Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

What some Trump backing Republican donors get told if they don’t make their gifts recurring ones – p

124

Comments

  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 58,969
    Andy_JS said:

    Isn't it going to be difficult to make people use vaccine passports to have a pint when they've already got used to being able to have one without a vaccine passport, and the figures will be lower in the future/?

    There isn't a plan to do that though?
  • Options
    Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    Andy_JS said:

    Isn't it going to be difficult to make people use vaccine passports to have a pint when they've already got used to being able to have one without a vaccine passport, and the figures will be lower in the future/?

    Businesses already have to ask people to check in using the test & trace app, or give their details. Making the final, technical step to a unified system of ID cards would not be particularly difficult.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,028
    Foxy said:

    Entirely off-topic, but an interesting piece in The Guardian about Norniron. For me the key paragraph is here:

    "Working-class loyalists feel left behind and ignored. I am not here to debate the merits of that, or the so-called siege mentality of loyalism. However there is a deep-rooted anger there that has been both been ignored by mainstream unionism and used time and again by the DUP and the Ulster Unionist party for political machinations when it suited them. The fear of a united Ireland and what that will mean for unionism is amped up at election time, and tensions are stoked by both political unionism and “stakeholders” within loyalism, such as the Loyalist Communities Council. And for what? What has fundamentally changed, or got better for working-class loyalist communities in Northern Ireland? They deserve better than being lied to and led up the hill, then abandoned when violence erupts"

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/apr/13/belfast-violence-young-working-class-people-failed

    I have to ask, what is it that these working-class loyalists think there is any point in being a loyalist? They have been lied to and led up the hill not only by their elected politicians but by the British government. Rather than doing something about these areas of deep deprivation, the unionist politicians and the UK government have abandoned them.

    "The fear of a united Ireland" in case what - they end up deprived and ignored? In deprived working class communities in England, people decided to throw the dice and vote for Brexit. In NI they didn't. Will be interesting to see how the fear of reunification plays out in these communities - even if they only stay at home in a border vote that could be enough to swing a close vote.

    I think that Working Class Loyalists would like Devo-Max, so nominally British but effectively under Home Rule. Of course that is rather dependent on there remaining a Unionist majority.

    Ulster Loyalists rather remind me of the Afrikaaners in the last days of apartheid. Not just the prospect of losing power, but also their pre-enlightenment Calvinist ideology.
    Totally different scenario, in South Africa only 10% of the population is white, in NI Unionists still got 43% at the last general election to 38% for Nationalists with the rest voting Alliance
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,632
    My employer is relaxing the rules on when it is OK to work in the office. Now added to the list of justifications is to do stuff that you can do more easily in the office.

    Won't impact me, mind.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    I have seen the Formby red squirrels.

    One of them was leaning on a lamppost at the corner of the street.

    And did the pavement stay below your feet?
  • Options
    Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Entirely off-topic, but an interesting piece in The Guardian about Norniron. For me the key paragraph is here:

    "Working-class loyalists feel left behind and ignored. I am not here to debate the merits of that, or the so-called siege mentality of loyalism. However there is a deep-rooted anger there that has been both been ignored by mainstream unionism and used time and again by the DUP and the Ulster Unionist party for political machinations when it suited them. The fear of a united Ireland and what that will mean for unionism is amped up at election time, and tensions are stoked by both political unionism and “stakeholders” within loyalism, such as the Loyalist Communities Council. And for what? What has fundamentally changed, or got better for working-class loyalist communities in Northern Ireland? They deserve better than being lied to and led up the hill, then abandoned when violence erupts"

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/apr/13/belfast-violence-young-working-class-people-failed

    I have to ask, what is it that these working-class loyalists think there is any point in being a loyalist? They have been lied to and led up the hill not only by their elected politicians but by the British government. Rather than doing something about these areas of deep deprivation, the unionist politicians and the UK government have abandoned them.

    "The fear of a united Ireland" in case what - they end up deprived and ignored? In deprived working class communities in England, people decided to throw the dice and vote for Brexit. In NI they didn't. Will be interesting to see how the fear of reunification plays out in these communities - even if they only stay at home in a border vote that could be enough to swing a close vote.

    I think that Working Class Loyalists would like Devo-Max, so nominally British but effectively under Home Rule. Of course that is rather dependent on there remaining a Unionist majority.

    Ulster Loyalists rather remind me of the Afrikaaners in the last days of apartheid. Not just the prospect of losing power, but also their pre-enlightenment Calvinist ideology.
    A border poll will only happen if Ireland presses for it.

    The prospect of renewed Loyalist terror will push that into the distant future.

    The men in balaclavas have a veto both ways, and I can't see that changing for a long time, there won't be a frontier within Ireland, equally, there won't be a United Ireland.
    However, if Scotland falls off then there will be precisely zero appetite in England for hanging on to Northern Ireland.

    Under such circumstances, the prospect of Northern Ireland as an independent state or, failing that, as a crown dependency should not be discounted.
  • Options
    stodgestodge Posts: 12,864
    Okay - to complicate matters further, there's a second group out there that wants to abolish the Mayor:

    https://newhamforchange.org/

    This group is led by a Forest Gate Labour Councillor and seems an anti-Momentum anti-Fiaz group.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,028
    edited April 2021

    Entirely off-topic, but an interesting piece in The Guardian about Norniron. For me the key paragraph is here:

    "Working-class loyalists feel left behind and ignored. I am not here to debate the merits of that, or the so-called siege mentality of loyalism. However there is a deep-rooted anger there that has been both been ignored by mainstream unionism and used time and again by the DUP and the Ulster Unionist party for political machinations when it suited them. The fear of a united Ireland and what that will mean for unionism is amped up at election time, and tensions are stoked by both political unionism and “stakeholders” within loyalism, such as the Loyalist Communities Council. And for what? What has fundamentally changed, or got better for working-class loyalist communities in Northern Ireland? They deserve better than being lied to and led up the hill, then abandoned when violence erupts"

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/apr/13/belfast-violence-young-working-class-people-failed

    I have to ask, what is it that these working-class loyalists think there is any point in being a loyalist? They have been lied to and led up the hill not only by their elected politicians but by the British government. Rather than doing something about these areas of deep deprivation, the unionist politicians and the UK government have abandoned them.

    "The fear of a united Ireland" in case what - they end up deprived and ignored? In deprived working class communities in England, people decided to throw the dice and vote for Brexit. In NI they didn't. Will be interesting to see how the fear of reunification plays out in these communities - even if they only stay at home in a border vote that could be enough to swing a close vote.

    Wrong.

    Every current DUP constituency in Northern Ireland voted Leave except East Londonderry and 44% of Northern Irish voters voted Leave overall ie almost identical to the 43% of Northern Irish voters who voted for the DUP and UUP at the 2019 election.

    Working class Loyalists in NI did vote for Brexit.

    They will not only vote against reunification, some of them would turn to the bomb or bullet over direct rule from Dublin, only powersharing at Stormont protects the GFA
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,292

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Entirely off-topic, but an interesting piece in The Guardian about Norniron. For me the key paragraph is here:

    "Working-class loyalists feel left behind and ignored. I am not here to debate the merits of that, or the so-called siege mentality of loyalism. However there is a deep-rooted anger there that has been both been ignored by mainstream unionism and used time and again by the DUP and the Ulster Unionist party for political machinations when it suited them. The fear of a united Ireland and what that will mean for unionism is amped up at election time, and tensions are stoked by both political unionism and “stakeholders” within loyalism, such as the Loyalist Communities Council. And for what? What has fundamentally changed, or got better for working-class loyalist communities in Northern Ireland? They deserve better than being lied to and led up the hill, then abandoned when violence erupts"

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/apr/13/belfast-violence-young-working-class-people-failed

    I have to ask, what is it that these working-class loyalists think there is any point in being a loyalist? They have been lied to and led up the hill not only by their elected politicians but by the British government. Rather than doing something about these areas of deep deprivation, the unionist politicians and the UK government have abandoned them.

    "The fear of a united Ireland" in case what - they end up deprived and ignored? In deprived working class communities in England, people decided to throw the dice and vote for Brexit. In NI they didn't. Will be interesting to see how the fear of reunification plays out in these communities - even if they only stay at home in a border vote that could be enough to swing a close vote.

    I think that Working Class Loyalists would like Devo-Max, so nominally British but effectively under Home Rule. Of course that is rather dependent on there remaining a Unionist majority.

    Ulster Loyalists rather remind me of the Afrikaaners in the last days of apartheid. Not just the prospect of losing power, but also their pre-enlightenment Calvinist ideology.
    A border poll will only happen if Ireland presses for it.

    The prospect of renewed Loyalist terror will push that into the distant future.

    The men in balaclavas have a veto both ways, and I can't see that changing for a long time, there won't be a frontier within Ireland, equally, there won't be a United Ireland.
    However, if Scotland falls off then there will be precisely zero appetite in England for hanging on to Northern Ireland.

    Under such circumstances, the prospect of Northern Ireland as an independent state or, failing that, as a crown dependency should not be discounted.
    Yes, if Scotland goes indy that changes the agenda in Norn. However, a United Ireland will remain a far-distant prospect for the same reasons I suggest. Indeed, the Loyalists might get even more edgy.

    Perilous times for everyone in the British Isles. We need to plot a route to a Federal-ish solution that appeases most Scots and calms the sitch in Ulster*

    *Yes, Dura Ace, 3 other counties, etc
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,223
    edited April 2021
    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Entirely off-topic, but an interesting piece in The Guardian about Norniron. For me the key paragraph is here:

    "Working-class loyalists feel left behind and ignored. I am not here to debate the merits of that, or the so-called siege mentality of loyalism. However there is a deep-rooted anger there that has been both been ignored by mainstream unionism and used time and again by the DUP and the Ulster Unionist party for political machinations when it suited them. The fear of a united Ireland and what that will mean for unionism is amped up at election time, and tensions are stoked by both political unionism and “stakeholders” within loyalism, such as the Loyalist Communities Council. And for what? What has fundamentally changed, or got better for working-class loyalist communities in Northern Ireland? They deserve better than being lied to and led up the hill, then abandoned when violence erupts"

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/apr/13/belfast-violence-young-working-class-people-failed

    I have to ask, what is it that these working-class loyalists think there is any point in being a loyalist? They have been lied to and led up the hill not only by their elected politicians but by the British government. Rather than doing something about these areas of deep deprivation, the unionist politicians and the UK government have abandoned them.

    "The fear of a united Ireland" in case what - they end up deprived and ignored? In deprived working class communities in England, people decided to throw the dice and vote for Brexit. In NI they didn't. Will be interesting to see how the fear of reunification plays out in these communities - even if they only stay at home in a border vote that could be enough to swing a close vote.

    I think that Working Class Loyalists would like Devo-Max, so nominally British but effectively under Home Rule. Of course that is rather dependent on there remaining a Unionist majority.

    Ulster Loyalists rather remind me of the Afrikaaners in the last days of apartheid. Not just the prospect of losing power, but also their pre-enlightenment Calvinist ideology.
    A border poll will only happen if Ireland presses for it.

    The prospect of renewed Loyalist terror will push that into the distant future.

    The men in balaclavas have a veto both ways, and I can't see that changing for a long time, there won't be a frontier within Ireland, equally, there won't be a United Ireland.
    The men in balaclavas do not have a veto. Wise politicians from Dublin and Westminster will nonetheless tread carefully.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,687

    I have seen the Formby red squirrels.

    One of them was leaning on a lamppost at the corner of the street.

    I hope you told it to get back to cleaning the windows.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles said:

    Leon said:

    There is no solution to the asymmetry of the UK. We can ameliorate it by making the Lords an elected Federal chamber (with two Lords from each UK county?), but there is no optimal arrangement

    This is a rare occasion when I agree with Kinabalu. Apart from that change to the Lords, the fudge we have now is probably the best we can hope for. It's a good deal for Scotland, Wales and NI, but that's the price England pays for keeping the Union.

    The Scots would be mad to reject it for something worse, but ultimately they must decide that (in about 10 years time)

    The answer is to create regions of England with their own interests.

    Manchester thinks they are ignored? Give Greater Manchester two senators, same as London. 2 for the Summer Country (including Devon and Cornwall) 2 for Yorkshire etc
    What about the towns and villages across the country? What do they get?

    I've got an idea, why don't we divide the country into blocs, we could call them constituencies, and each of those blocs elects one person to represent them - we could call that a Member of Parliament.
    I’m a fan of replacing the Lords with an elected body but it needs to be in a different basis to the Commons. Making it a federal parliament is a reasonable approach.

    Towns and counties would be represented in rough areas of similar interests of approximately similar size. Consider dividing Scotland into highlands and lowlands (I don’t know them well enough but people complain there is too much focus on Glasgow/Edinburgh)
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,292



    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Entirely off-topic, but an interesting piece in The Guardian about Norniron. For me the key paragraph is here:

    "Working-class loyalists feel left behind and ignored. I am not here to debate the merits of that, or the so-called siege mentality of loyalism. However there is a deep-rooted anger there that has been both been ignored by mainstream unionism and used time and again by the DUP and the Ulster Unionist party for political machinations when it suited them. The fear of a united Ireland and what that will mean for unionism is amped up at election time, and tensions are stoked by both political unionism and “stakeholders” within loyalism, such as the Loyalist Communities Council. And for what? What has fundamentally changed, or got better for working-class loyalist communities in Northern Ireland? They deserve better than being lied to and led up the hill, then abandoned when violence erupts"

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/apr/13/belfast-violence-young-working-class-people-failed

    I have to ask, what is it that these working-class loyalists think there is any point in being a loyalist? They have been lied to and led up the hill not only by their elected politicians but by the British government. Rather than doing something about these areas of deep deprivation, the unionist politicians and the UK government have abandoned them.

    "The fear of a united Ireland" in case what - they end up deprived and ignored? In deprived working class communities in England, people decided to throw the dice and vote for Brexit. In NI they didn't. Will be interesting to see how the fear of reunification plays out in these communities - even if they only stay at home in a border vote that could be enough to swing a close vote.

    I think that Working Class Loyalists would like Devo-Max, so nominally British but effectively under Home Rule. Of course that is rather dependent on there remaining a Unionist majority.

    Ulster Loyalists rather remind me of the Afrikaaners in the last days of apartheid. Not just the prospect of losing power, but also their pre-enlightenment Calvinist ideology.
    A border poll will only happen if Ireland presses for it.

    The prospect of renewed Loyalist terror will push that into the distant future.

    The men in balaclavas have a veto both ways, and I can't see that changing for a long time, there won't be a frontier within Ireland, equally, there won't be a United Ireland.
    The men in balaclavas do not have a veto. Wise politicians from Dublin and Westminster will nonetheless tread carefully.
    Yes they do. They made sure there was no frontier in Ireland and they are now making sure the UK/EU fudge the Irish Sea issue. Watch
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles said:

    Endillion said:

    Endillion said:

    Endillion said:

    FPT:

    Endillion said:

    I find it absolutely incomprehensible that anyone in the UK could look at the US and the mess of federal and state (not to mention municipal) responsibilities and competencies and say, "yeah, that's the model I want to follow".

    It may - it probably won't, but it may - provide a more stable and long-lasting resolution to the constitutional issue. However, it cannot possibly be worth making absolutely every aspect of day-to-day life for everyone in England more complicated. Taxes, healthcare, education, transport - just some of the many areas where having a regional structure sitting below the federal government would need to have some involvement, purely to justify their existence.

    And all to solve a problem that essentially boils down to a minority of rabble-rousers in Scotland who lost the argument seven years ago and now need to be put back in their box.

    I agree entirely - my proposal (I know you're not addressing me personally) is a cost-free one, that just involves the 'heads' of the UK, England, Scotland, NI and Wales, voting to rubber-stamp the key non-devolved issues, like foreign treaties, war, and perhaps the pivotal finance and defence investments, where such decisions would now simply require a WM vote, or be made using the PM's Royal prerogative.

    There would be no change to daily life for anyone. An English Parliament is not a necessary pre-requisite, though an English 'leader' is, but he or she could be elected by English WM MPs.
    What a sclerotic nightmare.

    So the First Minister's of Wales, NI and Scotland can just veto everything and lead to us never making any decisions?

    And even worse these decisions couldn't be settled UK-wide at UK General Elections anymore?

    What an absolute nightmare. Sounds even worse than us being in the European Union.
    Yes, Wales, NI and Scotland voting together, would be able to vote something down - or to put it another way, the UK PM would need to convince at least one other home nation except England of the wisdom of a decision before it passed. Is that really such a big ask? That one other home nation thinks something isn't a complete crock of shit?
    Nothing to do with "convincing". The issue is that you'd generally have a Labour Wales FM and an SNP Scotland FM - both of whom are inclined to vote against Conservative governments on principle - plus whoever is in Stormont, and that's either the DUP - famous for saying "No" at every opportunity, even when it's against their own best interests - or SF - even more likely to say no on principle.

    So a Labour Government gets things through by strong-arming or bribing Wales, and Conservatives can only bribe NI. It's a recipe for gridlock and bad governance.
    Given that I would envisage this being primarily about decisions like going to war, I see little to no harm in gridlock. I would prefer that five people have to be convinced to send in the Navy, rather than a cowed PM who has just been on the receiving end of a tongue lashing from the White House. Indeed I think it gives the PM some much needed cover to say no or at least delay saying yes.

    As for other decisions, take accession to the TPTPTT. England and the UK would vote for. I would strongly suspect and hope Wales and NI would vote for. That is a happy majority with only the SNP playing a deliberately obstructionist game, a fact that would be lost on no-one.
    Good grief. Where to even start with this.

    Ok, firstly, the phrase "I see little to no harm in gridlock". Where were you during most of 2019, when Parliament was at an utter standstill due to Brexit? Because you can't possibly have witnessed that and thought, "yes, I want more of this please, especially over really big decisions that matter".

    Secondly, your first paragraph makes sense only if you don't actually want the UK to go to war, ever. Which is fine as a view, but in that case just say it, instead of supporting a policy that just makes it impossible in practice.

    Whether or not Wales and NI would vote for TPP accession is moot - I'm sure they could find plenty of Walloonian-style objections as cover for demanding concessions in other arenas - because you've just cherry picked one example where everyone probably agrees. The whole point of having the extra assembly is precisely because not everyone agrees all the time.
    It's impossible to assess what impact the existence of the COTI would have had on Brexit - and indeed since I'm proposing it partly as a response to the rise in nationalism that that process seems to have accelerated, I'm not sure what clarity is gained by retroactively applying it to that situation. The process was gridlocked enough. It's by no means certain that it would have worsened that.

    Regarding going to war - no, I am not against going to war in principle - but neither am I against making it harder politically to do so than it currently is. That doesn't seem to me to be in any way unreasonable.

    I didn't cherry pick that example at all - it was something current that seemed to be a good fit. I'm happy to look at any plausible future scenarios, though obviously not Phil's ludicrous 'PM delays retaking the Shard whilst he rings around the leaders' bullshite.
    OK, I've gone back to your original proposal to have a think about other scenarios. You said:
    ... my proposal ... just involves the 'heads' of the UK, England, Scotland, NI and Wales, voting to rubber-stamp the key non-devolved issues, like foreign treaties, war, and perhaps the pivotal finance and defence investments, where such decisions would now simply require a WM vote, or be made using the PM's Royal prerogative.

