Yes, which is why there is near zero chance of a Labour majority at the next general election there is a clear chance of a PM Starmer given confidence and supply by the LDs and SNP
There is no chance of C&S with any of them. Tories won't find anyone willing to play after their treatment of the DUP. Labour can't afford the "in the SNP's pocket" attack so will go minority if needed.
The question is which way will the smaller parties lean in the event of a minority government? Suspect there is far more chance they would vote with a minority Labour government than a minority Tory one.
After last night's performance by Cummings I thought Starmer looked a much more appealing prospect.
Someone 'interesting' seems considerably less important today than someone sane.
Trident would go to SuBase Kings Bay in GA with the US boomers as an interim measure that would end up permanent as that's the route of least resistance that keeps the US happy.
Scotland would get a NATO (or EU) air policing mission like Iceland does right now because that serves everybody's interests. GIUK remains covered. Scotland don't have to shell out for an air force.
I can see Scotland ending up in the same position for similar reasons.
The 26 counties are in Partnership for Peace which is stage one of the four stage path to NATO membership. PfP along with whatever EU defence structure supercedes PESCO is the logical destination for Scotland.
How does an Independent Scotland get into the EU?
It would need an independent currency which means balancing it's books and I dread to think what the Scottish budget deficit looks like.
If we’re dissolving a Union of equals, then we’ll be taking our share of the national debt.
If we’re leaving the UK, you can keep your own debt.
The UK should take the debt, it would amount to about a 12% rise, so quite serviceable. But if the UK did that what do you think you are going to get in any negotiations?
And what kind of ratings from the agencies? Who would finance a state that came into existence in a proud moment of debt repudiation?
But separatists don't give a toss about any of that. All they want is their "freedom". They know they're better than England any day of the week. And anyone who thinks otherwise has either been brainwashed by fake news from the "London media", or else they're an English b*stard to start with. That's the true mentality of Scottish separatists.
You seem a tad emotional about the issue.
yes, very emotional. on the independence issue, I can foresee an Independent Scotland receiving positive overtures from the EU, with a view to expanding the EU trade markets, and strengthening the trade links with Ireland. Who knows, this could tip the reunification arguement for NI. If Scotland was offered the use of the Euro in return (imagine Euros with Scottish historical heroes all over them), I could see a ready deal in the offing here. I also read somewhere that there is a net flow North to South of generated electrical energy. Link that with "Scottish Oil" and it may be worth something, along with the continuence of the NATO foothold.
Just putting it out there, don't shoot the messenger please...
EU membership would require a hard border with England. It would also legally require Scotland to move towards adopting the euro, if not to adopt it right away. What is your point about national heroes? Euro banknotes are exactly the same for all EU countries. There would no longer be any Bank of Scotland, RBS, or Clydesdale notes. Euro coins have a "national side", though, so yes, if Scotland were in the eurozone there would indeed be McEurocoins.
People could maybe get pleasure from looking at these discs while waiting in the queue to have their car boots checked for smuggled booze and fags on returning from visiting family members in Berwick.
Yes, which is why there is near zero chance of a Labour majority at the next general election there is a clear chance of a PM Starmer given confidence and supply by the LDs and SNP
There is no chance of C&S with any of them. Tories won't find anyone willing to play after their treatment of the DUP. Labour can't afford the "in the SNP's pocket" attack so will go minority if needed.
The question is which way will the smaller parties lean in the event of a minority government? Suspect there is far more chance they would vote with a minority Labour government than a minority Tory one.
The chance of anyone leaning to the Tories in a minority government is nil. This has consequences including:
Only a Tory vote can possibly deliver a majority government. This will shore up the centre right vote. No other configuration of possible government is stable.
Consequences for LDs:
They need to clarify three areas of policy 1) How to build millions of houses everywhere except next to whoever they are speaking to while enabling your children to buy a house in the village.
2) Where do they stand in relation to support for Labour when the SNP's support is also needed - in particular about Ref2.
3) What is their medium/long term Brexit policy, and which bits are non negotiable.
How about:
1) Brownfield sites need to be fully exploited, and including allowing the building of homes in former retail areas which are now just charity shop jungles
2) All suppoirt for other parties must only extend to S+C, (i think it's called), until a proper PR system is introduced
3) Brexit has happened, so there doesn't need to be a policy on that. What we now need is a renegotiated Customs/Trade/ freedom of movement system.
Thanks. Good luck with (1) and (2). (3) is a Brexit policy. Parties will need one for decades. And good luck if FoM is a non-negotiable LD policy.
I disagree with your comment about 3. I consider it a future survival of the UK policy, if we are going to trade with Europe and staff our industries (such as they are). I do not consider it a rejoin policy either. I don't think we would be allowed back in on the favorable terms we had.
Yes, which is why there is near zero chance of a Labour majority at the next general election there is a clear chance of a PM Starmer given confidence and supply by the LDs and SNP
There is no chance of C&S with any of them. Tories won't find anyone willing to play after their treatment of the DUP. Labour can't afford the "in the SNP's pocket" attack so will go minority if needed.
The question is which way will the smaller parties lean in the event of a minority government? Suspect there is far more chance they would vote with a minority Labour government than a minority Tory one.
After last night's performance by Cummings I thought Starmer looked a much more appealing prospect.
Someone 'interesting' seems considerably less important today than someone sane.
This list of Lib Dem "target seats" does, I think, rather reflect the amount of effort and resources that the Lib Dems put into them at the last election, as they attempted to save the political skins of their recent big-name converts to liberalism.
The whole Lib Dem campaign was attuned in 2019 to mitigating or even reversing the disastrous Boris policy of leaving the EU, with no idea of the consequences or plans for dealing with the problems. Whether this particular line will be so prominent next time I do not know. I do not think it was so in the two recent byelections.
What really did for the Tories in these bye-elections, in addition to the incompetence and corruption, was the impression that Boris and his gang were arrogant authoritarians who did not pay any attention to the needs and aspirations of local people. It is very hard to see how the Tories can reverse this impression, except by clearing out the present Cabinet. Including Gove, of course.
The list of LD target seats with a Tory MP is an index of educated poshness with a certain style attached.
Questions to puzzle over would include these: If poshness and education are enough for LDs to come close why are seats like Arundel so Tory and the LDs so distant?
Whatever the answer is - and I think the question is significant - I think there are a very finite number of seats which LDs can aspire to.
It is also possible that when the next election comes the options will be stark: You are voting for two possibilities only, a Tory majority government or an unknown form of centre left alliance in which Lab, LD, Green and SNP are essential to its working.
It is not yet clear that the good people of, say, Wokingham, will certainly prefer the Burgon/Pidcock/Sturgeon/Davey/tree hugging alliance to John Redwood. That will be their choice.
Its posh seats which people of working age want to live in. Guildford, St Albans etc yes, Arundel is for the retired posh.
The problem, Mr Above, is that if you are looking at the results from 2019 (as here) you are looking backwards, at what was, not at what is.
One factor you also need to take into account is the number and quality of activists on the ground. Only so much can be done by a centralised operation (like the Conservative Party). The number of activists varies over time, as people move around. A good indicator of this factor is success in local elections. If there is a strong team of campaigners, they will do well in local elections as well.
I have no idea what the local Lib Dems in Arundel are like, but there is no reason at all why several strongly motivated activists should not move into the patch.
Nowhere is safe for the Tories - and you have no idea!
Maybe just me,but I wasn't sure how far the presence of any antibodies really indicated protection. Encouragingly, looking around it looks as though it probably does:
Trident would go to SuBase Kings Bay in GA with the US boomers as an interim measure that would end up permanent as that's the route of least resistance that keeps the US happy.
Scotland would get a NATO (or EU) air policing mission like Iceland does right now because that serves everybody's interests. GIUK remains covered. Scotland don't have to shell out for an air force.
I can see Scotland ending up in the same position for similar reasons.
