for 100m of Sanofi and 40m of Moderna instead of 100m AZ and 40m Pfizer the rollout would have been completely different and much slower.
The deals with Novavax and Valneva would never have happened either IMO as the VTF followed the VC playbook for them.
The same as Yorkshire, with over 5m people.
But I like the general sentiment.
Confirmed - Aguero to leave Man City this summer
Anyway, it's all academic. The Union is dying because the British constitute a smaller and smaller percentage of its population. At some point, if Scotland doesn't blow the whole thing up first, British identity will cease being merely a minority interest and start being an #FBPE style sect, and the relationship between the Home Nations will become entirely transactional. And that'll be the end of that.
https://twitter.com/LouiseRawAuthor/status/1376616308981239813
Also you make the classic “mistake” in thinking that the “solution” is more devolution.
Actually, it’s more sharing of central functions.
https://twitter.com/davidlammy/status/1376522685073735683?s=21
This would address that.
It's just following the logic of the Founding Fathers who realised that to create a stable American union, they needed to give each state equal dignity and sway, whatever the populations (which might change)
It worked in America, which, despite huge problems, has endured for nearly 250 years, becoming the most powerful nation in human history, even as it is now surpassed by China
Let's reimport the native British wisdom of those Founding Fathers, and apply it to the UK
BTW, there are far more than 27 counties in England.
And the Airdrie by election is on the 13th May post Holyrood
I and my wife who is Scots are very saddened to see the civil war in Scottish politics and as her late Father used to say Independence is not in Scotland's best interests
If they are indeed stripping her for no reason, that is deeply wrong, and deliberately humiliating. But I have my doubts.
You are also retweeting Louise Raw, who is a classic SWP Corbynite often accused of anti-Semitism. I do not know if she is guilty, but some caution required
https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/b/twitter-account-dr-louise-raw-reinstated-after-campaign-malicious-complaints
I thank you.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cromartyshire
If it consists of throwing your hands in the air, rending your garments, gnashing your teeth, and saying "the union is doomed, DOOMED!" then, with all due respect, you've said that about 97 times so you REALLY don't need to say it again