    So plausible future scenarios might include:
    - Trident renewal
    - Heathrow airport expansion
    - HS2/3/n
    - Whatever the current plan is for "levelling-up" the North of England

    Big fat no on allowing veto power to the fringe nations on any of those. In particular, any investment decisions are fraught with danger as every region would want an equivalent spend in their own territory.

    Also, you keep framing it as a check on England's power. But it works the other way as well - so Scotland/Wales/NI could unilaterally take the UK back into the EU, over the objections from England, if they chose. That alone is enough for this idea to be terrible.
    No they couldn't. The COTI would not have any role in proposing anything, as I made very clear from the start. They could say no to something, not create something else.

    Regarding Trident renewal, regrettably (as I'm not a Trident fan) I think it would pass no problems, with at least NI, probably Wales, probably not Scotland. However, the recent inexplicable investment in 260 missiles (up from the current 40)? Far tougher sell, and would have probably been a big boon for Boris to have been able to tell Uncle Joe he'd have to get back to him on that one.

    As for making approval of investment decisions contingent on equivalent amounts being spent in the nations - isn't this exactly what happens at the moment anyway?
    So you seriously think it's a good idea to kneecap the Government's ability to invest in Defence based on a holistic MOD plan? Instead the four countries should cherrypick which bit's they like or not.

    Utter madness. Is there a single nation with a strong military stupid enough to do a scheme like yours?
    Location of US military bases is driven by pork barrelling
    Is that something we should deliberately replicate?
    No but you asked a question
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,028
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Entirely off-topic, but an interesting piece in The Guardian about Norniron. For me the key paragraph is here:

    "Working-class loyalists feel left behind and ignored. I am not here to debate the merits of that, or the so-called siege mentality of loyalism. However there is a deep-rooted anger there that has been both been ignored by mainstream unionism and used time and again by the DUP and the Ulster Unionist party for political machinations when it suited them. The fear of a united Ireland and what that will mean for unionism is amped up at election time, and tensions are stoked by both political unionism and “stakeholders” within loyalism, such as the Loyalist Communities Council. And for what? What has fundamentally changed, or got better for working-class loyalist communities in Northern Ireland? They deserve better than being lied to and led up the hill, then abandoned when violence erupts"

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/apr/13/belfast-violence-young-working-class-people-failed

    I have to ask, what is it that these working-class loyalists think there is any point in being a loyalist? They have been lied to and led up the hill not only by their elected politicians but by the British government. Rather than doing something about these areas of deep deprivation, the unionist politicians and the UK government have abandoned them.

    "The fear of a united Ireland" in case what - they end up deprived and ignored? In deprived working class communities in England, people decided to throw the dice and vote for Brexit. In NI they didn't. Will be interesting to see how the fear of reunification plays out in these communities - even if they only stay at home in a border vote that could be enough to swing a close vote.

    I think that Working Class Loyalists would like Devo-Max, so nominally British but effectively under Home Rule. Of course that is rather dependent on there remaining a Unionist majority.

    Ulster Loyalists rather remind me of the Afrikaaners in the last days of apartheid. Not just the prospect of losing power, but also their pre-enlightenment Calvinist ideology.
    A border poll will only happen if Ireland presses for it.

    The prospect of renewed Loyalist terror will push that into the distant future.

    The men in balaclavas have a veto both ways, and I can't see that changing for a long time, there won't be a frontier within Ireland, equally, there won't be a United Ireland.
    However, if Scotland falls off then there will be precisely zero appetite in England for hanging on to Northern Ireland.

    Under such circumstances, the prospect of Northern Ireland as an independent state or, failing that, as a crown dependency should not be discounted.
    Yes, if Scotland goes indy that changes the agenda in Norn. However, a United Ireland will remain a far-distant prospect for the same reasons I suggest. Indeed, the Loyalists might get even more edgy.

    Perilous times for everyone in the British Isles. We need to plot a route to a Federal-ish solution that appeases most Scots and calms the sitch in Ulster*

    *Yes, Dura Ace, 3 other counties, etc
    Northern Ireland is also different, 8 NI constituencies voted for Brexit, 0 in Scotland did (though now No Deal has been avoided Yes has fallen back from almost 60% to less than 50% including undecideds anyway)
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,028

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Entirely off-topic, but an interesting piece in The Guardian about Norniron. For me the key paragraph is here:

    "Working-class loyalists feel left behind and ignored. I am not here to debate the merits of that, or the so-called siege mentality of loyalism. However there is a deep-rooted anger there that has been both been ignored by mainstream unionism and used time and again by the DUP and the Ulster Unionist party for political machinations when it suited them. The fear of a united Ireland and what that will mean for unionism is amped up at election time, and tensions are stoked by both political unionism and “stakeholders” within loyalism, such as the Loyalist Communities Council. And for what? What has fundamentally changed, or got better for working-class loyalist communities in Northern Ireland? They deserve better than being lied to and led up the hill, then abandoned when violence erupts"

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/apr/13/belfast-violence-young-working-class-people-failed

    I have to ask, what is it that these working-class loyalists think there is any point in being a loyalist? They have been lied to and led up the hill not only by their elected politicians but by the British government. Rather than doing something about these areas of deep deprivation, the unionist politicians and the UK government have abandoned them.

    "The fear of a united Ireland" in case what - they end up deprived and ignored? In deprived working class communities in England, people decided to throw the dice and vote for Brexit. In NI they didn't. Will be interesting to see how the fear of reunification plays out in these communities - even if they only stay at home in a border vote that could be enough to swing a close vote.

    I think that Working Class Loyalists would like Devo-Max, so nominally British but effectively under Home Rule. Of course that is rather dependent on there remaining a Unionist majority.

    Ulster Loyalists rather remind me of the Afrikaaners in the last days of apartheid. Not just the prospect of losing power, but also their pre-enlightenment Calvinist ideology.
    A border poll will only happen if Ireland presses for it.

    The prospect of renewed Loyalist terror will push that into the distant future.

    The men in balaclavas have a veto both ways, and I can't see that changing for a long time, there won't be a frontier within Ireland, equally, there won't be a United Ireland.
    However, if Scotland falls off then there will be precisely zero appetite in England for hanging on to Northern Ireland.

    Under such circumstances, the prospect of Northern Ireland as an independent state or, failing that, as a crown dependency should not be discounted.
    As a diehard Tory Unionist we could certainly hold onto Antrim and much of Derry and Down at least, even if we hand over Catholic and Nationalist majority Fermanagh, Armagh and Tyrone to the Republic.

  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,685
    edited April 2021
    O/T

    Just starting reading "Among The Thugs" by Bill Buford, first published in 1991. I can tell already it's going to be a good read, even though I'm not interested in football.
  • Options
    AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 20,010

    Andy_JS said:

    Isn't it going to be difficult to make people use vaccine passports to have a pint when they've already got used to being able to have one without a vaccine passport, and the figures will be lower in the future/?

    Businesses already have to ask people to check in using the test & trace app, or give their details. Making the final, technical step to a unified system of ID cards would not be particularly difficult.
    PB Pub Update

    Much proper ale. Pub buzzing. Very cold. Heaters welcome. Dark by the time we left.

    Pubs cannot ever be closed again in this country. They are this country.
  • Options
    Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    edited April 2021
    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Leon said:

    There is no solution to the asymmetry of the UK. We can ameliorate it by making the Lords an elected Federal chamber (with two Lords from each UK county?), but there is no optimal arrangement

    This is a rare occasion when I agree with Kinabalu. Apart from that change to the Lords, the fudge we have now is probably the best we can hope for. It's a good deal for Scotland, Wales and NI, but that's the price England pays for keeping the Union.

    The Scots would be mad to reject it for something worse, but ultimately they must decide that (in about 10 years time)

    The answer is to create regions of England with their own interests.

    Manchester thinks they are ignored? Give Greater Manchester two senators, same as London. 2 for the Summer Country (including Devon and Cornwall) 2 for Yorkshire etc
    What about the towns and villages across the country? What do they get?

    I've got an idea, why don't we divide the country into blocs, we could call them constituencies, and each of those blocs elects one person to represent them - we could call that a Member of Parliament.
    I’m a fan of replacing the Lords with an elected body but it needs to be in a different basis to the Commons. Making it a federal parliament is a reasonable approach.

    Towns and counties would be represented in rough areas of similar interests of approximately similar size. Consider dividing Scotland into highlands and lowlands (I don’t know them well enough but people complain there is too much focus on Glasgow/Edinburgh)
    All of these complicated solutions can easily be dispensed with if we also dispense with the Union. The endless, insoluble discontent of the Scots and the Irish border dispute would be made instantly to disappear if they were not attached to England, as would the West Lothian Question and the arguments about fiscal transfers. What's not to like?
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,223
    edited April 2021
    Leon said:



    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Entirely off-topic, but an interesting piece in The Guardian about Norniron. For me the key paragraph is here:

    "Working-class loyalists feel left behind and ignored. I am not here to debate the merits of that, or the so-called siege mentality of loyalism. However there is a deep-rooted anger there that has been both been ignored by mainstream unionism and used time and again by the DUP and the Ulster Unionist party for political machinations when it suited them. The fear of a united Ireland and what that will mean for unionism is amped up at election time, and tensions are stoked by both political unionism and “stakeholders” within loyalism, such as the Loyalist Communities Council. And for what? What has fundamentally changed, or got better for working-class loyalist communities in Northern Ireland? They deserve better than being lied to and led up the hill, then abandoned when violence erupts"

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/apr/13/belfast-violence-young-working-class-people-failed

    I have to ask, what is it that these working-class loyalists think there is any point in being a loyalist? They have been lied to and led up the hill not only by their elected politicians but by the British government. Rather than doing something about these areas of deep deprivation, the unionist politicians and the UK government have abandoned them.

    "The fear of a united Ireland" in case what - they end up deprived and ignored? In deprived working class communities in England, people decided to throw the dice and vote for Brexit. In NI they didn't. Will be interesting to see how the fear of reunification plays out in these communities - even if they only stay at home in a border vote that could be enough to swing a close vote.

    I think that Working Class Loyalists would like Devo-Max, so nominally British but effectively under Home Rule. Of course that is rather dependent on there remaining a Unionist majority.

    Ulster Loyalists rather remind me of the Afrikaaners in the last days of apartheid. Not just the prospect of losing power, but also their pre-enlightenment Calvinist ideology.
    A border poll will only happen if Ireland presses for it.

    The prospect of renewed Loyalist terror will push that into the distant future.

    The men in balaclavas have a veto both ways, and I can't see that changing for a long time, there won't be a frontier within Ireland, equally, there won't be a United Ireland.
    The men in balaclavas do not have a veto. Wise politicians from Dublin and Westminster will nonetheless tread carefully.
    Yes they do. They made sure there was no frontier in Ireland and they are now making sure the UK/EU fudge the Irish Sea issue. Watch
    You will have to elaborate on how the border/no border in the North Channel fudge will work. Unless of course we adopt/don't adopt/fudge an EEA. Now that might work, and for everyone.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Leon said:

    There is no solution to the asymmetry of the UK. We can ameliorate it by making the Lords an elected Federal chamber (with two Lords from each UK county?), but there is no optimal arrangement

    This is a rare occasion when I agree with Kinabalu. Apart from that change to the Lords, the fudge we have now is probably the best we can hope for. It's a good deal for Scotland, Wales and NI, but that's the price England pays for keeping the Union.

    The Scots would be mad to reject it for something worse, but ultimately they must decide that (in about 10 years time)

    The answer is to create regions of England with their own interests.

    Manchester thinks they are ignored? Give Greater Manchester two senators, same as London. 2 for the Summer Country (including Devon and Cornwall) 2 for Yorkshire etc
    What about the towns and villages across the country? What do they get?

    I've got an idea, why don't we divide the country into blocs, we could call them constituencies, and each of those blocs elects one person to represent them - we could call that a Member of Parliament.
    I’m a fan of replacing the Lords with an elected body but it needs to be in a different basis to the Commons. Making it a federal parliament is a reasonable approach.

    Towns and counties would be represented in rough areas of similar interests of approximately similar size. Consider dividing Scotland into highlands and lowlands (I don’t know them well enough but people complain there is too much focus on Glasgow/Edinburgh)
    All of these complicated solutions can easily be dispensed with if we also dispense with the Union. The endless, insoluble discontent of the Scots and the Irish border dispute would be made instantly to disappear if they were not attached to England, as would the West Lothian Question and the arguments about fiscal transfers. What's not to like?
    I wouldn’t want to deprive our Scottish and Irish brethren the chance to benefit from a partnership with England and Wales.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Leon said:



    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Entirely off-topic, but an interesting piece in The Guardian about Norniron. For me the key paragraph is here:

    "Working-class loyalists feel left behind and ignored. I am not here to debate the merits of that, or the so-called siege mentality of loyalism. However there is a deep-rooted anger there that has been both been ignored by mainstream unionism and used time and again by the DUP and the Ulster Unionist party for political machinations when it suited them. The fear of a united Ireland and what that will mean for unionism is amped up at election time, and tensions are stoked by both political unionism and “stakeholders” within loyalism, such as the Loyalist Communities Council. And for what? What has fundamentally changed, or got better for working-class loyalist communities in Northern Ireland? They deserve better than being lied to and led up the hill, then abandoned when violence erupts"

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/apr/13/belfast-violence-young-working-class-people-failed

    I have to ask, what is it that these working-class loyalists think there is any point in being a loyalist? They have been lied to and led up the hill not only by their elected politicians but by the British government. Rather than doing something about these areas of deep deprivation, the unionist politicians and the UK government have abandoned them.

    "The fear of a united Ireland" in case what - they end up deprived and ignored? In deprived working class communities in England, people decided to throw the dice and vote for Brexit. In NI they didn't. Will be interesting to see how the fear of reunification plays out in these communities - even if they only stay at home in a border vote that could be enough to swing a close vote.

    I think that Working Class Loyalists would like Devo-Max, so nominally British but effectively under Home Rule. Of course that is rather dependent on there remaining a Unionist majority.

    Ulster Loyalists rather remind me of the Afrikaaners in the last days of apartheid. Not just the prospect of losing power, but also their pre-enlightenment Calvinist ideology.
    A border poll will only happen if Ireland presses for it.

    The prospect of renewed Loyalist terror will push that into the distant future.

    The men in balaclavas have a veto both ways, and I can't see that changing for a long time, there won't be a frontier within Ireland, equally, there won't be a United Ireland.
    The men in balaclavas do not have a veto. Wise politicians from Dublin and Westminster will nonetheless tread carefully.
    Yes they do. They made sure there was no frontier in Ireland and they are now making sure the UK/EU fudge the Irish Sea issue. Watch
    You will have to elaborate on how the border/no border in the North Channel fudge will work. Unless of course we adopt/don't adopt/fudge an EEA. Now that might work, and for everyone.
    Trusted trader scheme
  • Options
    AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 20,010

    My employer is relaxing the rules on when it is OK to work in the office. Now added to the list of justifications is to do stuff that you can do more easily in the office.

    Won't impact me, mind.

    Will be good to go back into the office for a day or two a week. Collaborative stuff is rubbish on Zoom. A mixture will be the way forward I think.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,292
    HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Entirely off-topic, but an interesting piece in The Guardian about Norniron. For me the key paragraph is here:

    "Working-class loyalists feel left behind and ignored. I am not here to debate the merits of that, or the so-called siege mentality of loyalism. However there is a deep-rooted anger there that has been both been ignored by mainstream unionism and used time and again by the DUP and the Ulster Unionist party for political machinations when it suited them. The fear of a united Ireland and what that will mean for unionism is amped up at election time, and tensions are stoked by both political unionism and “stakeholders” within loyalism, such as the Loyalist Communities Council. And for what? What has fundamentally changed, or got better for working-class loyalist communities in Northern Ireland? They deserve better than being lied to and led up the hill, then abandoned when violence erupts"

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/apr/13/belfast-violence-young-working-class-people-failed

    I have to ask, what is it that these working-class loyalists think there is any point in being a loyalist? They have been lied to and led up the hill not only by their elected politicians but by the British government. Rather than doing something about these areas of deep deprivation, the unionist politicians and the UK government have abandoned them.

    "The fear of a united Ireland" in case what - they end up deprived and ignored? In deprived working class communities in England, people decided to throw the dice and vote for Brexit. In NI they didn't. Will be interesting to see how the fear of reunification plays out in these communities - even if they only stay at home in a border vote that could be enough to swing a close vote.

    I think that Working Class Loyalists would like Devo-Max, so nominally British but effectively under Home Rule. Of course that is rather dependent on there remaining a Unionist majority.

    Ulster Loyalists rather remind me of the Afrikaaners in the last days of apartheid. Not just the prospect of losing power, but also their pre-enlightenment Calvinist ideology.
    A border poll will only happen if Ireland presses for it.

    The prospect of renewed Loyalist terror will push that into the distant future.

    The men in balaclavas have a veto both ways, and I can't see that changing for a long time, there won't be a frontier within Ireland, equally, there won't be a United Ireland.
    However, if Scotland falls off then there will be precisely zero appetite in England for hanging on to Northern Ireland.

    Under such circumstances, the prospect of Northern Ireland as an independent state or, failing that, as a crown dependency should not be discounted.
    As a diehard Tory Unionist we could certainly hold onto Antrim and much of Derry and Down at least, even if we hand over Catholic and Nationalist majority Fermanagh, Armagh and Tyrone to the Republic.

    A repartition of the partition is not a sensible idea. Eventually Northern Ireland and its people will realise it is, and they are, in a very sweet spot. Entitled to UK and EU passports. Free to travel, settle, study, throughout UK/EU. Access to the UK and EU Single Markets. Get Erasmus from Ireland and the equivalent from the UK. Enviable

    At that point pressure for change will melt away, and Ulster should prosper
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,028
    edited April 2021

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Leon said:

    There is no solution to the asymmetry of the UK. We can ameliorate it by making the Lords an elected Federal chamber (with two Lords from each UK county?), but there is no optimal arrangement

    This is a rare occasion when I agree with Kinabalu. Apart from that change to the Lords, the fudge we have now is probably the best we can hope for. It's a good deal for Scotland, Wales and NI, but that's the price England pays for keeping the Union.

    The Scots would be mad to reject it for something worse, but ultimately they must decide that (in about 10 years time)

    The answer is to create regions of England with their own interests.

    Manchester thinks they are ignored? Give Greater Manchester two senators, same as London. 2 for the Summer Country (including Devon and Cornwall) 2 for Yorkshire etc
    What about the towns and villages across the country? What do they get?

    I've got an idea, why don't we divide the country into blocs, we could call them constituencies, and each of those blocs elects one person to represent them - we could call that a Member of Parliament.
    I’m a fan of replacing the Lords with an elected body but it needs to be in a different basis to the Commons. Making it a federal parliament is a reasonable approach.

    Towns and counties would be represented in rough areas of similar interests of approximately similar size. Consider dividing Scotland into highlands and lowlands (I don’t know them well enough but people complain there is too much focus on Glasgow/Edinburgh)
    All of these complicated solutions can easily be dispensed with if we also dispense with the Union. The endless, insoluble discontent of the Scots and the Irish border dispute would be made instantly to disappear if they were not attached to England, as would the West Lothian Question and the arguments about fiscal transfers. What's not to like?
    The fact our economy would be diminished in size, as would our military and France would overtake us on both measures, our role in the world would be weakened and we would have a hard border with Scotland as well as Ireland plus Scexit talks which would make Brexit look like a walk in the park and a resurgence of loyalist paramilitary violence in Northern Ireland at direct rule from Dublin.