The 26 counties are in Partnership for Peace which is stage one of the four stage path to NATO membership. PfP along with whatever EU defence structure supercedes PESCO is the logical destination for Scotland.
How does an Independent Scotland get into the EU?
It would need an independent currency which means balancing it's books and I dread to think what the Scottish budget deficit looks like.
If we’re dissolving a Union of equals, then we’ll be taking our share of the national debt.
If we’re leaving the UK, you can keep your own debt.
The UK should take the debt, it would amount to about a 12% rise, so quite serviceable. But if the UK did that what do you think you are going to get in any negotiations?
And what kind of ratings from the agencies? Who would finance a state that came into existence in a proud moment of debt repudiation?
But separatists don't give a toss about any of that. All they want is their "freedom". They know they're better than England any day of the week. And anyone who thinks otherwise has either been brainwashed by fake news from the "London media", or else they're an English b*stard to start with. That's the true mentality of Scottish separatists.
You seem a tad emotional about the issue.
yes, very emotional. on the independence issue, I can foresee an Independent Scotland receiving positive overtures from the EU, with a view to expanding the EU trade markets, and strengthening the trade links with Ireland. Who knows, this could tip the reunification arguement for NI. If Scotland was offered the use of the Euro in return (imagine Euros with Scottish historical heroes all over them), I could see a ready deal in the offing here. I also read somewhere that there is a net flow North to South of generated electrical energy. Link that with "Scottish Oil" and it may be worth something, along with the continuence of the NATO foothold.
Just putting it out there, don't shoot the messenger please...
EU membership would require a hard border with England. It would also legally require Scotland to move towards adopting the euro, if not to adopt it right away. What is your point about national heroes? Euro banknotes are exactly the same for all EU countries. There would no longer be any Bank of Scotland, RBS, or Clydesdale notes. Euro coins have a "national side", though, so yes, if Scotland were in the eurozone there would indeed be McEurocoins.
People could maybe get pleasure from looking at these discs while waiting in the queue to have their car boots checked for smuggled booze and fags on returning from visiting family members in Berwick.
I accept your point on the bank notes, but coins perhaps? It could be something for Nicola to campaign on ...Scottish Euro notes...
Matt Vickers (Tory MP for Stockton South) on BBC Politics showing why he is so much better than many of his other 2019 intake in that he has a brain and an amiable style.
Maybe just me,but I wasn't sure how far the presence of any antibodies really indicated protection. Encouragingly, looking around it looks as though it probably does:
A solid 15% of that number will be antibodies from just a single vaccine dose which we know isn't enough to prevent infection in most scenarios. Additionally delta has shown a level of immune escape from antibodies created by prior infection. That's why even at 92% antibody prevalence in England we're still getting 45k cases per day.
It is what it is, but just wanted to point out that even at 92% we can expect to see a lot of cases. Hopefully the government is readying the booster programme to commence in August as that would ensure everyone in groups 1-10 are better protected in the run up to November/December and we eliminate the risk of waning immunity, something Israel may be seeing.
It is not yet clear that the good people of, say, Wokingham, will certainly prefer the Burgon/Pidcock/Sturgeon/Davey/tree hugging alliance to John Redwood. That will be their choice.
Its posh seats which people of working age want to live in. Guildford, St Albans etc yes, Arundel is for the retired posh.
That's right, also within constituencies. In my patch (Hunt's constituency, SW Surrey) the Tories are down to 2 County Councillors out of 7, and both are in the villages where there are masses of wealthy retired people, while they have fallen miles behind the LibDems (and behind Labour at Borough level in some places like mine) in the small towns. Another factor is a college in the area even if not a full-blown university.
On algarkirk's hypothesis, for all the doubts about Starmer's positive ideas, few people will feel he's going to be a puppet of Burgon and Pidcock (if they've even heard of them). Is a possible post-election understanding with Sturgeon going to seem very terrifying in Wokingham? Will voters there care much about that? As for tree-huggers, lots of wealthy folk are quite open to a bit of greenery.
Interesting. In SW Surrey LD strength goes back decades so I shall wait and see, while agreeing that the Tories remain vulnerable in a number of seats. Your remaining argument is strong, that I fully accept. At the next election there is going to be strong contest between the Tories and all others. Personally I think the Tories as the only option for a majority government will hold attractions, that the LDs will do well but as usual spread too thin, and that the Tories will win SW Surrey and Wokingham.
I agree that Nicola is not a threat in Surrey or Wokingham in the same way she is in my English northern borders patch (if I stand up I can see Scotland). But neither is the idea of a government relying on the SNP a positive attraction anywhere in England. They may not be loathed but they are far from loved.
But Cleveland bridge closing is going to shock a lot of Red Wall seats but it's the consequence of some project delays due to Covid.
Now this is curious - but explains why I'm rather surprised by the news from Ben Houchen's press release.
“The company has a full order book for the next 18-months, this coupled with the firm’s history, expertise and highly skilled workforce makes us optimistic that a buyer will come forward quickly for this iconic business. But it is critical that local jobs are protected as part of any deal to buy Cleveland Bridge.”
Guildford is an interesting seat for a number of reasons:
1. Boundary changes: the hinterland of the seat is changing quite dramatically, though the town itself and most of the population stays as it was. If anything, I think this is good news for the Lib Dems as it adds the stations at Clandon, Horsley, and Effingham Junction to the seat, which might be more Lib Dem than the rural parts to the west and southeast of the town.
2. The Tory incumbent Angela Richardson might get a bit of boost when she defends the seat for the first time, though I don't think personal incumbency is as important as party incumbency.
3. What happens to Anne Milton's 4,356 votes? Did those people vote for her thinking she genuinely had a chance of winning? Or are these loyal Tories who might go home next time?
yes, very emotional. on the independence issue, I can foresee an Independent Scotland receiving positive overtures from the EU, with a view to expanding the EU trade markets, and strengthening the trade links with Ireland. Who knows, this could tip the reunification arguement for NI. If Scotland was offered the use of the Euro in return (imagine Euros with Scottish historical heroes all over them), I could see a ready deal in the offing here. I also read somewhere that there is a net flow North to South of generated electrical energy. Link that with "Scottish Oil" and it may be worth something, along with the continuence of the NATO foothold.
Just putting it out there, don't shoot the messenger please...
'I also read somewhere that there is a net flow North to South of generated electrical energy.'
In more cutting off nose to spite face news..
Well the only place they could supply is Ireland who are already supplied by England. Whether it's possible to justify building such a cable is an interesting question.
Cheap electricity doesn’t have to be exported. It can be used domestically to make manufacturing extremely competitive.
This list of Lib Dem "target seats" does, I think, rather reflect the amount of effort and resources that the Lib Dems put into them at the last election, as they attempted to save the political skins of their recent big-name converts to liberalism.
The whole Lib Dem campaign was attuned in 2019 to mitigating or even reversing the disastrous Boris policy of leaving the EU, with no idea of the consequences or plans for dealing with the problems. Whether this particular line will be so prominent next time I do not know. I do not think it was so in the two recent byelections.
What really did for the Tories in these bye-elections, in addition to the incompetence and corruption, was the impression that Boris and his gang were arrogant authoritarians who did not pay any attention to the needs and aspirations of local people. It is very hard to see how the Tories can reverse this impression, except by clearing out the present Cabinet. Including Gove, of course.
The list of LD target seats with a Tory MP is an index of educated poshness with a certain style attached.
Questions to puzzle over would include these: If poshness and education are enough for LDs to come close why are seats like Arundel so Tory and the LDs so distant?
Whatever the answer is - and I think the question is significant - I think there are a very finite number of seats which LDs can aspire to.
It is also possible that when the next election comes the options will be stark: You are voting for two possibilities only, a Tory majority government or an unknown form of centre left alliance in which Lab, LD, Green and SNP are essential to its working.
It is not yet clear that the good people of, say, Wokingham, will certainly prefer the Burgon/Pidcock/Sturgeon/Davey/tree hugging alliance to John Redwood. That will be their choice.
Its posh seats which people of working age want to live in. Guildford, St Albans etc yes, Arundel is for the retired posh.
The problem, Mr Above, is that if you are looking at the results from 2019 (as here) you are looking backwards, at what was, not at what is.
One factor you also need to take into account is the number and quality of activists on the ground. Only so much can be done by a centralised operation (like the Conservative Party). The number of activists varies over time, as people move around. A good indicator of this factor is success in local elections. If there is a strong team of campaigners, they will do well in local elections as well.
I have no idea what the local Lib Dems in Arundel are like, but there is no reason at all why several strongly motivated activists should not move into the patch.
Nowhere is safe for the Tories - and you have no idea!
And that 122 polls in succession with a Tory lead are all part of a cunning plan to lure Boris into a false sense of security.
Trident would go to SuBase Kings Bay in GA with the US boomers as an interim measure that would end up permanent as that's the route of least resistance that keeps the US happy.
Scotland would get a NATO (or EU) air policing mission like Iceland does right now because that serves everybody's interests. GIUK remains covered. Scotland don't have to shell out for an air force.
I can see Scotland ending up in the same position for similar reasons.
The 26 counties are in Partnership for Peace which is stage one of the four stage path to NATO membership. PfP along with whatever EU defence structure supercedes PESCO is the logical destination for Scotland.
How does an Independent Scotland get into the EU?
It would need an independent currency which means balancing it's books and I dread to think what the Scottish budget deficit looks like.
If we’re dissolving a Union of equals, then we’ll be taking our share of the national debt.
If we’re leaving the UK, you can keep your own debt.
The UK should take the debt, it would amount to about a 12% rise, so quite serviceable. But if the UK did that what do you think you are going to get in any negotiations?
And what kind of ratings from the agencies? Who would finance a state that came into existence in a proud moment of debt repudiation?
But separatists don't give a toss about any of that. All they want is their "freedom". They know they're better than England any day of the week. And anyone who thinks otherwise has either been brainwashed by fake news from the "London media", or else they're an English b*stard to start with. That's the true mentality of Scottish separatists.
You seem a tad emotional about the issue.
yes, very emotional. on the independence issue, I can foresee an Independent Scotland receiving positive overtures from the EU, with a view to expanding the EU trade markets, and strengthening the trade links with Ireland. Who knows, this could tip the reunification arguement for NI. If Scotland was offered the use of the Euro in return (imagine Euros with Scottish historical heroes all over them), I could see a ready deal in the offing here. I also read somewhere that there is a net flow North to South of generated electrical energy. Link that with "Scottish Oil" and it may be worth something, along with the continuence of the NATO foothold.
Just putting it out there, don't shoot the messenger please...
EU membership would require a hard border with England. It would also legally require Scotland to move towards adopting the euro, if not to adopt it right away. What is your point about national heroes? Euro banknotes are exactly the same for all EU countries. There would no longer be any Bank of Scotland, RBS, or Clydesdale notes. Euro coins have a "national side", though, so yes, if Scotland were in the eurozone there would indeed be McEurocoins.
People could maybe get pleasure from looking at these discs while waiting in the queue to have their car boots checked for smuggled booze and fags on returning from visiting family members in Berwick.
The hard border is a smokescreen. If England / rUK needs a hard border then none of the border issues from Brexit have been fixed and GB is having major trading issues with everyone. As that isn't a sustainable settlement then the border issue will have been resolved before it becomes applicable.
yes, very emotional. on the independence issue, I can foresee an Independent Scotland receiving positive overtures from the EU, with a view to expanding the EU trade markets, and strengthening the trade links with Ireland. Who knows, this could tip the reunification arguement for NI. If Scotland was offered the use of the Euro in return (imagine Euros with Scottish historical heroes all over them), I could see a ready deal in the offing here. I also read somewhere that there is a net flow North to South of generated electrical energy. Link that with "Scottish Oil" and it may be worth something, along with the continuence of the NATO foothold.
Just putting it out there, don't shoot the messenger please...
'I also read somewhere that there is a net flow North to South of generated electrical energy.'
In more cutting off nose to spite face news..
Well the only place they could supply is Ireland who are already supplied by England. Whether it's possible to justify building such a cable is an interesting question.
Cheap electricity doesn’t have to be exported. It can be used domestically to make manufacturing extremely competitive.
yes, very emotional. on the independence issue, I can foresee an Independent Scotland receiving positive overtures from the EU, with a view to expanding the EU trade markets, and strengthening the trade links with Ireland. Who knows, this could tip the reunification arguement for NI. If Scotland was offered the use of the Euro in return (imagine Euros with Scottish historical heroes all over them), I could see a ready deal in the offing here. I also read somewhere that there is a net flow North to South of generated electrical energy. Link that with "Scottish Oil" and it may be worth something, along with the continuence of the NATO foothold.
Just putting it out there, don't shoot the messenger please...
'I also read somewhere that there is a net flow North to South of generated electrical energy.'
In more cutting off nose to spite face news..
Well the only place they could supply is Ireland who are already supplied by England. Whether it's possible to justify building such a cable is an interesting question.
Cheap electricity doesn’t have to be exported. It can be used domestically to make manufacturing extremely competitive.
You are assuming the energy is cheap - that isn't stated within the article.
Yes, which is why there is near zero chance of a Labour majority at the next general election there is a clear chance of a PM Starmer given confidence and supply by the LDs and SNP
There is no chance of C&S with any of them. Tories won't find anyone willing to play after their treatment of the DUP. Labour can't afford the "in the SNP's pocket" attack so will go minority if needed.
The question is which way will the smaller parties lean in the event of a minority government? Suspect there is far more chance they would vote with a minority Labour government than a minority Tory one.
After last night's performance by Cummings I thought Starmer looked a much more appealing prospect.
Someone 'interesting' seems considerably less important today than someone sane.
Exactly. Time to end the freak show.
Might enough Tory MPs and members appreciate this and hold back from voting for Gove?
Alternatively Gove could stab Cummings in the back. OK that continues the freak show but Gove could be in No.10 and then do the dirty deed before parliamentary half-time.
Yes, which is why there is near zero chance of a Labour majority at the next general election there is a clear chance of a PM Starmer given confidence and supply by the LDs and SNP
There is no chance of C&S with any of them. Tories won't find anyone willing to play after their treatment of the DUP. Labour can't afford the "in the SNP's pocket" attack so will go minority if needed.
The question is which way will the smaller parties lean in the event of a minority government? Suspect there is far more chance they would vote with a minority Labour government than a minority Tory one.
The chance of anyone leaning to the Tories in a minority government is nil. This has consequences including:
Only a Tory vote can possibly deliver a majority government. This will shore up the centre right vote. No other configuration of possible government is stable.
Consequences for LDs:
They need to clarify three areas of policy 1) How to build millions of houses everywhere except next to whoever they are speaking to while enabling your children to buy a house in the village.
2) Where do they stand in relation to support for Labour when the SNP's support is also needed - in particular about Ref2.
3) What is their medium/long term Brexit policy, and which bits are non negotiable.
How about:
1) Brownfield sites need to be fully exploited, and including allowing the building of homes in former retail areas which are now just charity shop jungles
2) All suppoirt for other parties must only extend to S+C, (i think it's called), until a proper PR system is introduced
3) Brexit has happened, so there doesn't need to be a policy on that. What we now need is a renegotiated Customs/Trade/ freedom of movement system.
Thanks. Good luck with (1) and (2). (3) is a Brexit policy. Parties will need one for decades. And good luck if FoM is a non-negotiable LD policy.
I disagree with your comment about 3. I consider it a future survival of the UK policy, if we are going to trade with Europe and staff our industries (such as they are). I do not consider it a rejoin policy either. I don't think we would be allowed back in on the favorable terms we had.