    Your Little Englander vision would be a disaster that would rip these islands apart for decades
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,028
    Leon said:

    HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Entirely off-topic, but an interesting piece in The Guardian about Norniron. For me the key paragraph is here:

    "Working-class loyalists feel left behind and ignored. I am not here to debate the merits of that, or the so-called siege mentality of loyalism. However there is a deep-rooted anger there that has been both been ignored by mainstream unionism and used time and again by the DUP and the Ulster Unionist party for political machinations when it suited them. The fear of a united Ireland and what that will mean for unionism is amped up at election time, and tensions are stoked by both political unionism and “stakeholders” within loyalism, such as the Loyalist Communities Council. And for what? What has fundamentally changed, or got better for working-class loyalist communities in Northern Ireland? They deserve better than being lied to and led up the hill, then abandoned when violence erupts"

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/apr/13/belfast-violence-young-working-class-people-failed

    I have to ask, what is it that these working-class loyalists think there is any point in being a loyalist? They have been lied to and led up the hill not only by their elected politicians but by the British government. Rather than doing something about these areas of deep deprivation, the unionist politicians and the UK government have abandoned them.

    "The fear of a united Ireland" in case what - they end up deprived and ignored? In deprived working class communities in England, people decided to throw the dice and vote for Brexit. In NI they didn't. Will be interesting to see how the fear of reunification plays out in these communities - even if they only stay at home in a border vote that could be enough to swing a close vote.

    I think that Working Class Loyalists would like Devo-Max, so nominally British but effectively under Home Rule. Of course that is rather dependent on there remaining a Unionist majority.

    Ulster Loyalists rather remind me of the Afrikaaners in the last days of apartheid. Not just the prospect of losing power, but also their pre-enlightenment Calvinist ideology.
    A border poll will only happen if Ireland presses for it.

    The prospect of renewed Loyalist terror will push that into the distant future.

    The men in balaclavas have a veto both ways, and I can't see that changing for a long time, there won't be a frontier within Ireland, equally, there won't be a United Ireland.
    However, if Scotland falls off then there will be precisely zero appetite in England for hanging on to Northern Ireland.

    Under such circumstances, the prospect of Northern Ireland as an independent state or, failing that, as a crown dependency should not be discounted.
    As a diehard Tory Unionist we could certainly hold onto Antrim and much of Derry and Down at least, even if we hand over Catholic and Nationalist majority Fermanagh, Armagh and Tyrone to the Republic.

    A repartition of the partition is not a sensible idea. Eventually Northern Ireland and its people will realise it is, and they are, in a very sweet spot. Entitled to UK and EU passports. Free to travel, settle, study, throughout UK/EU. Access to the UK and EU Single Markets. Get Erasmus from Ireland and the equivalent from the UK. Enviable

    At that point pressure for change will melt away, and Ulster should prosper
    Hopefully
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,946

    Andy_JS said:

    Isn't it going to be difficult to make people use vaccine passports to have a pint when they've already got used to being able to have one without a vaccine passport, and the figures will be lower in the future/?

    Businesses already have to ask people to check in using the test & trace app, or give their details. Making the final, technical step to a unified system of ID cards would not be particularly difficult.
    PB Pub Update

    Much proper ale. Pub buzzing. Very cold. Heaters welcome. Dark by the time we left.

    Pubs cannot ever be closed again in this country. They are this country.
    Agreed. Nor must they become places where papers are demanded for access. UnBritish.

    Interesting that all the chatter on vaxpasses has quietened down. I wonder if the thousands of negative comments on Gove's article hit home.....
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,259
    Andy_JS said:

    Isn't it going to be difficult to make people use vaccine passports to have a pint when they've already got used to being able to have one without a vaccine passport, and the figures will be lower in the future/?

    Yes, just a tad.

    Some in government seem to have lost all common sense. I fear Gove, Hancock and co have been in the bunker far too long.

    I mean this 'everyone to get two tests a week' malarky is utter wasteful nonsense.

    Is anyone doing it?
  • Options
    geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,171
       
    Leon said:

    HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Entirely off-topic, but an interesting piece in The Guardian about Norniron. For me the key paragraph is here:

    "Working-class loyalists feel left behind and ignored. I am not here to debate the merits of that, or the so-called siege mentality of loyalism. However there is a deep-rooted anger there that has been both been ignored by mainstream unionism and used time and again by the DUP and the Ulster Unionist party for political machinations when it suited them. The fear of a united Ireland and what that will mean for unionism is amped up at election time, and tensions are stoked by both political unionism and “stakeholders” within loyalism, such as the Loyalist Communities Council. And for what? What has fundamentally changed, or got better for working-class loyalist communities in Northern Ireland? They deserve better than being lied to and led up the hill, then abandoned when violence erupts"

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/apr/13/belfast-violence-young-working-class-people-failed

    I have to ask, what is it that these working-class loyalists think there is any point in being a loyalist? They have been lied to and led up the hill not only by their elected politicians but by the British government. Rather than doing something about these areas of deep deprivation, the unionist politicians and the UK government have abandoned them.

    "The fear of a united Ireland" in case what - they end up deprived and ignored? In deprived working class communities in England, people decided to throw the dice and vote for Brexit. In NI they didn't. Will be interesting to see how the fear of reunification plays out in these communities - even if they only stay at home in a border vote that could be enough to swing a close vote.

    I think that Working Class Loyalists would like Devo-Max, so nominally British but effectively under Home Rule. Of course that is rather dependent on there remaining a Unionist majority.

    Ulster Loyalists rather remind me of the Afrikaaners in the last days of apartheid. Not just the prospect of losing power, but also their pre-enlightenment Calvinist ideology.
    A border poll will only happen if Ireland presses for it.

    The prospect of renewed Loyalist terror will push that into the distant future.

    The men in balaclavas have a veto both ways, and I can't see that changing for a long time, there won't be a frontier within Ireland, equally, there won't be a United Ireland.
    However, if Scotland falls off then there will be precisely zero appetite in England for hanging on to Northern Ireland.

    Under such circumstances, the prospect of Northern Ireland as an independent state or, failing that, as a crown dependency should not be discounted.
    As a diehard Tory Unionist we could certainly hold onto Antrim and much of Derry and Down at least, even if we hand over Catholic and Nationalist majority Fermanagh, Armagh and Tyrone to the Republic.

    A repartition of the partition is not a sensible idea. Eventually Northern Ireland and its people will realise it is, and they are, in a very sweet spot. Entitled to UK and EU passports. Free to travel, settle, study, throughout UK/EU. Access to the UK and EU Single Markets. Get Erasmus from Ireland and the equivalent from the UK. Enviable

    At that point pressure for change will melt away, and Ulster should prosper
    Quite so. The squeaky wheel got oiled.

  • Options
    FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    Just unbelievable

    https://twitter.com/BNODesk/status/1381885457206759427

    Austrian Health Minister Rudolf Anschober resigns, saying he is overworked because of the pandemic. "I do not want to break myself," he says -
  • Options
    Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Leon said:

    There is no solution to the asymmetry of the UK. We can ameliorate it by making the Lords an elected Federal chamber (with two Lords from each UK county?), but there is no optimal arrangement

    This is a rare occasion when I agree with Kinabalu. Apart from that change to the Lords, the fudge we have now is probably the best we can hope for. It's a good deal for Scotland, Wales and NI, but that's the price England pays for keeping the Union.

    The Scots would be mad to reject it for something worse, but ultimately they must decide that (in about 10 years time)

    The answer is to create regions of England with their own interests.

    Manchester thinks they are ignored? Give Greater Manchester two senators, same as London. 2 for the Summer Country (including Devon and Cornwall) 2 for Yorkshire etc
    What about the towns and villages across the country? What do they get?

    I've got an idea, why don't we divide the country into blocs, we could call them constituencies, and each of those blocs elects one person to represent them - we could call that a Member of Parliament.
    I’m a fan of replacing the Lords with an elected body but it needs to be in a different basis to the Commons. Making it a federal parliament is a reasonable approach.

    Towns and counties would be represented in rough areas of similar interests of approximately similar size. Consider dividing Scotland into highlands and lowlands (I don’t know them well enough but people complain there is too much focus on Glasgow/Edinburgh)
    All of these complicated solutions can easily be dispensed with if we also dispense with the Union. The endless, insoluble discontent of the Scots and the Irish border dispute would be made instantly to disappear if they were not attached to England, as would the West Lothian Question and the arguments about fiscal transfers. What's not to like?
    I wouldn’t want to deprive our Scottish and Irish brethren the chance to benefit from a partnership with England and Wales.
    Charles, a large fraction of the population of Scotland and Northern Ireland either wants rid of us or actively detests us, and the balancing portion in the middle are only in it for the money. In what universe is this a healthy state of affairs?
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,292
    Mortimer said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Isn't it going to be difficult to make people use vaccine passports to have a pint when they've already got used to being able to have one without a vaccine passport, and the figures will be lower in the future/?

    Businesses already have to ask people to check in using the test & trace app, or give their details. Making the final, technical step to a unified system of ID cards would not be particularly difficult.
    PB Pub Update

    Much proper ale. Pub buzzing. Very cold. Heaters welcome. Dark by the time we left.

    Pubs cannot ever be closed again in this country. They are this country.
    Agreed. Nor must they become places where papers are demanded for access. UnBritish.

    Interesting that all the chatter on vaxpasses has quietened down. I wonder if the thousands of negative comments on Gove's article hit home.....
    And yet, to get into the pub yesterday I had to book (or my friend did) leaving name and deets, and as I entered I had to use the NHS app to scan the QR code

    Is that much different from a flashing a vaxport?
  • Options
    CookieCookie Posts: 11,449
    A postscript to the squirrel story earlier to turn something we could all agree was a sad but possibly unavoidable situation into something half of us can get good and cross about: apparently the requirement to euthanise the squirrels was brought in by the EU in 2019, to the great disappointment of the RSPCA. Apparently.
  • Options
    FloaterFloater Posts: 14,195
    https://twitter.com/angie_rasmussen/status/1381967413944623109

    For perspective, here are some numbers:

    1 in 1,000,000: J&J vaccine
    1 in 3,000: oral contraceptives
    1 in 5: hospitalized COVID-19 patients

    As someone who got the J&J vaccine 8 days ago, and who took oral contraceptives for 20 years, I’ll take these odds.
  • Options
    Time_to_LeaveTime_to_Leave Posts: 2,547
    Floater said:

    Just unbelievable

    https://twitter.com/BNODesk/status/1381885457206759427

    Austrian Health Minister Rudolf Anschober resigns, saying he is overworked because of the pandemic. "I do not want to break myself," he says -

    Christ. Imagine hearing that, working on their wards.

    Hancock looks shattered but I will credit him with not being the sort to say it, because he knows he’s not right at the sharp end.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,259
    Floater said:

    Just unbelievable

    https://twitter.com/BNODesk/status/1381885457206759427

    Austrian Health Minister Rudolf Anschober resigns, saying he is overworked because of the pandemic. "I do not want to break myself," he says -

    Maybe the idea will catch on...
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,028
    edited April 2021

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Leon said:

    There is no solution to the asymmetry of the UK. We can ameliorate it by making the Lords an elected Federal chamber (with two Lords from each UK county?), but there is no optimal arrangement

    This is a rare occasion when I agree with Kinabalu. Apart from that change to the Lords, the fudge we have now is probably the best we can hope for. It's a good deal for Scotland, Wales and NI, but that's the price England pays for keeping the Union.

    The Scots would be mad to reject it for something worse, but ultimately they must decide that (in about 10 years time)

    The answer is to create regions of England with their own interests.

    Manchester thinks they are ignored? Give Greater Manchester two senators, same as London. 2 for the Summer Country (including Devon and Cornwall) 2 for Yorkshire etc
    What about the towns and villages across the country? What do they get?

    I've got an idea, why don't we divide the country into blocs, we could call them constituencies, and each of those blocs elects one person to represent them - we could call that a Member of Parliament.
    I’m a fan of replacing the Lords with an elected body but it needs to be in a different basis to the Commons. Making it a federal parliament is a reasonable approach.

    Towns and counties would be represented in rough areas of similar interests of approximately similar size. Consider dividing Scotland into highlands and lowlands (I don’t know them well enough but people complain there is too much focus on Glasgow/Edinburgh)
    All of these complicated solutions can easily be dispensed with if we also dispense with the Union. The endless, insoluble discontent of the Scots and the Irish border dispute would be made instantly to disappear if they were not attached to England, as would the West Lothian Question and the arguments about fiscal transfers. What's not to like?
    I wouldn’t want to deprive our Scottish and Irish brethren the chance to benefit from a partnership with England and Wales.
    Charles, a large fraction of the population of Scotland and Northern Ireland either wants rid of us or actively detests us, and the balancing portion in the middle are only in it for the money. In what universe is this a healthy state of affairs?
    A large part also wants to stay in the UK, 55% of Scots in 2014 and in NI's case many loyalists would prefer the bomb to leaving the UK for direct rule by Dublin.

    The end of the UK would also mean France decisively overtakes us both in terms of economy and military power, Putin would also benefit from our weaker state
  • Options
    MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 25,223
    edited April 2021
    HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Entirely off-topic, but an interesting piece in The Guardian about Norniron. For me the key paragraph is here:

    "Working-class loyalists feel left behind and ignored. I am not here to debate the merits of that, or the so-called siege mentality of loyalism. However there is a deep-rooted anger there that has been both been ignored by mainstream unionism and used time and again by the DUP and the Ulster Unionist party for political machinations when it suited them. The fear of a united Ireland and what that will mean for unionism is amped up at election time, and tensions are stoked by both political unionism and “stakeholders” within loyalism, such as the Loyalist Communities Council. And for what? What has fundamentally changed, or got better for working-class loyalist communities in Northern Ireland? They deserve better than being lied to and led up the hill, then abandoned when violence erupts"

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/apr/13/belfast-violence-young-working-class-people-failed

    I have to ask, what is it that these working-class loyalists think there is any point in being a loyalist? They have been lied to and led up the hill not only by their elected politicians but by the British government. Rather than doing something about these areas of deep deprivation, the unionist politicians and the UK government have abandoned them.

    "The fear of a united Ireland" in case what - they end up deprived and ignored? In deprived working class communities in England, people decided to throw the dice and vote for Brexit. In NI they didn't. Will be interesting to see how the fear of reunification plays out in these communities - even if they only stay at home in a border vote that could be enough to swing a close vote.

    I think that Working Class Loyalists would like Devo-Max, so nominally British but effectively under Home Rule. Of course that is rather dependent on there remaining a Unionist majority.

    Ulster Loyalists rather remind me of the Afrikaaners in the last days of apartheid. Not just the prospect of losing power, but also their pre-enlightenment Calvinist ideology.
    A border poll will only happen if Ireland presses for it.

    The prospect of renewed Loyalist terror will push that into the distant future.

    The men in balaclavas have a veto both ways, and I can't see that changing for a long time, there won't be a frontier within Ireland, equally, there won't be a United Ireland.
    However, if Scotland falls off then there will be precisely zero appetite in England for hanging on to Northern Ireland.

    Under such circumstances, the prospect of Northern Ireland as an independent state or, failing that, as a crown dependency should not be discounted.
    As a diehard Tory Unionist we could certainly hold onto Antrim and much of Derry and Down at least, even if we hand over Catholic and Nationalist majority Fermanagh, Armagh and Tyrone to the Republic.

    What an absolutely absurd suggestion.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Leon said:

    There is no solution to the asymmetry of the UK. We can ameliorate it by making the Lords an elected Federal chamber (with two Lords from each UK county?), but there is no optimal arrangement

    This is a rare occasion when I agree with Kinabalu. Apart from that change to the Lords, the fudge we have now is probably the best we can hope for. It's a good deal for Scotland, Wales and NI, but that's the price England pays for keeping the Union.

    The Scots would be mad to reject it for something worse, but ultimately they must decide that (in about 10 years time)

    The answer is to create regions of England with their own interests.

    Manchester thinks they are ignored? Give Greater Manchester two senators, same as London. 2 for the Summer Country (including Devon and Cornwall) 2 for Yorkshire etc
    What about the towns and villages across the country? What do they get?

    I've got an idea, why don't we divide the country into blocs, we could call them constituencies, and each of those blocs elects one person to represent them - we could call that a Member of Parliament.
    I’m a fan of replacing the Lords with an elected body but it needs to be in a different basis to the Commons. Making it a federal parliament is a reasonable approach.

    Towns and counties would be represented in rough areas of similar interests of approximately similar size. Consider dividing Scotland into highlands and lowlands (I don’t know them well enough but people complain there is too much focus on Glasgow/Edinburgh)
    All of these complicated solutions can easily be dispensed with if we also dispense with the Union. The endless, insoluble discontent of the Scots and the Irish border dispute would be made instantly to disappear if they were not attached to England, as would the West Lothian Question and the arguments about fiscal transfers. What's not to like?
    I wouldn’t want to deprive our Scottish and Irish brethren the chance to benefit from a partnership with England and Wales.
    Charles, a large fraction of the population of Scotland and Northern Ireland either wants rid of us or actively detests us, and the balancing portion in the middle are only in it for the money. In what universe is this a healthy state of affairs?
    If they vote to leave then they can depart with my blessing. If they want to stay they are welcome.
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,259

    Andy_JS said:

    Isn't it going to be difficult to make people use vaccine passports to have a pint when they've already got used to being able to have one without a vaccine passport, and the figures will be lower in the future/?

    Businesses already have to ask people to check in using the test & trace app, or give their details. Making the final, technical step to a unified system of ID cards would not be particularly difficult.
    PB Pub Update

    Much proper ale. Pub buzzing. Very cold. Heaters welcome. Dark by the time we left.

    Pubs cannot ever be closed again in this country. They are this country.
    If there were to be another lockdown then rather a lot of people would be in favour of descending upon central London and burning down the Palace of Westminster. With the MPs locked inside their damned House.

    Though not me, of course. That would be very, very wrong.
    I hope that Sunak would resign from Cabinet if we lock down again this autumn. Perhaps that would be the trigger for the 1922 to end Johnson if he goes down that path?
  • Options
    Time_to_LeaveTime_to_Leave Posts: 2,547
    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Leon said:

    There is no solution to the asymmetry of the UK. We can ameliorate it by making the Lords an elected Federal chamber (with two Lords from each UK county?), but there is no optimal arrangement

    This is a rare occasion when I agree with Kinabalu. Apart from that change to the Lords, the fudge we have now is probably the best we can hope for. It's a good deal for Scotland, Wales and NI, but that's the price England pays for keeping the Union.

    The Scots would be mad to reject it for something worse, but ultimately they must decide that (in about 10 years time)

    The answer is to create regions of England with their own interests.

    Manchester thinks they are ignored? Give Greater Manchester two senators, same as London. 2 for the Summer Country (including Devon and Cornwall) 2 for Yorkshire etc
    What about the towns and villages across the country? What do they get?

    I've got an idea, why don't we divide the country into blocs, we could call them constituencies, and each of those blocs elects one person to represent them - we could call that a Member of Parliament.
    I’m a fan of replacing the Lords with an elected body but it needs to be in a different basis to the Commons. Making it a federal parliament is a reasonable approach.