If we're not part of the EU, we no longer have any reason to pretend that all EU member states are the same. That's why a blanket free movement policy is a non-starter.
Starmer trying a new tactic - openly laughing at the government. And why not - its the same strategy that Ooh Ah Daily Star have been pursuing for months because it cuts through with its readers
In big doms interview he constantly talks about we did this, we put boris in place, we might set up a new party, we took over an existing party....
Who is the we?
Michael Gove.
I'm currently on holiday but I took a call from an old friend who moves in these circles.
Says Cummings is concentrating on wiping out Johnson and Sunak (whom he recently gave the kiss of death) and others.
Gove is clearing the decks, hence the divorce, expect a few other revelations before conference season.
Gove is more of a committed Unionist than he is a Brexiteer, he doesn't want to be remembered as the midwife of Scottish independence.
It is no coincidence that Cummings was Gove's consigliere.
The talk of replacing/ousting Johnson after the 2019 GE was reminiscent of Gove taking out Johnson after winning the referendum of 2016.
Now back to my holiday and sweating like a 70s DJ in a police station.
Gove is however electoral poison - especially for younger age groups.
I'm first in line to be impervious to the charms of the Gover but I'm mildly intrigued by the voters of Surrey Heath; do they back him in spite of his Govieness 'cos he's a Con, or does he have some personal following? He increased his majority every GE from 2005 except interestingly the last one which I suppose was the great efflorescence of English nationalism.
Gove does have his fans - I'm one on a non-political basis. He is a politician who is really interested in doing stuff, and I'm allergic to politicians who just want to BE something. I can well imagine that he'd be a great constituency MP - if I had some personal problem that an MP could help resolve, I would absolutely trust Gove to do the necessary.
Great comment. I've thought this for a while about people in positions of power. What motivates them? And you've summarised it very succinctly. There are those that want to do something and those that want to be someone. Sadly, there are far too many of the latter.
Starmer trying a new tactic - openly laughing at the government. And why not - its the same strategy that Ooh Ah Daily Star have been pursuing for months because it cuts through with its readers
He has a new team around him I believe? Starting to show.
At first glance, it looks considerably more practicable than others approaches.
Using the movement of the plasma to generate electricity through induction is certainly a novel approach. The idea does seem plausible unlike, as you say, most other approaches. However, you're still going to have the problems of irradiation of the containment vessel and the need to remove large amounts of heat.
Of course. But look at the (relative) scale of the thing - the energy fluxes are much smaller than conventional fusion approaches, a great deal of the energy is being extracted directly as electricity, and the engineering challenges ought therefore to be significantly less. It's still going to take quite some time to be a workable product, but it's not quite so much an impossible dream.
Another potential problem might be the availability of helium-3, which makes up only a small fraction of terrestrial helium. And you've got to separate it from regular helium-4. Most fusion experiments use the deuterium-tritium reaction, but that's not available here since most of the energy comes out as neutrons rather than charged particles.
Maybe just me,but I wasn't sure how far the presence of any antibodies really indicated protection. Encouragingly, looking around it looks as though it probably does:
A solid 15% of that number will be antibodies from just a single vaccine dose which we know isn't enough to prevent infection in most scenarios. Additionally delta has shown a level of immune escape from antibodies created by prior infection. That's why even at 92% antibody prevalence in England we're still getting 45k cases per day.
It is what it is, but just wanted to point out that even at 92% we can expect to see a lot of cases. Hopefully the government is readying the booster programme to commence in August as that would ensure everyone in groups 1-10 are better protected in the run up to November/December and we eliminate the risk of waning immunity, something Israel may be seeing.
The booster program is much easier logistically, no worrying about holding doses back as 1st/2nd jabs will be at a de minimis level from September onward.
Guildford is an interesting seat for a number of reasons:
1. Boundary changes: the hinterland of the seat is changing quite dramatically, though the town itself and most of the population stays as it was. If anything, I think this is good news for the Lib Dems as it adds the stations at Clandon, Horsley, and Effingham Junction to the seat, which might be more Lib Dem than the rural parts to the west and southeast of the town.
2. The Tory incumbent Angela Richardson might get a bit of boost when she defends the seat for the first time, though I don't think personal incumbency is as important as party incumbency.
3. What happens to Anne Milton's 4,356 votes? Did those people vote for her thinking she genuinely had a chance of winning? Or are these loyal Tories who might go home next time?
4. Working from home leading to people moving there from London.
yes, very emotional. on the independence issue, I can foresee an Independent Scotland receiving positive overtures from the EU, with a view to expanding the EU trade markets, and strengthening the trade links with Ireland. Who knows, this could tip the reunification arguement for NI. If Scotland was offered the use of the Euro in return (imagine Euros with Scottish historical heroes all over them), I could see a ready deal in the offing here. I also read somewhere that there is a net flow North to South of generated electrical energy. Link that with "Scottish Oil" and it may be worth something, along with the continuence of the NATO foothold.
Just putting it out there, don't shoot the messenger please...
'I also read somewhere that there is a net flow North to South of generated electrical energy.'
In more cutting off nose to spite face news..
Well the only place they could supply is Ireland who are already supplied by England. Whether it's possible to justify building such a cable is an interesting question.
Cheap electricity doesn’t have to be exported. It can be used domestically to make manufacturing extremely competitive.
True, but it would be oh so better to export. Not sure UK would prevent Scottish energy from going straight to europe through the networks already there. I'm sure a throughput fee could be negotiated alongside the UK's present energy swapping links to Ireland/Norway/Nederlands/France.
It is not yet clear that the good people of, say, Wokingham, will certainly prefer the Burgon/Pidcock/Sturgeon/Davey/tree hugging alliance to John Redwood. That will be their choice.
Its posh seats which people of working age want to live in. Guildford, St Albans etc yes, Arundel is for the retired posh.
That's right, also within constituencies. In my patch (Hunt's constituency, SW Surrey) the Tories are down to 2 County Councillors out of 7, and both are in the villages where there are masses of wealthy retired people, while they have fallen miles behind the LibDems (and behind Labour at Borough level in some places like mine) in the small towns. Another factor is a college in the area even if not a full-blown university.
On algarkirk's hypothesis, for all the doubts about Starmer's positive ideas, few people will feel he's going to be a puppet of Burgon and Pidcock (if they've even heard of them). Is a possible post-election understanding with Sturgeon going to seem very terrifying in Wokingham? Will voters there care much about that? As for tree-huggers, lots of wealthy folk are quite open to a bit of greenery.
Interesting. In SW Surrey LD strength goes back decades so I shall wait and see, while agreeing that the Tories remain vulnerable in a number of seats. Your remaining argument is strong, that I fully accept. At the next election there is going to be strong contest between the Tories and all others. Personally I think the Tories as the only option for a majority government will hold attractions, that the LDs will do well but as usual spread too thin, and that the Tories will win SW Surrey and Wokingham.
I agree that Nicola is not a threat in Surrey or Wokingham in the same way she is in my English northern borders patch (if I stand up I can see Scotland). But neither is the idea of a government relying on the SNP a positive attraction anywhere in England. They may not be loathed but they are far from loved.
More loved than the others.
‘Nicola Sturgeon the most popular leader in the UK, poll finds’
Polling asked voters last week how they thought each UK party leader was performing, with the First Minister receiving a net +24% approval rating in Scotland and +10% across the UK.
By contrast, Boris Johnson scored -35% in Scotland and -8% across the UK, Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer was given a -17% by people in Scotland and +9% in the UK, and LibDem leader Ed Davey scored -15% and -12% respectively; making Sturgeon the most popular leader in both Scotland and the UK.
yes, very emotional. on the independence issue, I can foresee an Independent Scotland receiving positive overtures from the EU, with a view to expanding the EU trade markets, and strengthening the trade links with Ireland. Who knows, this could tip the reunification arguement for NI. If Scotland was offered the use of the Euro in return (imagine Euros with Scottish historical heroes all over them), I could see a ready deal in the offing here. I also read somewhere that there is a net flow North to South of generated electrical energy. Link that with "Scottish Oil" and it may be worth something, along with the continuence of the NATO foothold.