    Towns and counties would be represented in rough areas of similar interests of approximately similar size. Consider dividing Scotland into highlands and lowlands (I don’t know them well enough but people complain there is too much focus on Glasgow/Edinburgh)
    All of these complicated solutions can easily be dispensed with if we also dispense with the Union. The endless, insoluble discontent of the Scots and the Irish border dispute would be made instantly to disappear if they were not attached to England, as would the West Lothian Question and the arguments about fiscal transfers. What's not to like?
    I wouldn’t want to deprive our Scottish and Irish brethren the chance to benefit from a partnership with England and Wales.
    Charles, a large fraction of the population of Scotland and Northern Ireland either wants rid of us or actively detests us, and the balancing portion in the middle are only in it for the money. In what universe is this a healthy state of affairs?
    A large part also wants to stay in the UK, 55% of Scots in 2014 and in NI's case many would prefer the bomb to leaving the UK for direct rule by Dublin.

    The end of the UK would also mean France decisively overtakes us both in terms of economy and military power, Putin would also benefit from our weaker state
    “The end of the UK would also mean France decisively overtakes us both in terms of economy and military power”?????!!!!

    That matters to you in the context of this conversation? Are you 12?
  • Options
    CookieCookie Posts: 11,449

    Floater said:

    Just unbelievable

    https://twitter.com/BNODesk/status/1381885457206759427

    Austrian Health Minister Rudolf Anschober resigns, saying he is overworked because of the pandemic. "I do not want to break myself," he says -

    Christ. Imagine hearing that, working on their wards.

    Hancock looks shattered but I will credit him with not being the sort to say it, because he knows he’s not right at the sharp end.
    Yes, I don't have much time for Matt Hancock's pandemic management, but you can't accusr him of not working hard.
    Weirdly, Matt Hancock came up as a friend suggestion on facebook for me yesterday.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758



    HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Entirely off-topic, but an interesting piece in The Guardian about Norniron. For me the key paragraph is here:

    "Working-class loyalists feel left behind and ignored. I am not here to debate the merits of that, or the so-called siege mentality of loyalism. However there is a deep-rooted anger there that has been both been ignored by mainstream unionism and used time and again by the DUP and the Ulster Unionist party for political machinations when it suited them. The fear of a united Ireland and what that will mean for unionism is amped up at election time, and tensions are stoked by both political unionism and “stakeholders” within loyalism, such as the Loyalist Communities Council. And for what? What has fundamentally changed, or got better for working-class loyalist communities in Northern Ireland? They deserve better than being lied to and led up the hill, then abandoned when violence erupts"

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/apr/13/belfast-violence-young-working-class-people-failed

    I have to ask, what is it that these working-class loyalists think there is any point in being a loyalist? They have been lied to and led up the hill not only by their elected politicians but by the British government. Rather than doing something about these areas of deep deprivation, the unionist politicians and the UK government have abandoned them.

    "The fear of a united Ireland" in case what - they end up deprived and ignored? In deprived working class communities in England, people decided to throw the dice and vote for Brexit. In NI they didn't. Will be interesting to see how the fear of reunification plays out in these communities - even if they only stay at home in a border vote that could be enough to swing a close vote.

    I think that Working Class Loyalists would like Devo-Max, so nominally British but effectively under Home Rule. Of course that is rather dependent on there remaining a Unionist majority.

    Ulster Loyalists rather remind me of the Afrikaaners in the last days of apartheid. Not just the prospect of losing power, but also their pre-enlightenment Calvinist ideology.
    A border poll will only happen if Ireland presses for it.

    The prospect of renewed Loyalist terror will push that into the distant future.

    The men in balaclavas have a veto both ways, and I can't see that changing for a long time, there won't be a frontier within Ireland, equally, there won't be a United Ireland.
    However, if Scotland falls off then there will be precisely zero appetite in England for hanging on to Northern Ireland.

    Under such circumstances, the prospect of Northern Ireland as an independent state or, failing that, as a crown dependency should not be discounted.
    As a diehard Tory Unionist we could certainly hold onto Antrim and much of Derry and Down at least, even if we hand over Catholic and Nationalist majority Fermanagh, Armagh and Tyrone to the Republic.

    What an absolutely absurd suggestion.
    I assume you are referring to @HYUFD’s repartition scheme - in which case I agree.

    Otherwise you are speaking bollocks 😁
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,311
    Bayern out on away goals. If City don't win the CL this season you begin to think that they never will.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,292
    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Leon said:

    There is no solution to the asymmetry of the UK. We can ameliorate it by making the Lords an elected Federal chamber (with two Lords from each UK county?), but there is no optimal arrangement

    This is a rare occasion when I agree with Kinabalu. Apart from that change to the Lords, the fudge we have now is probably the best we can hope for. It's a good deal for Scotland, Wales and NI, but that's the price England pays for keeping the Union.

    The Scots would be mad to reject it for something worse, but ultimately they must decide that (in about 10 years time)

    The answer is to create regions of England with their own interests.

    Manchester thinks they are ignored? Give Greater Manchester two senators, same as London. 2 for the Summer Country (including Devon and Cornwall) 2 for Yorkshire etc
    What about the towns and villages across the country? What do they get?

    I've got an idea, why don't we divide the country into blocs, we could call them constituencies, and each of those blocs elects one person to represent them - we could call that a Member of Parliament.
    I’m a fan of replacing the Lords with an elected body but it needs to be in a different basis to the Commons. Making it a federal parliament is a reasonable approach.

    Towns and counties would be represented in rough areas of similar interests of approximately similar size. Consider dividing Scotland into highlands and lowlands (I don’t know them well enough but people complain there is too much focus on Glasgow/Edinburgh)
    All of these complicated solutions can easily be dispensed with if we also dispense with the Union. The endless, insoluble discontent of the Scots and the Irish border dispute would be made instantly to disappear if they were not attached to England, as would the West Lothian Question and the arguments about fiscal transfers. What's not to like?
    I wouldn’t want to deprive our Scottish and Irish brethren the chance to benefit from a partnership with England and Wales.
    Charles, a large fraction of the population of Scotland and Northern Ireland either wants rid of us or actively detests us, and the balancing portion in the middle are only in it for the money. In what universe is this a healthy state of affairs?
    A large part also wants to stay in the UK, 55% of Scots in 2014 and in NI's case many would prefer the bomb to leaving the UK for direct rule by Dublin.

    The end of the UK would also mean France decisively overtakes us both in terms of economy and military power, Putin would also benefit from our weaker state
    More immediately than that, the departure of Scotland would tip the UK into economic turmoil, with a Depression in Scotland and an intense recession in rUK, and rUK might have to bail out Scotland as it teeters near to default

    English people who loftily shrug off Scottish indy, like it is some minor irritant, are stupid and possibly mad. Whether you agree with indy or not, it would be enormously complex and painful, for a decade or more, and it would make Brexit look easy.
  • Options
    Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Leon said:

    There is no solution to the asymmetry of the UK. We can ameliorate it by making the Lords an elected Federal chamber (with two Lords from each UK county?), but there is no optimal arrangement

    This is a rare occasion when I agree with Kinabalu. Apart from that change to the Lords, the fudge we have now is probably the best we can hope for. It's a good deal for Scotland, Wales and NI, but that's the price England pays for keeping the Union.

    The Scots would be mad to reject it for something worse, but ultimately they must decide that (in about 10 years time)

    The answer is to create regions of England with their own interests.

    Manchester thinks they are ignored? Give Greater Manchester two senators, same as London. 2 for the Summer Country (including Devon and Cornwall) 2 for Yorkshire etc
    What about the towns and villages across the country? What do they get?

    I've got an idea, why don't we divide the country into blocs, we could call them constituencies, and each of those blocs elects one person to represent them - we could call that a Member of Parliament.
    I’m a fan of replacing the Lords with an elected body but it needs to be in a different basis to the Commons. Making it a federal parliament is a reasonable approach.

    Towns and counties would be represented in rough areas of similar interests of approximately similar size. Consider dividing Scotland into highlands and lowlands (I don’t know them well enough but people complain there is too much focus on Glasgow/Edinburgh)
    All of these complicated solutions can easily be dispensed with if we also dispense with the Union. The endless, insoluble discontent of the Scots and the Irish border dispute would be made instantly to disappear if they were not attached to England, as would the West Lothian Question and the arguments about fiscal transfers. What's not to like?
    The fact our economy would be diminished in size, as would our military and France would overtake us on both measures, our role in the world would be weakened and we would have a hard border with Scotland as well as Ireland plus Scexit talks which would make Brexit look like a walk in the park and a resurgence of loyalist paramilitary violence in Northern Ireland at direct rule from Dublin.

    Your Little Englander vision would be a disaster that would rip these islands apart for decades
    You seem not to have noticed the nationalists metaphorically running riot in Edinburgh for the last ten years, or the actual rioting (and worse violence) that's been happening in Belfast at regular intervals since the Bronze Age.

    It would all be very nice, I'm sure, if there were a future for the British state but it is a disintegrating confederacy of four states united by nothing but money. The game is up. It's over.
  • Options
    Time_to_LeaveTime_to_Leave Posts: 2,547
    Cookie said:

    Floater said:

    Just unbelievable

    https://twitter.com/BNODesk/status/1381885457206759427

    Austrian Health Minister Rudolf Anschober resigns, saying he is overworked because of the pandemic. "I do not want to break myself," he says -

    Christ. Imagine hearing that, working on their wards.

    Hancock looks shattered but I will credit him with not being the sort to say it, because he knows he’s not right at the sharp end.
    Yes, I don't have much time for Matt Hancock's pandemic management, but you can't accusr him of not working hard.
    Weirdly, Matt Hancock came up as a friend suggestion on facebook for me yesterday.
    Is that how he’s policing the lockdown? Following us all on FB?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,028

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Leon said:

    There is no solution to the asymmetry of the UK. We can ameliorate it by making the Lords an elected Federal chamber (with two Lords from each UK county?), but there is no optimal arrangement

    This is a rare occasion when I agree with Kinabalu. Apart from that change to the Lords, the fudge we have now is probably the best we can hope for. It's a good deal for Scotland, Wales and NI, but that's the price England pays for keeping the Union.

    The Scots would be mad to reject it for something worse, but ultimately they must decide that (in about 10 years time)

    The answer is to create regions of England with their own interests.

    Manchester thinks they are ignored? Give Greater Manchester two senators, same as London. 2 for the Summer Country (including Devon and Cornwall) 2 for Yorkshire etc
    What about the towns and villages across the country? What do they get?

    I've got an idea, why don't we divide the country into blocs, we could call them constituencies, and each of those blocs elects one person to represent them - we could call that a Member of Parliament.
    I’m a fan of replacing the Lords with an elected body but it needs to be in a different basis to the Commons. Making it a federal parliament is a reasonable approach.

    Towns and counties would be represented in rough areas of similar interests of approximately similar size. Consider dividing Scotland into highlands and lowlands (I don’t know them well enough but people complain there is too much focus on Glasgow/Edinburgh)
    All of these complicated solutions can easily be dispensed with if we also dispense with the Union. The endless, insoluble discontent of the Scots and the Irish border dispute would be made instantly to disappear if they were not attached to England, as would the West Lothian Question and the arguments about fiscal transfers. What's not to like?
    I wouldn’t want to deprive our Scottish and Irish brethren the chance to benefit from a partnership with England and Wales.
    Charles, a large fraction of the population of Scotland and Northern Ireland either wants rid of us or actively detests us, and the balancing portion in the middle are only in it for the money. In what universe is this a healthy state of affairs?
    A large part also wants to stay in the UK, 55% of Scots in 2014 and in NI's case many would prefer the bomb to leaving the UK for direct rule by Dublin.

    The end of the UK would also mean France decisively overtakes us both in terms of economy and military power, Putin would also benefit from our weaker state
    “The end of the UK would also mean France decisively overtakes us both in terms of economy and military power”?????!!!!

    That matters to you in the context of this conversation? Are you 12?
    Of course it does, as a Tory the UK's maintaining and ideally increasing the UK's economic strength and power in the world should be one of our core aims.

  • Options
    LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 15,293

    JonathanD said:

    I'm late to the party on it but glad to see the speed up of some lifting of restrictions in Scotland, even if it feels like the very least that could be done. I will actually be able to meet up with a group of friends outside of my council area now for the first time in a long time, so something to look forward to finally.

    Considering that until very recently the Scottish unlock roadmap asserted that even in middle of June you would only be able to have outdoor meetings of 8 people from 3 households, it feels like someone has had a bite of the sensible pill with this change coming for Friday.

    As always, the easiest way to determine what Sturgeon is going to do is look at what England's doing and pick the opposite. A follower not a leader.
    She deliberately engineered 2/3s of England's Covid death rate just to be different. Shockingly passive.
    Scotland population density 65 per sq km.
    England population density 450 per sq km.
    You were blithely stating that the 40 miles between Glasgow and Edinburgh were empty yesterday, not even an F for your level of Scotch expertise I'm afraid.
    It seems the context went completely over your head, it is relatively empty compared to the distance between Liverpool and Manchester is what I was contrasting it with. This provides more of a firebreak.

    https://ibb.co/JCyRjkd
    https://ibb.co/JCyRjkd
    Using google maps as evidence for this is awful - for some reason it is showing Livingston as a whole bunch of green at that zoom level, which it doesn't when you zoom further in.

    There are actual population density maps, like this one, or this one (which is on a hilarious looking site), which better show the argument you are making - that the greater Liverpool-Manchester conurbation is more evenly densely populated than the Glasgow-Edinburgh central belt.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,226

    Andy_JS said:

    Isn't it going to be difficult to make people use vaccine passports to have a pint when they've already got used to being able to have one without a vaccine passport, and the figures will be lower in the future/?

    Businesses already have to ask people to check in using the test & trace app, or give their details. Making the final, technical step to a unified system of ID cards would not be particularly difficult.
    PB Pub Update

    Much proper ale. Pub buzzing. Very cold. Heaters welcome. Dark by the time we left.

    Pubs cannot ever be closed again in this country. They are this country.
    Need to rein it back slightly on this pubs = liberty = England thing, Anabob.

    Sounding a bit like Lozza Fox.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Leon said:

    There is no solution to the asymmetry of the UK. We can ameliorate it by making the Lords an elected Federal chamber (with two Lords from each UK county?), but there is no optimal arrangement

    This is a rare occasion when I agree with Kinabalu. Apart from that change to the Lords, the fudge we have now is probably the best we can hope for. It's a good deal for Scotland, Wales and NI, but that's the price England pays for keeping the Union.

    The Scots would be mad to reject it for something worse, but ultimately they must decide that (in about 10 years time)

    The answer is to create regions of England with their own interests.

    Manchester thinks they are ignored? Give Greater Manchester two senators, same as London. 2 for the Summer Country (including Devon and Cornwall) 2 for Yorkshire etc
    What about the towns and villages across the country? What do they get?

    I've got an idea, why don't we divide the country into blocs, we could call them constituencies, and each of those blocs elects one person to represent them - we could call that a Member of Parliament.
    I’m a fan of replacing the Lords with an elected body but it needs to be in a different basis to the Commons. Making it a federal parliament is a reasonable approach.

    Towns and counties would be represented in rough areas of similar interests of approximately similar size. Consider dividing Scotland into highlands and lowlands (I don’t know them well enough but people complain there is too much focus on Glasgow/Edinburgh)
    All of these complicated solutions can easily be dispensed with if we also dispense with the Union. The endless, insoluble discontent of the Scots and the Irish border dispute would be made instantly to disappear if they were not attached to England, as would the West Lothian Question and the arguments about fiscal transfers. What's not to like?
    I wouldn’t want to deprive our Scottish and Irish brethren the chance to benefit from a partnership with England and Wales.
    Charles, a large fraction of the population of Scotland and Northern Ireland either wants rid of us or actively detests us, and the balancing portion in the middle are only in it for the money. In what universe is this a healthy state of affairs?
    A large part also wants to stay in the UK, 55% of Scots in 2014 and in NI's case many would prefer the bomb to leaving the UK for direct rule by Dublin.

    The end of the UK would also mean France decisively overtakes us both in terms of economy and military power, Putin would also benefit from our weaker state
    “The end of the UK would also mean France decisively overtakes us both in terms of economy and military power”?????!!!!

    That matters to you in the context of this conversation? Are you 12?
    Of course it does, as a Tory the UK's maintaining and ideally increasing the UK's economic strength and power in the world should be one of our core aims.

    No, it shouldn’t.

    The government’s role is to provide security at home and abroad, and a legal and economic framework to support increasing per capita wealth. Anything more than that and they can just F off.
  • Options
    Time_to_LeaveTime_to_Leave Posts: 2,547
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Leon said:

    There is no solution to the asymmetry of the UK. We can ameliorate it by making the Lords an elected Federal chamber (with two Lords from each UK county?), but there is no optimal arrangement

    This is a rare occasion when I agree with Kinabalu. Apart from that change to the Lords, the fudge we have now is probably the best we can hope for. It's a good deal for Scotland, Wales and NI, but that's the price England pays for keeping the Union.

    The Scots would be mad to reject it for something worse, but ultimately they must decide that (in about 10 years time)

    The answer is to create regions of England with their own interests.

    Manchester thinks they are ignored? Give Greater Manchester two senators, same as London. 2 for the Summer Country (including Devon and Cornwall) 2 for Yorkshire etc
    What about the towns and villages across the country? What do they get?

    I've got an idea, why don't we divide the country into blocs, we could call them constituencies, and each of those blocs elects one person to represent them - we could call that a Member of Parliament.
    I’m a fan of replacing the Lords with an elected body but it needs to be in a different basis to the Commons. Making it a federal parliament is a reasonable approach.

    Towns and counties would be represented in rough areas of similar interests of approximately similar size. Consider dividing Scotland into highlands and lowlands (I don’t know them well enough but people complain there is too much focus on Glasgow/Edinburgh)
    All of these complicated solutions can easily be dispensed with if we also dispense with the Union. The endless, insoluble discontent of the Scots and the Irish border dispute would be made instantly to disappear if they were not attached to England, as would the West Lothian Question and the arguments about fiscal transfers. What's not to like?
    I wouldn’t want to deprive our Scottish and Irish brethren the chance to benefit from a partnership with England and Wales.
    Charles, a large fraction of the population of Scotland and Northern Ireland either wants rid of us or actively detests us, and the balancing portion in the middle are only in it for the money. In what universe is this a healthy state of affairs?
    A large part also wants to stay in the UK, 55% of Scots in 2014 and in NI's case many would prefer the bomb to leaving the UK for direct rule by Dublin.

    The end of the UK would also mean France decisively overtakes us both in terms of economy and military power, Putin would also benefit from our weaker state
    “The end of the UK would also mean France decisively overtakes us both in terms of economy and military power”?????!!!!

    That matters to you in the context of this conversation? Are you 12?
    Of course it does, as a Tory the UK's maintaining and ideally increasing the UK's economic strength and power in the world should be one of our core aims.

    Erm.... right....

    That’s not conservatism or otherwise right wing politics. It has another name.
  • Options
    Time_to_LeaveTime_to_Leave Posts: 2,547
    edited April 2021
    Delete - duplicate
  • Options
    MonkeysMonkeys Posts: 755
    edited April 2021

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Leon said:

    There is no solution to the asymmetry of the UK. We can ameliorate it by making the Lords an elected Federal chamber (with two Lords from each UK county?), but there is no optimal arrangement

    This is a rare occasion when I agree with Kinabalu. Apart from that change to the Lords, the fudge we have now is probably the best we can hope for. It's a good deal for Scotland, Wales and NI, but that's the price England pays for keeping the Union.

    The Scots would be mad to reject it for something worse, but ultimately they must decide that (in about 10 years time)

    The answer is to create regions of England with their own interests.

    Manchester thinks they are ignored? Give Greater Manchester two senators, same as London. 2 for the Summer Country (including Devon and Cornwall) 2 for Yorkshire etc
    What about the towns and villages across the country? What do they get?

    I've got an idea, why don't we divide the country into blocs, we could call them constituencies, and each of those blocs elects one person to represent them - we could call that a Member of Parliament.
    I’m a fan of replacing the Lords with an elected body but it needs to be in a different basis to the Commons. Making it a federal parliament is a reasonable approach.

    Towns and counties would be represented in rough areas of similar interests of approximately similar size. Consider dividing Scotland into highlands and lowlands (I don’t know them well enough but people complain there is too much focus on Glasgow/Edinburgh)
    All of these complicated solutions can easily be dispensed with if we also dispense with the Union. The endless, insoluble discontent of the Scots and the Irish border dispute would be made instantly to disappear if they were not attached to England, as would the West Lothian Question and the arguments about fiscal transfers. What's not to like?
    The fact our economy would be diminished in size, as would our military and France would overtake us on both measures, our role in the world would be weakened and we would have a hard border with Scotland as well as Ireland plus Scexit talks which would make Brexit look like a walk in the park and a resurgence of loyalist paramilitary violence in Northern Ireland at direct rule from Dublin.

    Your Little Englander vision would be a disaster that would rip these islands apart for decades
    You seem not to have noticed the nationalists metaphorically running riot in Edinburgh for the last ten years, or the actual rioting (and worse violence) that's been happening in Belfast at regular intervals since the Bronze Age.

    It would all be very nice, I'm sure, if there were a future for the British state but it is a disintegrating confederacy of four states united by nothing but money. The game is up. It's over.


    Economic gravity is a powerful unifier.
  • Options
    Time_to_LeaveTime_to_Leave Posts: 2,547
    kinabalu said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Isn't it going to be difficult to make people use vaccine passports to have a pint when they've already got used to being able to have one without a vaccine passport, and the figures will be lower in the future/?

    Businesses already have to ask people to check in using the test & trace app, or give their details. Making the final, technical step to a unified system of ID cards would not be particularly difficult.
    PB Pub Update

    Much proper ale. Pub buzzing. Very cold. Heaters welcome. Dark by the time we left.

    Pubs cannot ever be closed again in this country. They are this country.
    Need to rein it back slightly on this pubs = liberty = England thing, Anabob.

    Sounding a bit like Lozza Fox.
    To be fair, I saw on old boy making for a pub earlier in a linen suit and wearing a panama hat. Has had me smiling all evening. There’s a story there.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,028
    edited April 2021

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Leon said:

    There is no solution to the asymmetry of the UK. We can ameliorate it by making the Lords an elected Federal chamber (with two Lords from each UK county?), but there is no optimal arrangement

    This is a rare occasion when I agree with Kinabalu. Apart from that change to the Lords, the fudge we have now is probably the best we can hope for. It's a good deal for Scotland, Wales and NI, but that's the price England pays for keeping the Union.

    The Scots would be mad to reject it for something worse, but ultimately they must decide that (in about 10 years time)

    The answer is to create regions of England with their own interests.

    Manchester thinks they are ignored? Give Greater Manchester two senators, same as London. 2 for the Summer Country (including Devon and Cornwall) 2 for Yorkshire etc
    What about the towns and villages across the country? What do they get?

    I've got an idea, why don't we divide the country into blocs, we could call them constituencies, and each of those blocs elects one person to represent them - we could call that a Member of Parliament.
    I’m a fan of replacing the Lords with an elected body but it needs to be in a different basis to the Commons. Making it a federal parliament is a reasonable approach.

    Towns and counties would be represented in rough areas of similar interests of approximately similar size. Consider dividing Scotland into highlands and lowlands (I don’t know them well enough but people complain there is too much focus on Glasgow/Edinburgh)
    All of these complicated solutions can easily be dispensed with if we also dispense with the Union. The endless, insoluble discontent of the Scots and the Irish border dispute would be made instantly to disappear if they were not attached to England, as would the West Lothian Question and the arguments about fiscal transfers. What's not to like?
    The fact our economy would be diminished in size, as would our military and France would overtake us on both measures, our role in the world would be weakened and we would have a hard border with Scotland as well as Ireland plus Scexit talks which would make Brexit look like a walk in the park and a resurgence of loyalist paramilitary violence in Northern Ireland at direct rule from Dublin.

    Your Little Englander vision would be a disaster that would rip these islands apart for decades
    You seem not to have noticed the nationalists metaphorically running riot in Edinburgh for the last ten years, or the actual rioting (and worse violence) that's been happening in Belfast at regular intervals since the Bronze Age.

    It would all be very nice, I'm sure, if there were a future for the British state but it is a disintegrating confederacy of four states united by nothing but money. The game is up. It's over.
    So, what do I care, I despise the Nationalists and am quite happy to fight them, I am certainly not going to give in to Sturgeon and Salmond who still at least half of Scots also despise.

    There has been relative peace in NI since the GFA, the only reason rioting has emerged in the loyalist community is they see their community is not being listened too and NI is not close enough to GB.

    You are an ideological Little Englander, fair enough, though of course the end of the UK would lead to a recession and most likely depression across Britain as well as rip us apart for a decade or more with English and Scottish Nationalism on both sides of the border
  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,579
    edited April 2021
    Cookie said:

    A postscript to the squirrel story earlier to turn something we could all agree was a sad but possibly unavoidable situation into something half of us can get good and cross about: apparently the requirement to euthanise the squirrels was brought in by the EU in 2019, to the great disappointment of the RSPCA. Apparently.

    That is bunk - sorry.

    Grey Squirrels are subject to Section 14 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act as originally passed in *1981* as animals for which it is an offence to release into the wild.

    https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1981/69/section/14/enacted

    They are listed in Schedule 9.

    If rescue charities have been releasing them - if they have - is a scandal.

    https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1981/69/schedule/9/enacted

    It's as stupid as the RSPCA releasing foxes, though that is I think legal.

    If I am wrong anyone, please do correct me.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,028
    edited April 2021

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Leon said:

    There is no solution to the asymmetry of the UK. We can ameliorate it by making the Lords an elected Federal chamber (with two Lords from each UK county?), but there is no optimal arrangement

    This is a rare occasion when I agree with Kinabalu. Apart from that change to the Lords, the fudge we have now is probably the best we can hope for. It's a good deal for Scotland, Wales and NI, but that's the price England pays for keeping the Union.

    The Scots would be mad to reject it for something worse, but ultimately they must decide that (in about 10 years time)

    The answer is to create regions of England with their own interests.

    Manchester thinks they are ignored? Give Greater Manchester two senators, same as London. 2 for the Summer Country (including Devon and Cornwall) 2 for Yorkshire etc
    What about the towns and villages across the country? What do they get?

    I've got an idea, why don't we divide the country into blocs, we could call them constituencies, and each of those blocs elects one person to represent them - we could call that a Member of Parliament.
    I’m a fan of replacing the Lords with an elected body but it needs to be in a different basis to the Commons. Making it a federal parliament is a reasonable approach.

    Towns and counties would be represented in rough areas of similar interests of approximately similar size. Consider dividing Scotland into highlands and lowlands (I don’t know them well enough but people complain there is too much focus on Glasgow/Edinburgh)
    All of these complicated solutions can easily be dispensed with if we also dispense with the Union. The endless, insoluble discontent of the Scots and the Irish border dispute would be made instantly to disappear if they were not attached to England, as would the West Lothian Question and the arguments about fiscal transfers. What's not to like?
    I wouldn’t want to deprive our Scottish and Irish brethren the chance to benefit from a partnership with England and Wales.
    Charles, a large fraction of the population of Scotland and Northern Ireland either wants rid of us or actively detests us, and the balancing portion in the middle are only in it for the money. In what universe is this a healthy state of affairs?
    A large part also wants to stay in the UK, 55% of Scots in 2014 and in NI's case many would prefer the bomb to leaving the UK for direct rule by Dublin.

    The end of the UK would also mean France decisively overtakes us both in terms of economy and military power, Putin would also benefit from our weaker state
    “The end of the UK would also mean France decisively overtakes us both in terms of economy and military power”?????!!!!

    That matters to you in the context of this conversation? Are you 12?
    Of course it does, as a Tory the UK's maintaining and ideally increasing the UK's economic strength and power in the world should be one of our core aims.

    Erm.... right....

    That’s not conservatism or otherwise right wing politics. It has another name.
    No it is Conservatism, after all the Conservatives were the main party of Empire and since then under Thatcher and beyond have been all about the UK punching above its weight.

    The Conservative Party has also always contained a large element of British Nationalism without being Fascist
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,292
    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Leon said:

    There is no solution to the asymmetry of the UK. We can ameliorate it by making the Lords an elected Federal chamber (with two Lords from each UK county?), but there is no optimal arrangement

    This is a rare occasion when I agree with Kinabalu. Apart from that change to the Lords, the fudge we have now is probably the best we can hope for. It's a good deal for Scotland, Wales and NI, but that's the price England pays for keeping the Union.

    The Scots would be mad to reject it for something worse, but ultimately they must decide that (in about 10 years time)

    The answer is to create regions of England with their own interests.

    Manchester thinks they are ignored? Give Greater Manchester two senators, same as London. 2 for the Summer Country (including Devon and Cornwall) 2 for Yorkshire etc
    What about the towns and villages across the country? What do they get?

    I've got an idea, why don't we divide the country into blocs, we could call them constituencies, and each of those blocs elects one person to represent them - we could call that a Member of Parliament.
    I’m a fan of replacing the Lords with an elected body but it needs to be in a different basis to the Commons. Making it a federal parliament is a reasonable approach.

    Towns and counties would be represented in rough areas of similar interests of approximately similar size. Consider dividing Scotland into highlands and lowlands (I don’t know them well enough but people complain there is too much focus on Glasgow/Edinburgh)
    All of these complicated solutions can easily be dispensed with if we also dispense with the Union. The endless, insoluble discontent of the Scots and the Irish border dispute would be made instantly to disappear if they were not attached to England, as would the West Lothian Question and the arguments about fiscal transfers. What's not to like?
    I wouldn’t want to deprive our Scottish and Irish brethren the chance to benefit from a partnership with England and Wales.
    Charles, a large fraction of the population of Scotland and Northern Ireland either wants rid of us or actively detests us, and the balancing portion in the middle are only in it for the money. In what universe is this a healthy state of affairs?
    A large part also wants to stay in the UK, 55% of Scots in 2014 and in NI's case many would prefer the bomb to leaving the UK for direct rule by Dublin.

    The end of the UK would also mean France decisively overtakes us both in terms of economy and military power, Putin would also benefit from our weaker state
    “The end of the UK would also mean France decisively overtakes us both in terms of economy and military power”?????!!!!

    That matters to you in the context of this conversation? Are you 12?
    Of course it does, as a Tory the UK's maintaining and ideally increasing the UK's economic strength and power in the world should be one of our core aims.

    No, it shouldn’t.

    The government’s role is to provide security at home and abroad, and a legal and economic framework to support increasing per capita wealth. Anything more than that and they can just F off.
    What??

    I'm with HYUFD here. The aim of any national government should be the increasing prosperity and liberty of its citizens, and furthering the power, security and influence of the nation (because a more secure and powerful nation is more likely to deliver that prosperity and freedom).

    I do not understand anyone who does not understand this
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,226
    Mortimer said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Isn't it going to be difficult to make people use vaccine passports to have a pint when they've already got used to being able to have one without a vaccine passport, and the figures will be lower in the future/?

    Businesses already have to ask people to check in using the test & trace app, or give their details. Making the final, technical step to a unified system of ID cards would not be particularly difficult.
    PB Pub Update

    Much proper ale. Pub buzzing. Very cold. Heaters welcome. Dark by the time we left.

    Pubs cannot ever be closed again in this country. They are this country.
    Agreed. Nor must they become places where papers are demanded for access. UnBritish.

    Interesting that all the chatter on vaxpasses has quietened down. I wonder if the thousands of negative comments on Gove's article hit home.....
    I did write many many posts explaining why it was all talk and not a prospect to take too seriously. But I suppose it's good to fret. No fret no relief.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,028
    edited April 2021
    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Leon said:

    There is no solution to the asymmetry of the UK. We can ameliorate it by making the Lords an elected Federal chamber (with two Lords from each UK county?), but there is no optimal arrangement

    This is a rare occasion when I agree with Kinabalu. Apart from that change to the Lords, the fudge we have now is probably the best we can hope for. It's a good deal for Scotland, Wales and NI, but that's the price England pays for keeping the Union.

    The Scots would be mad to reject it for something worse, but ultimately they must decide that (in about 10 years time)

    The answer is to create regions of England with their own interests.

    Manchester thinks they are ignored? Give Greater Manchester two senators, same as London. 2 for the Summer Country (including Devon and Cornwall) 2 for Yorkshire etc
    What about the towns and villages across the country? What do they get?

    I've got an idea, why don't we divide the country into blocs, we could call them constituencies, and each of those blocs elects one person to represent them - we could call that a Member of Parliament.
    I’m a fan of replacing the Lords with an elected body but it needs to be in a different basis to the Commons. Making it a federal parliament is a reasonable approach.

    Towns and counties would be represented in rough areas of similar interests of approximately similar size. Consider dividing Scotland into highlands and lowlands (I don’t know them well enough but people complain there is too much focus on Glasgow/Edinburgh)
    All of these complicated solutions can easily be dispensed with if we also dispense with the Union. The endless, insoluble discontent of the Scots and the Irish border dispute would be made instantly to disappear if they were not attached to England, as would the West Lothian Question and the arguments about fiscal transfers. What's not to like?
    I wouldn’t want to deprive our Scottish and Irish brethren the chance to benefit from a partnership with England and Wales.
    Charles, a large fraction of the population of Scotland and Northern Ireland either wants rid of us or actively detests us, and the balancing portion in the middle are only in it for the money. In what universe is this a healthy state of affairs?
    A large part also wants to stay in the UK, 55% of Scots in 2014 and in NI's case many would prefer the bomb to leaving the UK for direct rule by Dublin.

    The end of the UK would also mean France decisively overtakes us both in terms of economy and military power, Putin would also benefit from our weaker state
    “The end of the UK would also mean France decisively overtakes us both in terms of economy and military power”?????!!!!

    That matters to you in the context of this conversation? Are you 12?
    Of course it does, as a Tory the UK's maintaining and ideally increasing the UK's economic strength and power in the world should be one of our core aims.

    No, it shouldn’t.

    The government’s role is to provide security at home and abroad, and a legal and economic framework to support increasing per capita wealth. Anything more than that and they can just F off.
    No.

    It is not just that, otherwise we may as well just be Switzerland.

    In any case you are a classical liberal if anything more than a traditional conservative anyway, a Gladstonian Liberal not a Disraelian Tory
  • Options
    Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    edited April 2021
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Leon said:

    There is no solution to the asymmetry of the UK. We can ameliorate it by making the Lords an elected Federal chamber (with two Lords from each UK county?), but there is no optimal arrangement

    This is a rare occasion when I agree with Kinabalu. Apart from that change to the Lords, the fudge we have now is probably the best we can hope for. It's a good deal for Scotland, Wales and NI, but that's the price England pays for keeping the Union.

    The Scots would be mad to reject it for something worse, but ultimately they must decide that (in about 10 years time)

    The answer is to create regions of England with their own interests.

    Manchester thinks they are ignored? Give Greater Manchester two senators, same as London. 2 for the Summer Country (including Devon and Cornwall) 2 for Yorkshire etc
    What about the towns and villages across the country? What do they get?

    I've got an idea, why don't we divide the country into blocs, we could call them constituencies, and each of those blocs elects one person to represent them - we could call that a Member of Parliament.
    I’m a fan of replacing the Lords with an elected body but it needs to be in a different basis to the Commons. Making it a federal parliament is a reasonable approach.

    Towns and counties would be represented in rough areas of similar interests of approximately similar size. Consider dividing Scotland into highlands and lowlands (I don’t know them well enough but people complain there is too much focus on Glasgow/Edinburgh)
    All of these complicated solutions can easily be dispensed with if we also dispense with the Union. The endless, insoluble discontent of the Scots and the Irish border dispute would be made instantly to disappear if they were not attached to England, as would the West Lothian Question and the arguments about fiscal transfers. What's not to like?
    The fact our economy would be diminished in size, as would our military and France would overtake us on both measures, our role in the world would be weakened and we would have a hard border with Scotland as well as Ireland plus Scexit talks which would make Brexit look like a walk in the park and a resurgence of loyalist paramilitary violence in Northern Ireland at direct rule from Dublin.

    Your Little Englander vision would be a disaster that would rip these islands apart for decades
    You seem not to have noticed the nationalists metaphorically running riot in Edinburgh for the last ten years, or the actual rioting (and worse violence) that's been happening in Belfast at regular intervals since the Bronze Age.

    It would all be very nice, I'm sure, if there were a future for the British state but it is a disintegrating confederacy of four states united by nothing but money. The game is up. It's over.
    So, what do I care, I despise the Nationalists and am quite happy to fight them, I am certainly not going to give in to Sturgeon and Salmond who still at least half of Scots also despise.

    There has been relative peace in NI since the GFA, the only reason rioting has emerged in the loyalist community is they see their community is not being listened too and NI is not close enough to GB.

    You are an ideological Little Englander, fair enough, though of course the end of the UK would lead to a recession and most likely depression across Britain as well as rip us apart for a decade or more with Nationalism on both sides of the border
    The fact that the Britain we grew up in is dead is not the fault of the English. Why we should be expected to try to resuscitate it by means of continually appeasing the Scots or, failing that, by fighting their nationalists (by stonewalling their demands for independence, or even by sending in the tanks as you have so stupidly suggested in the past) is quite beyond me.
  • Options
    MonkeysMonkeys Posts: 755
    Honestly, the Previously-NO Remainers that have gone Sindy won't vote Yes, because they'll have to face up to the fact that the arguments for Sindy are the same as the arguments for Leave - separate yourself from an economic power you share a land border with, to do business with a geographically distinct entity with a larger economy that you do less business with. When they realise this, they will forgive Brexit, but they will never stop griping about it either. They will have their cake and eat it.

  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,259
    DAILY TELEGRAPH: Quarter of virus deaths not caused by Covid

    https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1382077324053610499
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 39,226

    kinabalu said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Isn't it going to be difficult to make people use vaccine passports to have a pint when they've already got used to being able to have one without a vaccine passport, and the figures will be lower in the future/?

    Businesses already have to ask people to check in using the test & trace app, or give their details. Making the final, technical step to a unified system of ID cards would not be particularly difficult.
    PB Pub Update

    Much proper ale. Pub buzzing. Very cold. Heaters welcome. Dark by the time we left.

    Pubs cannot ever be closed again in this country. They are this country.
    Need to rein it back slightly on this pubs = liberty = England thing, Anabob.