Just putting it out there, don't shoot the messenger please...
'I also read somewhere that there is a net flow North to South of generated electrical energy.'
In more cutting off nose to spite face news..
This is just so much bollocks. Firstly, it’s the Express. Secondly the seven year old quote in the headline comes from some random “risk analyst” commenting on something Ed Davey said during the referendum. So the Express reheats some old quotes as click bait to enrage Independence supporters and fire up its own English Nationalist base you are willing to play along. Round of applause.
At first glance, it looks considerably more practicable than others approaches.
Using the movement of the plasma to generate electricity through induction is certainly a novel approach. The idea does seem plausible unlike, as you say, most other approaches. However, you're still going to have the problems of irradiation of the containment vessel and the need to remove large amounts of heat.
Of course. But look at the (relative) scale of the thing - the energy fluxes are much smaller than conventional fusion approaches, a great deal of the energy is being extracted directly as electricity, and the engineering challenges ought therefore to be significantly less. It's still going to take quite some time to be a workable product, but it's not quite so much an impossible dream.
Another potential problem might be the availability of helium-3, which makes up only a small fraction of terrestrial helium. And you've got to separate it from regular helium-4. Most fusion experiments use the deuterium-tritium reaction, but that's not available here since most of the energy comes out as neutrons rather than charged particles.
Doesn't a deuterium/deuterium fusion reaction produce he-3?
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 2m Boris says it's "common sense" to let people cram into nightclubs for ten weeks before demanding a Covid passport. It's a view.
Guildford is an interesting seat for a number of reasons:
1. Boundary changes: the hinterland of the seat is changing quite dramatically, though the town itself and most of the population stays as it was. If anything, I think this is good news for the Lib Dems as it adds the stations at Clandon, Horsley, and Effingham Junction to the seat, which might be more Lib Dem than the rural parts to the west and southeast of the town.
2. The Tory incumbent Angela Richardson might get a bit of boost when she defends the seat for the first time, though I don't think personal incumbency is as important as party incumbency.
3. What happens to Anne Milton's 4,356 votes? Did those people vote for her thinking she genuinely had a chance of winning? Or are these loyal Tories who might go home next time?
4. Working from home leading to people moving there from London.
That could apply to anywhere that isn't a big city to be honest. Is Guildford more likely to get those people? I doubt it as it is a very expensive place to live. I suspect the effect of Londoners moving out will be hard to see as they'll be spread fairly evenly around the country.
It is not yet clear that the good people of, say, Wokingham, will certainly prefer the Burgon/Pidcock/Sturgeon/Davey/tree hugging alliance to John Redwood. That will be their choice.
Its posh seats which people of working age want to live in. Guildford, St Albans etc yes, Arundel is for the retired posh.
That's right, also within constituencies. In my patch (Hunt's constituency, SW Surrey) the Tories are down to 2 County Councillors out of 7, and both are in the villages where there are masses of wealthy retired people, while they have fallen miles behind the LibDems (and behind Labour at Borough level in some places like mine) in the small towns. Another factor is a college in the area even if not a full-blown university.
On algarkirk's hypothesis, for all the doubts about Starmer's positive ideas, few people will feel he's going to be a puppet of Burgon and Pidcock (if they've even heard of them). Is a possible post-election understanding with Sturgeon going to seem very terrifying in Wokingham? Will voters there care much about that? As for tree-huggers, lots of wealthy folk are quite open to a bit of greenery.
Interesting. In SW Surrey LD strength goes back decades so I shall wait and see, while agreeing that the Tories remain vulnerable in a number of seats. Your remaining argument is strong, that I fully accept. At the next election there is going to be strong contest between the Tories and all others. Personally I think the Tories as the only option for a majority government will hold attractions, that the LDs will do well but as usual spread too thin, and that the Tories will win SW Surrey and Wokingham.
I agree that Nicola is not a threat in Surrey or Wokingham in the same way she is in my English northern borders patch (if I stand up I can see Scotland). But neither is the idea of a government relying on the SNP a positive attraction anywhere in England. They may not be loathed but they are far from loved.
More loved than the others.
‘Nicola Sturgeon the most popular leader in the UK, poll finds’
Polling asked voters last week how they thought each UK party leader was performing, with the First Minister receiving a net +24% approval rating in Scotland and +10% across the UK.
By contrast, Boris Johnson scored -35% in Scotland and -8% across the UK, Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer was given a -17% by people in Scotland and +9% in the UK, and LibDem leader Ed Davey scored -15% and -12% respectively; making Sturgeon the most popular leader in both Scotland and the UK.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 2m Boris says it's "common sense" to let people cram into nightclubs for ten weeks before demanding a Covid passport. It's a view.
He said its "common sense" that we need to offer young people the chance to be vaccinated twice, before we demand from them proof that they've been vaccinated twice.
He's right. You can't demand proof of double-vaccination before you've offered the opportunity to be double-vaccinated.
I'm not a fan, so I am biased, but what grates is, I haven't got a clue what he's in favour of other than life being back to normal and COVID not being a problem. He mentioned vaccine passports and Boris's previous comments about ID cards.
Maybe just me,but I wasn't sure how far the presence of any antibodies really indicated protection. Encouragingly, looking around it looks as though it probably does:
I'm just wary that delta does infect both double jabbed and previously infected people
So, the road might be a little longer than we think - although hopefully the added protection of jabs / previous illness will keep the severity of illness down
stable institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities;
a functioning market economy and the capacity to cope with competition and market forces in the EU;
the ability to take on and implement effectively the obligations of membership, including adherence to the aims of political, economic and monetary union.
No need to join the Euro to join the EU because there is no timetable on joining the Euro in the maastricht treaty.
Trident would go to SuBase Kings Bay in GA with the US boomers as an interim measure that would end up permanent as that's the route of least resistance that keeps the US happy.
Scotland would get a NATO (or EU) air policing mission like Iceland does right now because that serves everybody's interests. GIUK remains covered. Scotland don't have to shell out for an air force.
Russia would not invade Scotland.
If 3 happened (which it won’t) the US would not stand by and watch the loss of GIUK.
Covered earlier in the last thread - I'll wait for the article but I suspect it goes not all money went on XYZ, ignoring the fact the rest went on making sure XYZ got to the people it was supposed to get to.
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 2m Boris says it's "common sense" to let people cram into nightclubs for ten weeks before demanding a Covid passport. It's a view.
On a certain level it does make sense. If you allow uncontrolled spread in nightclubs and then demand vaxports 10 weeks later, the clubs should in theory have quite a lot of naturally achieved immunity PLUS double jabbed which may well make them safer from September onwards than the counterfactual of instantly introducing vaxports........ Maybe this is what the PM is going for ?
stable institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities;
a functioning market economy and the capacity to cope with competition and market forces in the EU;
the ability to take on and implement effectively the obligations of membership, including adherence to the aims of political, economic and monetary union.
No need to join the Euro to join the EU because there is no timetable on joining the Euro in the maastricht treaty.
"obligations of membership, including adherence to the aims of ... monetary union"
So is Scotland going to commit to monetary union? Yes or no?
stable institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities;
a functioning market economy and the capacity to cope with competition and market forces in the EU;
the ability to take on and implement effectively the obligations of membership, including adherence to the aims of political, economic and monetary union.
No need to join the Euro to join the EU because there is no timetable on joining the Euro in the maastricht treaty.
Which would still see a hung parliament on the UK Survation numbers and PM Starmer propped up by the SNP and LDs, the SDLP, PC, Alliance and Greens despite another Tory majority in England.
The DUP would not support the Tories again unless they removed the Irish Sea border
Err… yes. Thanks. Hate to be a pain, but I repeat my question:
Scottish figures are largely irrelevant to the UK total unless the SCons take the lead as the SNP will prop up Labour anyway, so your Scottish subsample demand is also largely irrelevant.