    Sounding a bit like Lozza Fox.
    To be fair, I saw on old boy making for a pub earlier in a linen suit and wearing a panama hat. Has had me smiling all evening. There’s a story there.
    Yes I know what you mean. Although those sorts are usually better from a distance.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,028

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Leon said:

    There is no solution to the asymmetry of the UK. We can ameliorate it by making the Lords an elected Federal chamber (with two Lords from each UK county?), but there is no optimal arrangement

    This is a rare occasion when I agree with Kinabalu. Apart from that change to the Lords, the fudge we have now is probably the best we can hope for. It's a good deal for Scotland, Wales and NI, but that's the price England pays for keeping the Union.

    The Scots would be mad to reject it for something worse, but ultimately they must decide that (in about 10 years time)

    The answer is to create regions of England with their own interests.

    Manchester thinks they are ignored? Give Greater Manchester two senators, same as London. 2 for the Summer Country (including Devon and Cornwall) 2 for Yorkshire etc
    What about the towns and villages across the country? What do they get?

    I've got an idea, why don't we divide the country into blocs, we could call them constituencies, and each of those blocs elects one person to represent them - we could call that a Member of Parliament.
    I’m a fan of replacing the Lords with an elected body but it needs to be in a different basis to the Commons. Making it a federal parliament is a reasonable approach.

    Towns and counties would be represented in rough areas of similar interests of approximately similar size. Consider dividing Scotland into highlands and lowlands (I don’t know them well enough but people complain there is too much focus on Glasgow/Edinburgh)
    All of these complicated solutions can easily be dispensed with if we also dispense with the Union. The endless, insoluble discontent of the Scots and the Irish border dispute would be made instantly to disappear if they were not attached to England, as would the West Lothian Question and the arguments about fiscal transfers. What's not to like?
    The fact our economy would be diminished in size, as would our military and France would overtake us on both measures, our role in the world would be weakened and we would have a hard border with Scotland as well as Ireland plus Scexit talks which would make Brexit look like a walk in the park and a resurgence of loyalist paramilitary violence in Northern Ireland at direct rule from Dublin.

    Your Little Englander vision would be a disaster that would rip these islands apart for decades
    You seem not to have noticed the nationalists metaphorically running riot in Edinburgh for the last ten years, or the actual rioting (and worse violence) that's been happening in Belfast at regular intervals since the Bronze Age.

    It would all be very nice, I'm sure, if there were a future for the British state but it is a disintegrating confederacy of four states united by nothing but money. The game is up. It's over.
    So, what do I care, I despise the Nationalists and am quite happy to fight them, I am certainly not going to give in to Sturgeon and Salmond who still at least half of Scots also despise.

    There has been relative peace in NI since the GFA, the only reason rioting has emerged in the loyalist community is they see their community is not being listened too and NI is not close enough to GB.

    You are an ideological Little Englander, fair enough, though of course the end of the UK would lead to a recession and most likely depression across Britain as well as rip us apart for a decade or more with Nationalism on both sides of the border
    The fact that the Britain we grew up in is dead is not the fault of the English. Why we should be expected to try to resuscitate it by means of continually appeasing the Scots or, failing that, by fighting their nationalists (by stonewalling their demands for independence, or even by sending in the tanks as you have so stupidly suggested in the past) is quite beyond me.
    It is not dead despite the fact as an ideological Little Englander you have a clear agenda to kill it off as much as the Scottish and Welsh nationalists do.

    We are stronger together, weaker divided
  • Options
    Time_to_LeaveTime_to_Leave Posts: 2,547
    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Isn't it going to be difficult to make people use vaccine passports to have a pint when they've already got used to being able to have one without a vaccine passport, and the figures will be lower in the future/?

    Businesses already have to ask people to check in using the test & trace app, or give their details. Making the final, technical step to a unified system of ID cards would not be particularly difficult.
    PB Pub Update

    Much proper ale. Pub buzzing. Very cold. Heaters welcome. Dark by the time we left.

    Pubs cannot ever be closed again in this country. They are this country.
    Need to rein it back slightly on this pubs = liberty = England thing, Anabob.

    Sounding a bit like Lozza Fox.
    To be fair, I saw on old boy making for a pub earlier in a linen suit and wearing a panama hat. Has had me smiling all evening. There’s a story there.
    Yes I know what you mean. Although those sorts are usually better from a distance.
    True. He probably follows Surrey and Arsenal.
  • Options
    Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 7,981
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Leon said:

    There is no solution to the asymmetry of the UK. We can ameliorate it by making the Lords an elected Federal chamber (with two Lords from each UK county?), but there is no optimal arrangement

    This is a rare occasion when I agree with Kinabalu. Apart from that change to the Lords, the fudge we have now is probably the best we can hope for. It's a good deal for Scotland, Wales and NI, but that's the price England pays for keeping the Union.

    The Scots would be mad to reject it for something worse, but ultimately they must decide that (in about 10 years time)

    The answer is to create regions of England with their own interests.

    Manchester thinks they are ignored? Give Greater Manchester two senators, same as London. 2 for the Summer Country (including Devon and Cornwall) 2 for Yorkshire etc
    What about the towns and villages across the country? What do they get?

    I've got an idea, why don't we divide the country into blocs, we could call them constituencies, and each of those blocs elects one person to represent them - we could call that a Member of Parliament.
    I’m a fan of replacing the Lords with an elected body but it needs to be in a different basis to the Commons. Making it a federal parliament is a reasonable approach.

    Towns and counties would be represented in rough areas of similar interests of approximately similar size. Consider dividing Scotland into highlands and lowlands (I don’t know them well enough but people complain there is too much focus on Glasgow/Edinburgh)
    All of these complicated solutions can easily be dispensed with if we also dispense with the Union. The endless, insoluble discontent of the Scots and the Irish border dispute would be made instantly to disappear if they were not attached to England, as would the West Lothian Question and the arguments about fiscal transfers. What's not to like?
    I wouldn’t want to deprive our Scottish and Irish brethren the chance to benefit from a partnership with England and Wales.
    Charles, a large fraction of the population of Scotland and Northern Ireland either wants rid of us or actively detests us, and the balancing portion in the middle are only in it for the money. In what universe is this a healthy state of affairs?
    A large part also wants to stay in the UK, 55% of Scots in 2014 and in NI's case many would prefer the bomb to leaving the UK for direct rule by Dublin.

    The end of the UK would also mean France decisively overtakes us both in terms of economy and military power, Putin would also benefit from our weaker state
    “The end of the UK would also mean France decisively overtakes us both in terms of economy and military power”?????!!!!

    That matters to you in the context of this conversation? Are you 12?
    Of course it does, as a Tory the UK's maintaining and ideally increasing the UK's economic strength and power in the world should be one of our core aims.

    And yet you support a government that has done everything possible to isolate the UK and reduce its influence?

    You should be on the stage at the Comedy Store
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,292
    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Leon said:

    There is no solution to the asymmetry of the UK. We can ameliorate it by making the Lords an elected Federal chamber (with two Lords from each UK county?), but there is no optimal arrangement

    This is a rare occasion when I agree with Kinabalu. Apart from that change to the Lords, the fudge we have now is probably the best we can hope for. It's a good deal for Scotland, Wales and NI, but that's the price England pays for keeping the Union.

    The Scots would be mad to reject it for something worse, but ultimately they must decide that (in about 10 years time)

    The answer is to create regions of England with their own interests.

    Manchester thinks they are ignored? Give Greater Manchester two senators, same as London. 2 for the Summer Country (including Devon and Cornwall) 2 for Yorkshire etc
    What about the towns and villages across the country? What do they get?

    I've got an idea, why don't we divide the country into blocs, we could call them constituencies, and each of those blocs elects one person to represent them - we could call that a Member of Parliament.
    I’m a fan of replacing the Lords with an elected body but it needs to be in a different basis to the Commons. Making it a federal parliament is a reasonable approach.

    Towns and counties would be represented in rough areas of similar interests of approximately similar size. Consider dividing Scotland into highlands and lowlands (I don’t know them well enough but people complain there is too much focus on Glasgow/Edinburgh)
    All of these complicated solutions can easily be dispensed with if we also dispense with the Union. The endless, insoluble discontent of the Scots and the Irish border dispute would be made instantly to disappear if they were not attached to England, as would the West Lothian Question and the arguments about fiscal transfers. What's not to like?
    I wouldn’t want to deprive our Scottish and Irish brethren the chance to benefit from a partnership with England and Wales.
    Charles, a large fraction of the population of Scotland and Northern Ireland either wants rid of us or actively detests us, and the balancing portion in the middle are only in it for the money. In what universe is this a healthy state of affairs?
    A large part also wants to stay in the UK, 55% of Scots in 2014 and in NI's case many would prefer the bomb to leaving the UK for direct rule by Dublin.

    The end of the UK would also mean France decisively overtakes us both in terms of economy and military power, Putin would also benefit from our weaker state
    “The end of the UK would also mean France decisively overtakes us both in terms of economy and military power”?????!!!!

    That matters to you in the context of this conversation? Are you 12?
    Of course it does, as a Tory the UK's maintaining and ideally increasing the UK's economic strength and power in the world should be one of our core aims.

    No, it shouldn’t.

    The government’s role is to provide security at home and abroad, and a legal and economic framework to support increasing per capita wealth. Anything more than that and they can just F off.
    No.

    It is not just that, otherwise we may as well just be Switzerland.

    In any case you are a classical liberal if anything more than a traditional conservative anyway, a Gladstonian Liberal not a Disraelian Tory
    Even the Swiss have a Foreign Policy whose sole intention is increasing the security, power and influence of Switzerland, they just do it within an historic framework of armed neutrality. And they do it well

    No significant country in history has ever entertained a foreign policy with any different purpose. The only exceptions are colonies, satellite states, dependencies, tiny tax havens. and so on.

    Charles seems to think furthering the national interest = invading and conquering. Bizarre
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,691
    Cookie said:

    Floater said:

    Just unbelievable

    https://twitter.com/BNODesk/status/1381885457206759427

    Austrian Health Minister Rudolf Anschober resigns, saying he is overworked because of the pandemic. "I do not want to break myself," he says -

    Christ. Imagine hearing that, working on their wards.

    Hancock looks shattered but I will credit him with not being the sort to say it, because he knows he’s not right at the sharp end.
    Weirdly, Matt Hancock came up as a friend suggestion on facebook for me yesterday.
    Should be good for a lucrative government contract, no questions asked...
  • Options
    turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 15,204

    DAILY TELEGRAPH: Quarter of virus deaths not caused by Covid

    https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1382077324053610499

    Somewhat misleading headline. It refers to current deaths, but Would be easy to misinterpret the headline to think it applied to the whole pandemic, as indeed I did on seeing the headline...
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,028
    edited April 2021

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Leon said:

    There is no solution to the asymmetry of the UK. We can ameliorate it by making the Lords an elected Federal chamber (with two Lords from each UK county?), but there is no optimal arrangement

    This is a rare occasion when I agree with Kinabalu. Apart from that change to the Lords, the fudge we have now is probably the best we can hope for. It's a good deal for Scotland, Wales and NI, but that's the price England pays for keeping the Union.

    The Scots would be mad to reject it for something worse, but ultimately they must decide that (in about 10 years time)

    The answer is to create regions of England with their own interests.

    Manchester thinks they are ignored? Give Greater Manchester two senators, same as London. 2 for the Summer Country (including Devon and Cornwall) 2 for Yorkshire etc
    What about the towns and villages across the country? What do they get?

    I've got an idea, why don't we divide the country into blocs, we could call them constituencies, and each of those blocs elects one person to represent them - we could call that a Member of Parliament.
    I’m a fan of replacing the Lords with an elected body but it needs to be in a different basis to the Commons. Making it a federal parliament is a reasonable approach.

    Towns and counties would be represented in rough areas of similar interests of approximately similar size. Consider dividing Scotland into highlands and lowlands (I don’t know them well enough but people complain there is too much focus on Glasgow/Edinburgh)
    All of these complicated solutions can easily be dispensed with if we also dispense with the Union. The endless, insoluble discontent of the Scots and the Irish border dispute would be made instantly to disappear if they were not attached to England, as would the West Lothian Question and the arguments about fiscal transfers. What's not to like?
    I wouldn’t want to deprive our Scottish and Irish brethren the chance to benefit from a partnership with England and Wales.
    Charles, a large fraction of the population of Scotland and Northern Ireland either wants rid of us or actively detests us, and the balancing portion in the middle are only in it for the money. In what universe is this a healthy state of affairs?
    A large part also wants to stay in the UK, 55% of Scots in 2014 and in NI's case many would prefer the bomb to leaving the UK for direct rule by Dublin.

    The end of the UK would also mean France decisively overtakes us both in terms of economy and military power, Putin would also benefit from our weaker state
    “The end of the UK would also mean France decisively overtakes us both in terms of economy and military power”?????!!!!

    That matters to you in the context of this conversation? Are you 12?
    Of course it does, as a Tory the UK's maintaining and ideally increasing the UK's economic strength and power in the world should be one of our core aims.

    And yet you support a government that has done everything possible to isolate the UK and reduce its influence?

    You should be on the stage at the Comedy Store
    Only if you believe the UK only has global influence as part of the EU, which is of course absurd as the UK is also the only European power other than France to also be a permanent member of the UN Security Council and a member of the G7 and G20 too.

    I can understand why Ireland, which is not a permanent member of the UN Security Council and not a member of the G7 and G20 needs to be in the EU to project its economic and political power globally but the UK does not have to be
  • Options
    Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 8,905
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Leon said:

    There is no solution to the asymmetry of the UK. We can ameliorate it by making the Lords an elected Federal chamber (with two Lords from each UK county?), but there is no optimal arrangement

    This is a rare occasion when I agree with Kinabalu. Apart from that change to the Lords, the fudge we have now is probably the best we can hope for. It's a good deal for Scotland, Wales and NI, but that's the price England pays for keeping the Union.

    The Scots would be mad to reject it for something worse, but ultimately they must decide that (in about 10 years time)

    The answer is to create regions of England with their own interests.

    Manchester thinks they are ignored? Give Greater Manchester two senators, same as London. 2 for the Summer Country (including Devon and Cornwall) 2 for Yorkshire etc
    What about the towns and villages across the country? What do they get?

    I've got an idea, why don't we divide the country into blocs, we could call them constituencies, and each of those blocs elects one person to represent them - we could call that a Member of Parliament.
    I’m a fan of replacing the Lords with an elected body but it needs to be in a different basis to the Commons. Making it a federal parliament is a reasonable approach.

    Towns and counties would be represented in rough areas of similar interests of approximately similar size. Consider dividing Scotland into highlands and lowlands (I don’t know them well enough but people complain there is too much focus on Glasgow/Edinburgh)
    All of these complicated solutions can easily be dispensed with if we also dispense with the Union. The endless, insoluble discontent of the Scots and the Irish border dispute would be made instantly to disappear if they were not attached to England, as would the West Lothian Question and the arguments about fiscal transfers. What's not to like?
    The fact our economy would be diminished in size, as would our military and France would overtake us on both measures, our role in the world would be weakened and we would have a hard border with Scotland as well as Ireland plus Scexit talks which would make Brexit look like a walk in the park and a resurgence of loyalist paramilitary violence in Northern Ireland at direct rule from Dublin.

    Your Little Englander vision would be a disaster that would rip these islands apart for decades
    You seem not to have noticed the nationalists metaphorically running riot in Edinburgh for the last ten years, or the actual rioting (and worse violence) that's been happening in Belfast at regular intervals since the Bronze Age.

    It would all be very nice, I'm sure, if there were a future for the British state but it is a disintegrating confederacy of four states united by nothing but money. The game is up. It's over.
    So, what do I care, I despise the Nationalists and am quite happy to fight them, I am certainly not going to give in to Sturgeon and Salmond who still at least half of Scots also despise.

    There has been relative peace in NI since the GFA, the only reason rioting has emerged in the loyalist community is they see their community is not being listened too and NI is not close enough to GB.

    You are an ideological Little Englander, fair enough, though of course the end of the UK would lead to a recession and most likely depression across Britain as well as rip us apart for a decade or more with Nationalism on both sides of the border
    The fact that the Britain we grew up in is dead is not the fault of the English. Why we should be expected to try to resuscitate it by means of continually appeasing the Scots or, failing that, by fighting their nationalists (by stonewalling their demands for independence, or even by sending in the tanks as you have so stupidly suggested in the past) is quite beyond me.
    It is not dead despite the fact as an ideological Little Englander you have a clear agenda to kill it off as much as the Scottish and Welsh nationalists do.

    We are stronger together, weaker divided
    The Scottish nationalists are in complete command of the field, and the Welsh ones are following, because they have captured the Labour Party. In case you hadn't noticed, Welsh Labour has started to actively field and promote independence supporters for elected office.

    There is exactly one thing holding the British state together now, and that's the transfer payments. If the average Scottish or Welsh voter thought she would be better off out than in by £1 per year then you wouldn't see them for dust.

    Once again, none of this is the fault of the English. Everyone else started giving up on Britain. Not us.
  • Options
    AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 20,010
    kinabalu said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Isn't it going to be difficult to make people use vaccine passports to have a pint when they've already got used to being able to have one without a vaccine passport, and the figures will be lower in the future/?

    Businesses already have to ask people to check in using the test & trace app, or give their details. Making the final, technical step to a unified system of ID cards would not be particularly difficult.
    PB Pub Update

    Much proper ale. Pub buzzing. Very cold. Heaters welcome. Dark by the time we left.

    Pubs cannot ever be closed again in this country. They are this country.
    Need to rein it back slightly on this pubs = liberty = England thing, Anabob.

    Sounding a bit like Lozza Fox.
    Odd and unfair comment. I’m pro vaccination and (was) pro lockdown. But we need to move on. That’s all I’m saying.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,292

    Leon said:

    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Leon said:

    There is no solution to the asymmetry of the UK. We can ameliorate it by making the Lords an elected Federal chamber (with two Lords from each UK county?), but there is no optimal arrangement

    This is a rare occasion when I agree with Kinabalu. Apart from that change to the Lords, the fudge we have now is probably the best we can hope for. It's a good deal for Scotland, Wales and NI, but that's the price England pays for keeping the Union.

    The Scots would be mad to reject it for something worse, but ultimately they must decide that (in about 10 years time)

    The answer is to create regions of England with their own interests.

    Manchester thinks they are ignored? Give Greater Manchester two senators, same as London. 2 for the Summer Country (including Devon and Cornwall) 2 for Yorkshire etc
    What about the towns and villages across the country? What do they get?

    I've got an idea, why don't we divide the country into blocs, we could call them constituencies, and each of those blocs elects one person to represent them - we could call that a Member of Parliament.
    I’m a fan of replacing the Lords with an elected body but it needs to be in a different basis to the Commons. Making it a federal parliament is a reasonable approach.

    Towns and counties would be represented in rough areas of similar interests of approximately similar size. Consider dividing Scotland into highlands and lowlands (I don’t know them well enough but people complain there is too much focus on Glasgow/Edinburgh)
    All of these complicated solutions can easily be dispensed with if we also dispense with the Union. The endless, insoluble discontent of the Scots and the Irish border dispute would be made instantly to disappear if they were not attached to England, as would the West Lothian Question and the arguments about fiscal transfers. What's not to like?
    I wouldn’t want to deprive our Scottish and Irish brethren the chance to benefit from a partnership with England and Wales.
    Charles, a large fraction of the population of Scotland and Northern Ireland either wants rid of us or actively detests us, and the balancing portion in the middle are only in it for the money. In what universe is this a healthy state of affairs?
    A large part also wants to stay in the UK, 55% of Scots in 2014 and in NI's case many would prefer the bomb to leaving the UK for direct rule by Dublin.