However the Scottish figures are SNP 39%, Tories 22%, Labour 19%, Greens 5%, LDs 4%
Nope. Now you’re answering a question I did not ask. I know it’s terribly old-fashioned, but could you give a straight answer to a straight question? Please inform us where you got the figures you pumped in to Martin Baxter’s ElectoralCalculus calculator:
For unless the Scottish Conservatives take the lead in Scotland whether the SNP lead or SLab lead it makes no difference, their MPs will both make Starmer PM
Nope, you are still obfuscating. The link you provided does not contain the numbers you yourself pumped into Baxter’s calculator.
Please inform us where you got the figures you entered in to the ElectoralCalculus calculator:
Nope Nats like you have got to realise not all polls revolve around you, I have now given you both the UK and Scottish Survation figures both of which would make Starmer PM with minor parties support, exactly as the 2019 Scottish numbers would.
You are Labour's little helpers at Westminster so obviously we don't give a toss precisely how many little Nationalists there are at Westminster as you will all be making Starmer PM anyway. Unless the SCons make significant gains in Scotland, Scottish figures are therefore irrelevant for UK elections
BritNats like you have got to realise that folk can see through all your huffing and puffing. Behind the bravado you’re shitting it.
Everybody can clearly see how you are allocating figures to the Scottish parties, so it is you that is clearly obsessed with Scottish electoral behaviour.
Fascinatingly, you are predicting the following Unionist losses:
SNP gains from SCon: Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine Dumfries and Galloway (Alister Jack, Secretary of State for Scotland) Moray (Douglas Ross, Leader of the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party)
SNP gains from SLD: Caithness Sutherland and Easter Ross Edinburgh West North East Fife Orkney and Shetland (Alistair Carmichael, former Secretary of State for Scotland)
As I also posted the actual Scottish figures show your pathetic party down to just 39% from the 45% you got in 2019.
However it matters not a jot, the little Nationalists would still have the numbers to prop up Starmer with the LDs and other minor parties in a hung parliament.
As long as we Tories are in power we can and will refuse indyref2 and as Union matters are reserved to Westminster under the Scotland Act 1998 there is sod all you can do about it.
If Starmer gets in however and needs your support to get in power and offers you indyref2 and devomax that is his affair not ours
I mean its your affair too as you’ll have to live with the consequence of the breakup of our country but I know your short-termism doesn't look that far ahead.
It would be disappointing of course but if Starmer gave in to the SNP because he needed their support to stay PM in a hung parliament and gave them a legal indyref2 and lost, even after offering Scots devomax then he would immediately lose power.
As soon as Scottish MPs left the Commons after a Scexit vote we Tories would return to power without an election as we would still have a majority in England, Wales and NI alone. We would then shift to an English Nationalist agenda and take as hard a line as possible with the SNP in Scexit talks. We would also dominate English politics for a further generation.
Labour meanwhile having lost Scotland would be utterly screwed. Only 5 times since 1945 have Labour won a majority without Scottish MPs, in 1945, 1966, 1997, 2001 and 2005 and most of those were under Blair
I'm far from sure that such policies would be as enduringly popular as you blithely assume.
If there was an indyref2 and the Scottish Nationalists won then English voters would immediately demand as hard a negotiation line as possible with the SNP and Scottish government in Scexit talks and no concessions whatsoever to the SNP.
Exactly the same as European voters demanded the EU take as hard a line as possible with the Tories and UK government after the Brexit vote.
London would have to take as hard a line as possible with Edinburgh as Brussels took with London in the Brexit talks or be replaced by a government that would.
I’m an english voter and I wouldn’t
You are an English Labour voter so irrelevant, the Tories had a majority of 157 in England alone in 2019.
Scottish independence would not only end the Union but also the Conservative and Unionist Party, which would become the English Nationalist Party and dominate English politics as much as the SNP dominated Scottish politics.
List of people FUDHY defines as “irrelevant”:
English Labour voters English Lib Dem voters English Green voters One Nation Tories The Scots The Welsh Irish people who don’t vote DUP The rest of the world
His universe is exceedingly small.
Not as small as Scotland.
You overestimate how popular the Boris Johnson Fanclub is.
Could we have just one thread where we don't confuse EU membership criteria with Euro membership criteria.
Just One. It's all in asking.
EU membership criteria requires making efforts to join the Euro...
Hence you can use the Euro criteria as part of the EU membership criteria.
No.
Why not? One question Indy Scots keep avoiding is what currency will you use - and that question is very important as all options have serious compromises and risks.
Trident would go to SuBase Kings Bay in GA with the US boomers as an interim measure that would end up permanent as that's the route of least resistance that keeps the US happy.
Scotland would get a NATO (or EU) air policing mission like Iceland does right now because that serves everybody's interests. GIUK remains covered. Scotland don't have to shell out for an air force.
I can see Scotland ending up in the same position for similar reasons.
The 26 counties are in Partnership for Peace which is stage one of the four stage path to NATO membership. PfP along with whatever EU defence structure supercedes PESCO is the logical destination for Scotland.
How does an Independent Scotland get into the EU?
It would need an independent currency which means balancing it's books and I dread to think what the Scottish budget deficit looks like.
I think the usual solution is that you hire Goldman Sachs to lightly fricassee the books for you
stable institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities;
a functioning market economy and the capacity to cope with competition and market forces in the EU;
the ability to take on and implement effectively the obligations of membership, including adherence to the aims of political, economic and monetary union.
No need to join the Euro to join the EU because there is no timetable on joining the Euro in the maastricht treaty.
“…adherence to the aims of…monetary union” is what people are on about. New members have to adhere to the aim of monetary union, which means joining the Euro. Sure, there’s no timetable, but you can’t join the EU with a commitment to keep your own currency indefinitely.
Trident would go to SuBase Kings Bay in GA with the US boomers as an interim measure that would end up permanent as that's the route of least resistance that keeps the US happy.
Scotland would get a NATO (or EU) air policing mission like Iceland does right now because that serves everybody's interests. GIUK remains covered. Scotland don't have to shell out for an air force.
I can see Scotland ending up in the same position for similar reasons.
The 26 counties are in Partnership for Peace which is stage one of the four stage path to NATO membership. PfP along with whatever EU defence structure supercedes PESCO is the logical destination for Scotland.
How does an Independent Scotland get into the EU?
It would need an independent currency which means balancing it's books and I dread to think what the Scottish budget deficit looks like.
I think the usual solution is that you hire Goldman Sachs to lightly fricassee the books for you
I suspect if Goldman Sachs was being used some people may be dubious. Could you think of anyone else who may be suitable (Deutsche Bank is probably a good alternative).
This list of Lib Dem "target seats" does, I think, rather reflect the amount of effort and resources that the Lib Dems put into them at the last election, as they attempted to save the political skins of their recent big-name converts to liberalism.
The whole Lib Dem campaign was attuned in 2019 to mitigating or even reversing the disastrous Boris policy of leaving the EU, with no idea of the consequences or plans for dealing with the problems. Whether this particular line will be so prominent next time I do not know. I do not think it was so in the two recent byelections.
What really did for the Tories in these bye-elections, in addition to the incompetence and corruption, was the impression that Boris and his gang were arrogant authoritarians who did not pay any attention to the needs and aspirations of local people. It is very hard to see how the Tories can reverse this impression, except by clearing out the present Cabinet. Including Gove, of course.
The list of LD target seats with a Tory MP is an index of educated poshness with a certain style attached.
Questions to puzzle over would include these: If poshness and education are enough for LDs to come close why are seats like Arundel so Tory and the LDs so distant?
Whatever the answer is - and I think the question is significant - I think there are a very finite number of seats which LDs can aspire to.