    The end of the UK would also mean France decisively overtakes us both in terms of economy and military power, Putin would also benefit from our weaker state
    “The end of the UK would also mean France decisively overtakes us both in terms of economy and military power”?????!!!!

    That matters to you in the context of this conversation? Are you 12?
    Of course it does, as a Tory the UK's maintaining and ideally increasing the UK's economic strength and power in the world should be one of our core aims.

    No, it shouldn’t.

    The government’s role is to provide security at home and abroad, and a legal and economic framework to support increasing per capita wealth. Anything more than that and they can just F off.
    What??

    I'm with HYUFD here. The aim of any national government should be the increasing prosperity and liberty of its citizens, and furthering the power, security and influence of the nation (because a more secure and powerful nation is more likely to deliver that prosperity and freedom).

    I do not understand anyone who does not understand this
    Yes and no. Increasing prosperity? Yes. Ensuring the defence of the realm? Of course. Furthering power and influence overseas? Not necessarily. Some of us think the country has done its bit and would quite like to metaphorically retire to the shire and smoke our pipes. We’ll get involved for the big stuff, and pull out weight, but mostly the world is welcome to get on and do its own thing if it leaves us alone.
    That is just another way of furthering our security. Armed detachment. Very arguable

    I'm not saying we should aim to recolonise Guyana, I am saying I expect any UK government to do its best to keep us safe and maximise our global leverage.

    eg A powerful, secure UK, with good strong allies, is more likely to resist - and to be able to resist - the encroaching power of Putin and Xi. As a major trading economy with a world city for a capital we cannot withdraw from the world to smoke a pipe in the Shire. Nor do we have to join in mad military adventures, however
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,685

    DAILY TELEGRAPH: Quarter of virus deaths not caused by Covid

    https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1382077324053610499

    Interesting...
  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,579
    MattW said:

    Cookie said:

    A postscript to the squirrel story earlier to turn something we could all agree was a sad but possibly unavoidable situation into something half of us can get good and cross about: apparently the requirement to euthanise the squirrels was brought in by the EU in 2019, to the great disappointment of the RSPCA. Apparently.

    That is bunk - sorry.

    Grey Squirrels are subject to Section 14 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act as originally passed in *1981* as animals for which it is an offence to release into the wild.

    https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1981/69/section/14/enacted

    They are listed in Schedule 9.

    If rescue charities have been releasing them - if they have - is a scandal.

    https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1981/69/schedule/9/enacted

    It's as stupid as the RSPCA releasing foxes, though that is I think legal.

    If I am wrong anyone, please do correct me.
    OK - nuance.

    It seems that what the EU did was to prevent the exception - Licences for Release.

    Though why anybody would want to release a grey squirrel, and spend money on doing so, baffles me.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,691
    DavidL said:

    Bayern out on away goals. If City don't win the CL this season you begin to think that they never will.

    It was a good game. Both sides missed sitters. PSG will beat Man City.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,344

    Leon said:

    Charles said:



    The government’s role is to provide security at home and abroad, and a legal and economic framework to support increasing per capita wealth. Anything more than that and they can just F off.

    What??

    I'm with HYUFD here. The aim of any national government should be the increasing prosperity and liberty of its citizens, and furthering the power, security and influence of the nation (because a more secure and powerful nation is more likely to deliver that prosperity and freedom).

    I do not understand anyone who does not understand this
    Yes and no. Increasing prosperity? Yes. Ensuring the defence of the realm? Of course. Furthering power and influence overseas? Not necessarily. Some of us think the country has done its bit and would quite like to metaphorically retire to the shire and smoke our pipes. We’ll get involved for the big stuff, and pull out weight, but mostly the world is welcome to get on and do its own thing if it leaves us alone.
    Global power and influence isn't a zero-sum game - leaving aside EU questions, a significant part of Government is about arranging healthy cooperation with other countries. Sure, there will be countries whos governments are so vile that we want little contact, and others that behave weirdly - as we do at times ourselves. But the default setting should be working together for mutual advantage, rather than trying to get more powerful than someone else.
  • Options
    Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 7,981
    MattW said:



    [Animal stuff snipped]

    If I am wrong anyone, please do correct me.

    Well, I think your sentence structure in your final sentence was a little clumsy. I am not sure if that counts as "wrong" ;)
  • Options
    rpjsrpjs Posts: 3,787
    edited April 2021
    HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Entirely off-topic, but an interesting piece in The Guardian about Norniron. For me the key paragraph is here:

    "Working-class loyalists feel left behind and ignored. I am not here to debate the merits of that, or the so-called siege mentality of loyalism. However there is a deep-rooted anger there that has been both been ignored by mainstream unionism and used time and again by the DUP and the Ulster Unionist party for political machinations when it suited them. The fear of a united Ireland and what that will mean for unionism is amped up at election time, and tensions are stoked by both political unionism and “stakeholders” within loyalism, such as the Loyalist Communities Council. And for what? What has fundamentally changed, or got better for working-class loyalist communities in Northern Ireland? They deserve better than being lied to and led up the hill, then abandoned when violence erupts"

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/apr/13/belfast-violence-young-working-class-people-failed

    I have to ask, what is it that these working-class loyalists think there is any point in being a loyalist? They have been lied to and led up the hill not only by their elected politicians but by the British government. Rather than doing something about these areas of deep deprivation, the unionist politicians and the UK government have abandoned them.

    "The fear of a united Ireland" in case what - they end up deprived and ignored? In deprived working class communities in England, people decided to throw the dice and vote for Brexit. In NI they didn't. Will be interesting to see how the fear of reunification plays out in these communities - even if they only stay at home in a border vote that could be enough to swing a close vote.

    I think that Working Class Loyalists would like Devo-Max, so nominally British but effectively under Home Rule. Of course that is rather dependent on there remaining a Unionist majority.

    Ulster Loyalists rather remind me of the Afrikaaners in the last days of apartheid. Not just the prospect of losing power, but also their pre-enlightenment Calvinist ideology.
    A border poll will only happen if Ireland presses for it.

    The prospect of renewed Loyalist terror will push that into the distant future.

    The men in balaclavas have a veto both ways, and I can't see that changing for a long time, there won't be a frontier within Ireland, equally, there won't be a United Ireland.
    However, if Scotland falls off then there will be precisely zero appetite in England for hanging on to Northern Ireland.

    Under such circumstances, the prospect of Northern Ireland as an independent state or, failing that, as a crown dependency should not be discounted.
    As a diehard Tory Unionist we could certainly hold onto Antrim and much of Derry and Down at least, even if we hand over Catholic and Nationalist majority Fermanagh, Armagh and Tyrone to the Republic.

    Lol, don't you know that the only reason Fermanagh and Tyrone were included in NI in the first place was that even the headbangers of the time realized without them it'd be too small a statelet to be viable?
  • Options
    rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 58,259
    Andy_JS said:

    DAILY TELEGRAPH: Quarter of virus deaths not caused by Covid

    https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1382077324053610499

    Interesting...
    And:

    "Oxford University has calculated that the number of people in hospital with an active coronavirus infection is likely to be around half the current published daily figure."
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,292

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Leon said:

    There is no solution to the asymmetry of the UK. We can ameliorate it by making the Lords an elected Federal chamber (with two Lords from each UK county?), but there is no optimal arrangement

    This is a rare occasion when I agree with Kinabalu. Apart from that change to the Lords, the fudge we have now is probably the best we can hope for. It's a good deal for Scotland, Wales and NI, but that's the price England pays for keeping the Union.

    The Scots would be mad to reject it for something worse, but ultimately they must decide that (in about 10 years time)

    The answer is to create regions of England with their own interests.

    Manchester thinks they are ignored? Give Greater Manchester two senators, same as London. 2 for the Summer Country (including Devon and Cornwall) 2 for Yorkshire etc
    What about the towns and villages across the country? What do they get?

    I've got an idea, why don't we divide the country into blocs, we could call them constituencies, and each of those blocs elects one person to represent them - we could call that a Member of Parliament.
    I’m a fan of replacing the Lords with an elected body but it needs to be in a different basis to the Commons. Making it a federal parliament is a reasonable approach.

    Towns and counties would be represented in rough areas of similar interests of approximately similar size. Consider dividing Scotland into highlands and lowlands (I don’t know them well enough but people complain there is too much focus on Glasgow/Edinburgh)
    All of these complicated solutions can easily be dispensed with if we also dispense with the Union. The endless, insoluble discontent of the Scots and the Irish border dispute would be made instantly to disappear if they were not attached to England, as would the West Lothian Question and the arguments about fiscal transfers. What's not to like?
    The fact our economy would be diminished in size, as would our military and France would overtake us on both measures, our role in the world would be weakened and we would have a hard border with Scotland as well as Ireland plus Scexit talks which would make Brexit look like a walk in the park and a resurgence of loyalist paramilitary violence in Northern Ireland at direct rule from Dublin.

    Your Little Englander vision would be a disaster that would rip these islands apart for decades
    You seem not to have noticed the nationalists metaphorically running riot in Edinburgh for the last ten years, or the actual rioting (and worse violence) that's been happening in Belfast at regular intervals since the Bronze Age.

    It would all be very nice, I'm sure, if there were a future for the British state but it is a disintegrating confederacy of four states united by nothing but money. The game is up. It's over.
    So, what do I care, I despise the Nationalists and am quite happy to fight them, I am certainly not going to give in to Sturgeon and Salmond who still at least half of Scots also despise.

    There has been relative peace in NI since the GFA, the only reason rioting has emerged in the loyalist community is they see their community is not being listened too and NI is not close enough to GB.

    You are an ideological Little Englander, fair enough, though of course the end of the UK would lead to a recession and most likely depression across Britain as well as rip us apart for a decade or more with Nationalism on both sides of the border
    The fact that the Britain we grew up in is dead is not the fault of the English. Why we should be expected to try to resuscitate it by means of continually appeasing the Scots or, failing that, by fighting their nationalists (by stonewalling their demands for independence, or even by sending in the tanks as you have so stupidly suggested in the past) is quite beyond me.
    It is not dead despite the fact as an ideological Little Englander you have a clear agenda to kill it off as much as the Scottish and Welsh nationalists do.

    We are stronger together, weaker divided
    The Scottish nationalists are in complete command of the field, and the Welsh ones are following, because they have captured the Labour Party. In case you hadn't noticed, Welsh Labour has started to actively field and promote independence supporters for elected office.

    There is exactly one thing holding the British state together now, and that's the transfer payments. If the average Scottish or Welsh voter thought she would be better off out than in by £1 per year then you wouldn't see them for dust.

    Once again, none of this is the fault of the English. Everyone else started giving up on Britain. Not us.
    You are ludicrously defeatist. The YES vote in Scotland is fragile. Even now the Nats cannot command a permanent lead, with Sturgeon on telly every day doing her Mother of the Nation bit, all paid for by England - ideal circs for them

    As for Wales the politicians see a benefit in playing the indy card (because they see the money going to Scotland) but support for Welsh indy is still low, and it is quite unlikely to happen in anyone's lifetime, on here

    Unionists need to keep calm and carry on. This too shall pass
  • Options
    turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 15,204
    Andy_JS said:

    DAILY TELEGRAPH: Quarter of virus deaths not caused by Covid

    https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1382077324053610499

    Interesting...
    See my post. It’s about current deaths, and is not that surprising. Lots of the elderly in hospital have been there a long time, and have Covid, may die if something else.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,028
    rpjs said:

    HYUFD said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Entirely off-topic, but an interesting piece in The Guardian about Norniron. For me the key paragraph is here:

    "Working-class loyalists feel left behind and ignored. I am not here to debate the merits of that, or the so-called siege mentality of loyalism. However there is a deep-rooted anger there that has been both been ignored by mainstream unionism and used time and again by the DUP and the Ulster Unionist party for political machinations when it suited them. The fear of a united Ireland and what that will mean for unionism is amped up at election time, and tensions are stoked by both political unionism and “stakeholders” within loyalism, such as the Loyalist Communities Council. And for what? What has fundamentally changed, or got better for working-class loyalist communities in Northern Ireland? They deserve better than being lied to and led up the hill, then abandoned when violence erupts"

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/apr/13/belfast-violence-young-working-class-people-failed

    I have to ask, what is it that these working-class loyalists think there is any point in being a loyalist? They have been lied to and led up the hill not only by their elected politicians but by the British government. Rather than doing something about these areas of deep deprivation, the unionist politicians and the UK government have abandoned them.

    "The fear of a united Ireland" in case what - they end up deprived and ignored? In deprived working class communities in England, people decided to throw the dice and vote for Brexit. In NI they didn't. Will be interesting to see how the fear of reunification plays out in these communities - even if they only stay at home in a border vote that could be enough to swing a close vote.

    I think that Working Class Loyalists would like Devo-Max, so nominally British but effectively under Home Rule. Of course that is rather dependent on there remaining a Unionist majority.

    Ulster Loyalists rather remind me of the Afrikaaners in the last days of apartheid. Not just the prospect of losing power, but also their pre-enlightenment Calvinist ideology.
    A border poll will only happen if Ireland presses for it.

    The prospect of renewed Loyalist terror will push that into the distant future.

    The men in balaclavas have a veto both ways, and I can't see that changing for a long time, there won't be a frontier within Ireland, equally, there won't be a United Ireland.
    However, if Scotland falls off then there will be precisely zero appetite in England for hanging on to Northern Ireland.

    Under such circumstances, the prospect of Northern Ireland as an independent state or, failing that, as a crown dependency should not be discounted.
    As a diehard Tory Unionist we could certainly hold onto Antrim and much of Derry and Down at least, even if we hand over Catholic and Nationalist majority Fermanagh, Armagh and Tyrone to the Republic.

    Lol, don't you know that the only reason Fermanagh and Tyrone were included in NI in the first place was that even the headbangers of the time realized without them it'd be too small a statelet to be viable?
    Which was wrong after all it is not an independent state anyway but part of the UK
  • Options
    MrEdMrEd Posts: 5,578
    On topic, much as I would have voted for Trump, I don't like this tactic. It's bullying and there is no need to do it. If your person is good enough, people will contribute. They shouldn't feel pressurised to do so.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Leon said:

    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Leon said:

    There is no solution to the asymmetry of the UK. We can ameliorate it by making the Lords an elected Federal chamber (with two Lords from each UK county?), but there is no optimal arrangement

    This is a rare occasion when I agree with Kinabalu. Apart from that change to the Lords, the fudge we have now is probably the best we can hope for. It's a good deal for Scotland, Wales and NI, but that's the price England pays for keeping the Union.

    The Scots would be mad to reject it for something worse, but ultimately they must decide that (in about 10 years time)

    The answer is to create regions of England with their own interests.

    Manchester thinks they are ignored? Give Greater Manchester two senators, same as London. 2 for the Summer Country (including Devon and Cornwall) 2 for Yorkshire etc
    What about the towns and villages across the country? What do they get?

    I've got an idea, why don't we divide the country into blocs, we could call them constituencies, and each of those blocs elects one person to represent them - we could call that a Member of Parliament.
    I’m a fan of replacing the Lords with an elected body but it needs to be in a different basis to the Commons. Making it a federal parliament is a reasonable approach.

    Towns and counties would be represented in rough areas of similar interests of approximately similar size. Consider dividing Scotland into highlands and lowlands (I don’t know them well enough but people complain there is too much focus on Glasgow/Edinburgh)
    All of these complicated solutions can easily be dispensed with if we also dispense with the Union. The endless, insoluble discontent of the Scots and the Irish border dispute would be made instantly to disappear if they were not attached to England, as would the West Lothian Question and the arguments about fiscal transfers. What's not to like?
    I wouldn’t want to deprive our Scottish and Irish brethren the chance to benefit from a partnership with England and Wales.
    Charles, a large fraction of the population of Scotland and Northern Ireland either wants rid of us or actively detests us, and the balancing portion in the middle are only in it for the money. In what universe is this a healthy state of affairs?
    A large part also wants to stay in the UK, 55% of Scots in 2014 and in NI's case many would prefer the bomb to leaving the UK for direct rule by Dublin.

    The end of the UK would also mean France decisively overtakes us both in terms of economy and military power, Putin would also benefit from our weaker state
    “The end of the UK would also mean France decisively overtakes us both in terms of economy and military power”?????!!!!

    That matters to you in the context of this conversation? Are you 12?
    Of course it does, as a Tory the UK's maintaining and ideally increasing the UK's economic strength and power in the world should be one of our core aims.

    No, it shouldn’t.

    The government’s role is to provide security at home and abroad, and a legal and economic framework to support increasing per capita wealth. Anything more than that and they can just F off.
    What??

    I'm with HYUFD here. The aim of any national government should be the increasing prosperity and liberty of its citizens, and furthering the power, security and influence of the nation (because a more secure and powerful nation is more likely to deliver that prosperity and freedom).

    I do not understand anyone who does not understand this
    @HYUFD sees driving tanks into Catalonia as a good increase in the UK’s power
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,691

    DAILY TELEGRAPH: Quarter of virus deaths not caused by Covid

    https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1382077324053610499

    Somewhat misleading headline. It refers to current deaths, but Would be easy to misinterpret the headline to think it applied to the whole pandemic, as indeed I did on seeing the headline...
    I think it refers to the way Death Certificates are filled in. So for example if a death occurred from acute renal failure brought on by covid pneumonitis, then the covid would be recorded as an underlying cause rather than the primary cause. Those are the 23% it refers to.

    It is a meaningless distinction if the covid caused the acute renal failure.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,028
    edited April 2021

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Leon said:

    There is no solution to the asymmetry of the UK. We can ameliorate it by making the Lords an elected Federal chamber (with two Lords from each UK county?), but there is no optimal arrangement

    This is a rare occasion when I agree with Kinabalu. Apart from that change to the Lords, the fudge we have now is probably the best we can hope for. It's a good deal for Scotland, Wales and NI, but that's the price England pays for keeping the Union.

    The Scots would be mad to reject it for something worse, but ultimately they must decide that (in about 10 years time)

    The answer is to create regions of England with their own interests.

    Manchester thinks they are ignored? Give Greater Manchester two senators, same as London. 2 for the Summer Country (including Devon and Cornwall) 2 for Yorkshire etc
    What about the towns and villages across the country? What do they get?

    I've got an idea, why don't we divide the country into blocs, we could call them constituencies, and each of those blocs elects one person to represent them - we could call that a Member of Parliament.
    I’m a fan of replacing the Lords with an elected body but it needs to be in a different basis to the Commons. Making it a federal parliament is a reasonable approach.

    Towns and counties would be represented in rough areas of similar interests of approximately similar size. Consider dividing Scotland into highlands and lowlands (I don’t know them well enough but people complain there is too much focus on Glasgow/Edinburgh)
    All of these complicated solutions can easily be dispensed with if we also dispense with the Union. The endless, insoluble discontent of the Scots and the Irish border dispute would be made instantly to disappear if they were not attached to England, as would the West Lothian Question and the arguments about fiscal transfers. What's not to like?
    The fact our economy would be diminished in size, as would our military and France would overtake us on both measures, our role in the world would be weakened and we would have a hard border with Scotland as well as Ireland plus Scexit talks which would make Brexit look like a walk in the park and a resurgence of loyalist paramilitary violence in Northern Ireland at direct rule from Dublin.