It is also possible that when the next election comes the options will be stark: You are voting for two possibilities only, a Tory majority government or an unknown form of centre left alliance in which Lab, LD, Green and SNP are essential to its working.
It is not yet clear that the good people of, say, Wokingham, will certainly prefer the Burgon/Pidcock/Sturgeon/Davey/tree hugging alliance to John Redwood. That will be their choice.
Its posh seats which people of working age want to live in. Guildford, St Albans etc yes, Arundel is for the retired posh.
The problem, Mr Above, is that if you are looking at the results from 2019 (as here) you are looking backwards, at what was, not at what is.
One factor you also need to take into account is the number and quality of activists on the ground. Only so much can be done by a centralised operation (like the Conservative Party). The number of activists varies over time, as people move around. A good indicator of this factor is success in local elections. If there is a strong team of campaigners, they will do well in local elections as well.
I have no idea what the local Lib Dems in Arundel are like, but there is no reason at all why several strongly motivated activists should not move into the patch.
Nowhere is safe for the Tories - and you have no idea!
And that 122 polls in succession with a Tory lead are all part of a cunning plan to lure Boris into a false sense of security.
Not at all. I think many of those who say they are going to vote Conservative in polls are thinking of the relatively competent Conservative governments we had in the days of Churchill and MacMillan. The present gang of dodgy incompetents is quite another story - but a lot of people have not yet looked beyond the bluster and the "fun" of the Johnson regime.
It is not yet clear that the good people of, say, Wokingham, will certainly prefer the Burgon/Pidcock/Sturgeon/Davey/tree hugging alliance to John Redwood. That will be their choice.
Its posh seats which people of working age want to live in. Guildford, St Albans etc yes, Arundel is for the retired posh.
That's right, also within constituencies. In my patch (Hunt's constituency, SW Surrey) the Tories are down to 2 County Councillors out of 7, and both are in the villages where there are masses of wealthy retired people, while they have fallen miles behind the LibDems (and behind Labour at Borough level in some places like mine) in the small towns. Another factor is a college in the area even if not a full-blown university.
On algarkirk's hypothesis, for all the doubts about Starmer's positive ideas, few people will feel he's going to be a puppet of Burgon and Pidcock (if they've even heard of them). Is a possible post-election understanding with Sturgeon going to seem very terrifying in Wokingham? Will voters there care much about that? As for tree-huggers, lots of wealthy folk are quite open to a bit of greenery.
Interesting. In SW Surrey LD strength goes back decades so I shall wait and see, while agreeing that the Tories remain vulnerable in a number of seats. Your remaining argument is strong, that I fully accept. At the next election there is going to be strong contest between the Tories and all others. Personally I think the Tories as the only option for a majority government will hold attractions, that the LDs will do well but as usual spread too thin, and that the Tories will win SW Surrey and Wokingham.
I agree that Nicola is not a threat in Surrey or Wokingham in the same way she is in my English northern borders patch (if I stand up I can see Scotland). But neither is the idea of a government relying on the SNP a positive attraction anywhere in England. They may not be loathed but they are far from loved.
More loved than the others.
‘Nicola Sturgeon the most popular leader in the UK, poll finds’
Polling asked voters last week how they thought each UK party leader was performing, with the First Minister receiving a net +24% approval rating in Scotland and +10% across the UK.
By contrast, Boris Johnson scored -35% in Scotland and -8% across the UK, Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer was given a -17% by people in Scotland and +9% in the UK, and LibDem leader Ed Davey scored -15% and -12% respectively; making Sturgeon the most popular leader in both Scotland and the UK.
yes, very emotional. on the independence issue, I can foresee an Independent Scotland receiving positive overtures from the EU, with a view to expanding the EU trade markets, and strengthening the trade links with Ireland. Who knows, this could tip the reunification arguement for NI. If Scotland was offered the use of the Euro in return (imagine Euros with Scottish historical heroes all over them), I could see a ready deal in the offing here. I also read somewhere that there is a net flow North to South of generated electrical energy. Link that with "Scottish Oil" and it may be worth something, along with the continuence of the NATO foothold.
Just putting it out there, don't shoot the messenger please...
'I also read somewhere that there is a net flow North to South of generated electrical energy.'
In more cutting off nose to spite face news..
This is just so much bollocks. Firstly, it’s the Express. Secondly the seven year old quote in the headline comes from some random “risk analyst” commenting on something Ed Davey said during the referendum. So the Express reheats some old quotes as click bait to enrage Independence supporters and fire up its own English Nationalist base you are willing to play along. Round of applause.
Remind me who the Express supports?...
The embarassing element is that Davey may have started it....
Trident would go to SuBase Kings Bay in GA with the US boomers as an interim measure that would end up permanent as that's the route of least resistance that keeps the US happy.
Scotland would get a NATO (or EU) air policing mission like Iceland does right now because that serves everybody's interests. GIUK remains covered. Scotland don't have to shell out for an air force.
I can see Scotland ending up in the same position for similar reasons.
The 26 counties are in Partnership for Peace which is stage one of the four stage path to NATO membership. PfP along with whatever EU defence structure supercedes PESCO is the logical destination for Scotland.
How does an Independent Scotland get into the EU?
It would need an independent currency which means balancing it's books and I dread to think what the Scottish budget deficit looks like.
If we’re dissolving a Union of equals, then we’ll be taking our share of the national debt.
If we’re leaving the UK, you can keep your own debt.
1. It will be negotiated. It’s neither of those two alternatives.
Trident would go to SuBase Kings Bay in GA with the US boomers as an interim measure that would end up permanent as that's the route of least resistance that keeps the US happy.
Scotland would get a NATO (or EU) air policing mission like Iceland does right now because that serves everybody's interests. GIUK remains covered. Scotland don't have to shell out for an air force.
I can see Scotland ending up in the same position for similar reasons.
The 26 counties are in Partnership for Peace which is stage one of the four stage path to NATO membership. PfP along with whatever EU defence structure supercedes PESCO is the logical destination for Scotland.
How does an Independent Scotland get into the EU?
It would need an independent currency which means balancing it's books and I dread to think what the Scottish budget deficit looks like.
If we’re dissolving a Union of equals, then we’ll be taking our share of the national debt.
If we’re leaving the UK, you can keep your own debt.
1. It will be negotiated. It’s neither of those two alternatives.
On the Marcus Rashford thing, here's my (admittedly cynical take).
He's taken up social causes that are easy to support and difficult to challenge in order to build his brand - Saint Marcus the champion of the underprivileged, squeaky clean, future Knight of the Realm.
That his people have come out swinging with a pre-emptive strike against the Spectator is telling - get your retaliation in first, frame the narrative. The Luvvies are already circling the wagons in defence of Marcus (I'm looking at you BBC and your front page puff piece).
But that statement from the Rashford camp is very carefully worded, as some on here have noted. He doesn't "need" to partner with brands ... well no-one does, do they, unless they want them to pay for stuff. And "most" of any fees goes to the good good causes. Hmmm.
Brand building doesn't come cheap ... staffers to pay, "operating expenses" and so on.
Yes, I'm an old cynic, but the Spectator is right to shine a light on this.
On a related point, I'm amazed that there hasn't been more of an expose of footballer tax affairs given the public's appetite for taking the super rich down a peg or two. How much of Rashford's £10m salary finds it's way to the HMRC? If I were earning that amount I'd only see, what, £6m of it under PAYE and the rest would go to Rishi (but then I'm not a tax accountant).
(((Dan Hodges))) @DPJHodges · 2m Boris says it's "common sense" to let people cram into nightclubs for ten weeks before demanding a Covid passport. It's a view.
He said its "common sense" that we need to offer young people the chance to be vaccinated twice, before we demand from them proof that they've been vaccinated twice.
He's right. You can't demand proof of double-vaccination before you've offered the opportunity to be double-vaccinated.
I wish people wouldn't use the term common-sense in relation to drugged and drunken teens and tweens in nightclubs, they have none by that point.