    Your Little Englander vision would be a disaster that would rip these islands apart for decades
    You seem not to have noticed the nationalists metaphorically running riot in Edinburgh for the last ten years, or the actual rioting (and worse violence) that's been happening in Belfast at regular intervals since the Bronze Age.

    It would all be very nice, I'm sure, if there were a future for the British state but it is a disintegrating confederacy of four states united by nothing but money. The game is up. It's over.
    So, what do I care, I despise the Nationalists and am quite happy to fight them, I am certainly not going to give in to Sturgeon and Salmond who still at least half of Scots also despise.

    There has been relative peace in NI since the GFA, the only reason rioting has emerged in the loyalist community is they see their community is not being listened too and NI is not close enough to GB.

    You are an ideological Little Englander, fair enough, though of course the end of the UK would lead to a recession and most likely depression across Britain as well as rip us apart for a decade or more with Nationalism on both sides of the border
    The fact that the Britain we grew up in is dead is not the fault of the English. Why we should be expected to try to resuscitate it by means of continually appeasing the Scots or, failing that, by fighting their nationalists (by stonewalling their demands for independence, or even by sending in the tanks as you have so stupidly suggested in the past) is quite beyond me.
    It is not dead despite the fact as an ideological Little Englander you have a clear agenda to kill it off as much as the Scottish and Welsh nationalists do.

    We are stronger together, weaker divided
    The Scottish nationalists are in complete command of the field, and the Welsh ones are following, because they have captured the Labour Party. In case you hadn't noticed, Welsh Labour has started to actively field and promote independence supporters for elected office.

    There is exactly one thing holding the British state together now, and that's the transfer payments. If the average Scottish or Welsh voter thought she would be better off out than in by £1 per year then you wouldn't see them for dust.

    Once again, none of this is the fault of the English. Everyone else started giving up on Britain. Not us.
    Rubbish, at least half of Scots are still Unionists, 2/3 of the Welsh at least are still Unionists.

    Even Drakeford has made clear he opposes independence even if he backs a Federal UK.

    Little Englanders like you have already given up on Britain, not the 50% of Unionists Scots or the 65%+ of Unionist Welsh
  • Options
    turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 15,204
    edited April 2021
    Foxy said:

    DAILY TELEGRAPH: Quarter of virus deaths not caused by Covid

    https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1382077324053610499

    Somewhat misleading headline. It refers to current deaths, but Would be easy to misinterpret the headline to think it applied to the whole pandemic, as indeed I did on seeing the headline...
    I think it refers to the way Death Certificates are filled in. So for example if a death occurred from acute renal failure brought on by covid pneumonitis, then the covid would be recorded as an underlying cause rather than the primary cause. Those are the 23% it refers to.

    It is a meaningless distinction if the covid caused the acute renal failure.
    Which would point once again to scientifically or medically illiterate reporting by the press once again...
    (Edited for clarity)
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,344
    edited April 2021
    MattW said:

    Cookie said:

    A postscript to the squirrel story earlier to turn something we could all agree was a sad but possibly unavoidable situation into something half of us can get good and cross about: apparently the requirement to euthanise the squirrels was brought in by the EU in 2019, to the great disappointment of the RSPCA. Apparently.

    That is bunk - sorry.

    Grey Squirrels are subject to Section 14 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act as originally passed in *1981* as animals for which it is an offence to release into the wild.

    https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1981/69/section/14/enacted

    They are listed in Schedule 9.

    If rescue charities have been releasing them - if they have - is a scandal.

    https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1981/69/schedule/9/enacted

    It's as stupid as the RSPCA releasing foxes, though that is I think legal.

    If I am wrong anyone, please do correct me.
    The legislation was introduced, I believe, in an attempt to save the red squirrels, which were seen as a more national breed. They're now extremely rare and it makes sense to be decent to all squirrels, which in my view give much more pleasure to watch than almost any other natural species.

    It's not a view shared by everyone, I admit. I remember asking in a pet shop if they have some bird-proof squirrel-feeders rather than the other way round, and getting a very quizzical look. :)
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Leon said:

    There is no solution to the asymmetry of the UK. We can ameliorate it by making the Lords an elected Federal chamber (with two Lords from each UK county?), but there is no optimal arrangement

    This is a rare occasion when I agree with Kinabalu. Apart from that change to the Lords, the fudge we have now is probably the best we can hope for. It's a good deal for Scotland, Wales and NI, but that's the price England pays for keeping the Union.

    The Scots would be mad to reject it for something worse, but ultimately they must decide that (in about 10 years time)

    The answer is to create regions of England with their own interests.

    Manchester thinks they are ignored? Give Greater Manchester two senators, same as London. 2 for the Summer Country (including Devon and Cornwall) 2 for Yorkshire etc
    What about the towns and villages across the country? What do they get?

    I've got an idea, why don't we divide the country into blocs, we could call them constituencies, and each of those blocs elects one person to represent them - we could call that a Member of Parliament.
    I’m a fan of replacing the Lords with an elected body but it needs to be in a different basis to the Commons. Making it a federal parliament is a reasonable approach.

    Towns and counties would be represented in rough areas of similar interests of approximately similar size. Consider dividing Scotland into highlands and lowlands (I don’t know them well enough but people complain there is too much focus on Glasgow/Edinburgh)
    All of these complicated solutions can easily be dispensed with if we also dispense with the Union. The endless, insoluble discontent of the Scots and the Irish border dispute would be made instantly to disappear if they were not attached to England, as would the West Lothian Question and the arguments about fiscal transfers. What's not to like?
    I wouldn’t want to deprive our Scottish and Irish brethren the chance to benefit from a partnership with England and Wales.
    Charles, a large fraction of the population of Scotland and Northern Ireland either wants rid of us or actively detests us, and the balancing portion in the middle are only in it for the money. In what universe is this a healthy state of affairs?
    A large part also wants to stay in the UK, 55% of Scots in 2014 and in NI's case many would prefer the bomb to leaving the UK for direct rule by Dublin.

    The end of the UK would also mean France decisively overtakes us both in terms of economy and military power, Putin would also benefit from our weaker state
    “The end of the UK would also mean France decisively overtakes us both in terms of economy and military power”?????!!!!

    That matters to you in the context of this conversation? Are you 12?
    Of course it does, as a Tory the UK's maintaining and ideally increasing the UK's economic strength and power in the world should be one of our core aims.

    No, it shouldn’t.

    The government’s role is to provide security at home and abroad, and a legal and economic framework to support increasing per capita wealth. Anything more than that and they can just F off.
    No.

    It is not just that, otherwise we may as well just be Switzerland.

    In any case you are a classical liberal if anything more than a traditional conservative anyway, a Gladstonian Liberal not a Disraelian Tory
    We’ve been Tories since the days of Queen Anne. So well before Disraeli.
  • Options
    AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 20,010

    DAILY TELEGRAPH: Quarter of virus deaths not caused by Covid

    https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1382077324053610499

    Somewhat misleading headline. It refers to current deaths, but Would be easy to misinterpret the headline to think it applied to the whole pandemic, as indeed I did on seeing the headline...
    It’s inevitable now that a significant proportion of the reported numbers are going to be “with the virus” rather than “from the virus” , because the absolute numbers are very small. It’s not clear what we can do about it, as that’s always been the measure and to change it now means the data is not comparable.

    But undoubtedly the effect is magnified when absolute numbers are very low.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,028
    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Leon said:

    There is no solution to the asymmetry of the UK. We can ameliorate it by making the Lords an elected Federal chamber (with two Lords from each UK county?), but there is no optimal arrangement

    This is a rare occasion when I agree with Kinabalu. Apart from that change to the Lords, the fudge we have now is probably the best we can hope for. It's a good deal for Scotland, Wales and NI, but that's the price England pays for keeping the Union.

    The Scots would be mad to reject it for something worse, but ultimately they must decide that (in about 10 years time)

    The answer is to create regions of England with their own interests.

    Manchester thinks they are ignored? Give Greater Manchester two senators, same as London. 2 for the Summer Country (including Devon and Cornwall) 2 for Yorkshire etc
    What about the towns and villages across the country? What do they get?

    I've got an idea, why don't we divide the country into blocs, we could call them constituencies, and each of those blocs elects one person to represent them - we could call that a Member of Parliament.
    I’m a fan of replacing the Lords with an elected body but it needs to be in a different basis to the Commons. Making it a federal parliament is a reasonable approach.

    Towns and counties would be represented in rough areas of similar interests of approximately similar size. Consider dividing Scotland into highlands and lowlands (I don’t know them well enough but people complain there is too much focus on Glasgow/Edinburgh)
    All of these complicated solutions can easily be dispensed with if we also dispense with the Union. The endless, insoluble discontent of the Scots and the Irish border dispute would be made instantly to disappear if they were not attached to England, as would the West Lothian Question and the arguments about fiscal transfers. What's not to like?
    I wouldn’t want to deprive our Scottish and Irish brethren the chance to benefit from a partnership with England and Wales.
    Charles, a large fraction of the population of Scotland and Northern Ireland either wants rid of us or actively detests us, and the balancing portion in the middle are only in it for the money. In what universe is this a healthy state of affairs?
    A large part also wants to stay in the UK, 55% of Scots in 2014 and in NI's case many would prefer the bomb to leaving the UK for direct rule by Dublin.

    The end of the UK would also mean France decisively overtakes us both in terms of economy and military power, Putin would also benefit from our weaker state
    “The end of the UK would also mean France decisively overtakes us both in terms of economy and military power”?????!!!!

    That matters to you in the context of this conversation? Are you 12?
    Of course it does, as a Tory the UK's maintaining and ideally increasing the UK's economic strength and power in the world should be one of our core aims.

    No, it shouldn’t.

    The government’s role is to provide security at home and abroad, and a legal and economic framework to support increasing per capita wealth. Anything more than that and they can just F off.
    No.

    It is not just that, otherwise we may as well just be Switzerland.

    In any case you are a classical liberal if anything more than a traditional conservative anyway, a Gladstonian Liberal not a Disraelian Tory
    We’ve been Tories since the days of Queen Anne. So well before Disraeli.
    I said you are, not your great great grandfather
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Leon said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Leon said:

    There is no solution to the asymmetry of the UK. We can ameliorate it by making the Lords an elected Federal chamber (with two Lords from each UK county?), but there is no optimal arrangement

    This is a rare occasion when I agree with Kinabalu. Apart from that change to the Lords, the fudge we have now is probably the best we can hope for. It's a good deal for Scotland, Wales and NI, but that's the price England pays for keeping the Union.

    The Scots would be mad to reject it for something worse, but ultimately they must decide that (in about 10 years time)

    The answer is to create regions of England with their own interests.

    Manchester thinks they are ignored? Give Greater Manchester two senators, same as London. 2 for the Summer Country (including Devon and Cornwall) 2 for Yorkshire etc
    What about the towns and villages across the country? What do they get?

    I've got an idea, why don't we divide the country into blocs, we could call them constituencies, and each of those blocs elects one person to represent them - we could call that a Member of Parliament.
    I’m a fan of replacing the Lords with an elected body but it needs to be in a different basis to the Commons. Making it a federal parliament is a reasonable approach.

    Towns and counties would be represented in rough areas of similar interests of approximately similar size. Consider dividing Scotland into highlands and lowlands (I don’t know them well enough but people complain there is too much focus on Glasgow/Edinburgh)
    All of these complicated solutions can easily be dispensed with if we also dispense with the Union. The endless, insoluble discontent of the Scots and the Irish border dispute would be made instantly to disappear if they were not attached to England, as would the West Lothian Question and the arguments about fiscal transfers. What's not to like?
    I wouldn’t want to deprive our Scottish and Irish brethren the chance to benefit from a partnership with England and Wales.
    Charles, a large fraction of the population of Scotland and Northern Ireland either wants rid of us or actively detests us, and the balancing portion in the middle are only in it for the money. In what universe is this a healthy state of affairs?
    A large part also wants to stay in the UK, 55% of Scots in 2014 and in NI's case many would prefer the bomb to leaving the UK for direct rule by Dublin.

    The end of the UK would also mean France decisively overtakes us both in terms of economy and military power, Putin would also benefit from our weaker state
    “The end of the UK would also mean France decisively overtakes us both in terms of economy and military power”?????!!!!

    That matters to you in the context of this conversation? Are you 12?
    Of course it does, as a Tory the UK's maintaining and ideally increasing the UK's economic strength and power in the world should be one of our core aims.

    No, it shouldn’t.

    The government’s role is to provide security at home and abroad, and a legal and economic framework to support increasing per capita wealth. Anything more than that and they can just F off.
    No.

    It is not just that, otherwise we may as well just be Switzerland.

    In any case you are a classical liberal if anything more than a traditional conservative anyway, a Gladstonian Liberal not a Disraelian Tory
    Even the Swiss have a Foreign Policy whose sole intention is increasing the security, power and influence of Switzerland, they just do it within an historic framework of armed neutrality. And they do it well

    No significant country in history has ever entertained a foreign policy with any different purpose. The only exceptions are colonies, satellite states, dependencies, tiny tax havens. and so on.

    Charles seems to think furthering the national interest = invading and conquering. Bizarre
    Security at home and abroad, robust intervention when appropriate. But no need for us to get involved in increasing our power for its own sake
  • Options
    AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 20,010
    Foxy said:

    DAILY TELEGRAPH: Quarter of virus deaths not caused by Covid

    https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1382077324053610499

    Somewhat misleading headline. It refers to current deaths, but Would be easy to misinterpret the headline to think it applied to the whole pandemic, as indeed I did on seeing the headline...
    I think it refers to the way Death Certificates are filled in. So for example if a death occurred from acute renal failure brought on by covid pneumonitis, then the covid would be recorded as an underlying cause rather than the primary cause. Those are the 23% it refers to.

    It is a meaningless distinction if the covid caused the acute renal failure.
    I’m not sure that’s right TBH. The measure is death of any cause within 28 days of a positive COVID test. So inevitably some deaths will be unrelated to covid?
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,986

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Leon said:

    There is no solution to the asymmetry of the UK. We can ameliorate it by making the Lords an elected Federal chamber (with two Lords from each UK county?), but there is no optimal arrangement

    This is a rare occasion when I agree with Kinabalu. Apart from that change to the Lords, the fudge we have now is probably the best we can hope for. It's a good deal for Scotland, Wales and NI, but that's the price England pays for keeping the Union.

    The Scots would be mad to reject it for something worse, but ultimately they must decide that (in about 10 years time)

    The answer is to create regions of England with their own interests.

    Manchester thinks they are ignored? Give Greater Manchester two senators, same as London. 2 for the Summer Country (including Devon and Cornwall) 2 for Yorkshire etc
    What about the towns and villages across the country? What do they get?

    I've got an idea, why don't we divide the country into blocs, we could call them constituencies, and each of those blocs elects one person to represent them - we could call that a Member of Parliament.
    I’m a fan of replacing the Lords with an elected body but it needs to be in a different basis to the Commons. Making it a federal parliament is a reasonable approach.

    Towns and counties would be represented in rough areas of similar interests of approximately similar size. Consider dividing Scotland into highlands and lowlands (I don’t know them well enough but people complain there is too much focus on Glasgow/Edinburgh)
    All of these complicated solutions can easily be dispensed with if we also dispense with the Union. The endless, insoluble discontent of the Scots and the Irish border dispute would be made instantly to disappear if they were not attached to England, as would the West Lothian Question and the arguments about fiscal transfers. What's not to like?
    The fact our economy would be diminished in size, as would our military and France would overtake us on both measures, our role in the world would be weakened and we would have a hard border with Scotland as well as Ireland plus Scexit talks which would make Brexit look like a walk in the park and a resurgence of loyalist paramilitary violence in Northern Ireland at direct rule from Dublin.

    Your Little Englander vision would be a disaster that would rip these islands apart for decades
    You seem not to have noticed the nationalists metaphorically running riot in Edinburgh for the last ten years, or the actual rioting (and worse violence) that's been happening in Belfast at regular intervals since the Bronze Age.

    It would all be very nice, I'm sure, if there were a future for the British state but it is a disintegrating confederacy of four states united by nothing but money. The game is up. It's over.
    So, what do I care, I despise the Nationalists and am quite happy to fight them, I am certainly not going to give in to Sturgeon and Salmond who still at least half of Scots also despise.

    There has been relative peace in NI since the GFA, the only reason rioting has emerged in the loyalist community is they see their community is not being listened too and NI is not close enough to GB.

    You are an ideological Little Englander, fair enough, though of course the end of the UK would lead to a recession and most likely depression across Britain as well as rip us apart for a decade or more with Nationalism on both sides of the border
    The fact that the Britain we grew up in is dead is not the fault of the English. Why we should be expected to try to resuscitate it by means of continually appeasing the Scots or, failing that, by fighting their nationalists (by stonewalling their demands for independence, or even by sending in the tanks as you have so stupidly suggested in the past) is quite beyond me.
    It is not dead despite the fact as an ideological Little Englander you have a clear agenda to kill it off as much as the Scottish and Welsh nationalists do.

    We are stronger together, weaker divided
    The Scottish nationalists are in complete command of the field, and the Welsh ones are following, because they have captured the Labour Party. In case you hadn't noticed, Welsh Labour has started to actively field and promote independence supporters for elected office.

    There is exactly one thing holding the British state together now, and that's the transfer payments. If the average Scottish or Welsh voter thought she would be better off out than in by £1 per year then you wouldn't see them for dust.

    Once again, none of this is the fault of the English. Everyone else started giving up on Britain. Not us.
    Everyone started giving up on Britain when we (The English) started assuming we were Britain.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,691

    MattW said:

    Cookie said:

    A postscript to the squirrel story earlier to turn something we could all agree was a sad but possibly unavoidable situation into something half of us can get good and cross about: apparently the requirement to euthanise the squirrels was brought in by the EU in 2019, to the great disappointment of the RSPCA. Apparently.

    That is bunk - sorry.

    Grey Squirrels are subject to Section 14 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act as originally passed in *1981* as animals for which it is an offence to release into the wild.

    https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1981/69/section/14/enacted

    They are listed in Schedule 9.

    If rescue charities have been releasing them - if they have - is a scandal.

    https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1981/69/schedule/9/enacted

    It's as stupid as the RSPCA releasing foxes, though that is I think legal.

    If I am wrong anyone, please do correct me.
    The legislation was introduced, I believe, in an attempt to save the red squirrels, which were seen as a more national breed. They're now extremely rare and it makes sense to be decent to all squirrels, which in my view give much more pleasure to watch than almost any other natural species.

    It's not a view shared by everyone, I admit. I remember asking in a pet shop if they have some bird-proof squirrel-feeders rather than the other way round, and getting a very quizzical look. :)
    One of the many pleasures of the Isle of Wight is the red squirrels, which are free of grey competition there. They are more shy, but there are some places that they are easy to spot, including a caravan park near Sandown.

    I have found my dog really quite good at keeping grey squirrels away from the bird feeder. My current picture is him and the cat sizing up a bushy tailed tree rat.
This discussion has been closed.