1 Of course an independent Scotland would end up in the Euro 2 Of course the criteria for Euro membership won't be an impediment for Scotland's EU membership. We all know they fudge the criteria in practice so "ah but Scotland won't hit the criteria so won't be allowed in" is nonsense.
stable institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities;
a functioning market economy and the capacity to cope with competition and market forces in the EU;
the ability to take on and implement effectively the obligations of membership, including adherence to the aims of political, economic and monetary union.
No need to join the Euro to join the EU because there is no timetable on joining the Euro in the maastricht treaty.
It's literally right there.
Yes, but you don't have to be using the Euro to join the EU.
You don't have to be using the Euro to be a continuing member of the EU.
We can tell both of these facts are true by the numerous states who have joined the EU who were not using the Euro, have not adopted the Euro and did not meet the Euro convergence criteria when they joined the EU.
Meeting the Euro usage criteria is not a criteria for joining the EU.
At first glance, it looks considerably more practicable than others approaches.
Using the movement of the plasma to generate electricity through induction is certainly a novel approach. The idea does seem plausible unlike, as you say, most other approaches. However, you're still going to have the problems of irradiation of the containment vessel and the need to remove large amounts of heat.
Of course. But look at the (relative) scale of the thing - the energy fluxes are much smaller than conventional fusion approaches, a great deal of the energy is being extracted directly as electricity, and the engineering challenges ought therefore to be significantly less. It's still going to take quite some time to be a workable product, but it's not quite so much an impossible dream.
Another potential problem might be the availability of helium-3, which makes up only a small fraction of terrestrial helium. And you've got to separate it from regular helium-4. Most fusion experiments use the deuterium-tritium reaction, but that's not available here since most of the energy comes out as neutrons rather than charged particles.
Doesn't a deuterium/deuterium fusion reaction produce he-3?
It does indeed, but that requires very high temperatures (400-500 million degrees C). Virtually all of the He3 used today comes from the decay of the tritium used in nuclear warheads (as I just discovered on Wikipedia :-)
1 Of course an independent Scotland would end up in the Euro 2 Of course the criteria for Euro membership won't be an impediment for Scotland's EU membership. We all know they fudge the criteria in practice so "ah but Scotland won't hit the criteria so won't be allowed in" is nonsense.
You think they will be willing to repeat the experience they had with Greece?
stable institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities;
a functioning market economy and the capacity to cope with competition and market forces in the EU;
the ability to take on and implement effectively the obligations of membership, including adherence to the aims of political, economic and monetary union.
No need to join the Euro to join the EU because there is no timetable on joining the Euro in the maastricht treaty.
“…adherence to the aims of…monetary union” is what people are on about. New members have to adhere to the aim of monetary union, which means joining the Euro. Sure, there’s no timetable, but you can’t join the EU with a commitment to keep your own currency indefinitely.
yes, very emotional. on the independence issue, I can foresee an Independent Scotland receiving positive overtures from the EU, with a view to expanding the EU trade markets, and strengthening the trade links with Ireland. Who knows, this could tip the reunification arguement for NI. If Scotland was offered the use of the Euro in return (imagine Euros with Scottish historical heroes all over them), I could see a ready deal in the offing here. I also read somewhere that there is a net flow North to South of generated electrical energy. Link that with "Scottish Oil" and it may be worth something, along with the continuence of the NATO foothold.
Just putting it out there, don't shoot the messenger please...
'I also read somewhere that there is a net flow North to South of generated electrical energy.'
In more cutting off nose to spite face news..
This is just so much bollocks. Firstly, it’s the Express. Secondly the seven year old quote in the headline comes from some random “risk analyst” commenting on something Ed Davey said during the referendum. So the Express reheats some old quotes as click bait to enrage Independence supporters and fire up its own English Nationalist base you are willing to play along. Round of applause.
Remind me who the Express supports?...
The embarassing element is that Davey may have started it....
They were quoting him from a 2014 interview with Good Morning Scotland, when he was energy secretary, talking about the prospects for a pan GB energy market after Scottish Independence. Given he was on the “No” side his interpretation was that this would not be straightforward nor necessarily in the interests of rUK. Given that he’s a unionist politician, and known to be one, that’s hardly surprising nor embarrassing.
It is not yet clear that the good people of, say, Wokingham, will certainly prefer the Burgon/Pidcock/Sturgeon/Davey/tree hugging alliance to John Redwood. That will be their choice.
Its posh seats which people of working age want to live in. Guildford, St Albans etc yes, Arundel is for the retired posh.
That's right, also within constituencies. In my patch (Hunt's constituency, SW Surrey) the Tories are down to 2 County Councillors out of 7, and both are in the villages where there are masses of wealthy retired people, while they have fallen miles behind the LibDems (and behind Labour at Borough level in some places like mine) in the small towns. Another factor is a college in the area even if not a full-blown university.
On algarkirk's hypothesis, for all the doubts about Starmer's positive ideas, few people will feel he's going to be a puppet of Burgon and Pidcock (if they've even heard of them). Is a possible post-election understanding with Sturgeon going to seem very terrifying in Wokingham? Will voters there care much about that? As for tree-huggers, lots of wealthy folk are quite open to a bit of greenery.
Interesting. In SW Surrey LD strength goes back decades so I shall wait and see, while agreeing that the Tories remain vulnerable in a number of seats. Your remaining argument is strong, that I fully accept. At the next election there is going to be strong contest between the Tories and all others. Personally I think the Tories as the only option for a majority government will hold attractions, that the LDs will do well but as usual spread too thin, and that the Tories will win SW Surrey and Wokingham.
I agree that Nicola is not a threat in Surrey or Wokingham in the same way she is in my English northern borders patch (if I stand up I can see Scotland). But neither is the idea of a government relying on the SNP a positive attraction anywhere in England. They may not be loathed but they are far from loved.
More loved than the others.
‘Nicola Sturgeon the most popular leader in the UK, poll finds’
Polling asked voters last week how they thought each UK party leader was performing, with the First Minister receiving a net +24% approval rating in Scotland and +10% across the UK.
By contrast, Boris Johnson scored -35% in Scotland and -8% across the UK, Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer was given a -17% by people in Scotland and +9% in the UK, and LibDem leader Ed Davey scored -15% and -12% respectively; making Sturgeon the most popular leader in both Scotland and the UK.
Guildford is an interesting seat for a number of reasons:
1. Boundary changes: the hinterland of the seat is changing quite dramatically, though the town itself and most of the population stays as it was. If anything, I think this is good news for the Lib Dems as it adds the stations at Clandon, Horsley, and Effingham Junction to the seat, which might be more Lib Dem than the rural parts to the west and southeast of the town.
2. The Tory incumbent Angela Richardson might get a bit of boost when she defends the seat for the first time, though I don't think personal incumbency is as important as party incumbency.
3. What happens to Anne Milton's 4,356 votes? Did those people vote for her thinking she genuinely had a chance of winning? Or are these loyal Tories who might go home next time?
4. Working from home leading to people moving there from London.
That could apply to anywhere that isn't a big city to be honest. Is Guildford more likely to get those people? I doubt it as it is a very expensive place to live. I suspect the effect of Londoners moving out will be hard to see as they'll be spread fairly evenly around the country.
The fact that it is expensive is precisely why the Londoners who move there are more likely to be wealthier and better educated than the people moving to some of the other commuter towns. And therefore more likely to be ABC1 remainers, and therefore more likely to vote LibDem.
stable institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities;
a functioning market economy and the capacity to cope with competition and market forces in the EU;
the ability to take on and implement effectively the obligations of membership, including adherence to the aims of political, economic and monetary union.
No need to join the Euro to join the EU because there is no timetable on joining the Euro in the maastricht treaty.
"obligations of membership, including adherence to the aims of ... monetary union"
So is Scotland going to commit to monetary union? Yes or no?
Scotland should do what is in its best economic interest.
If joining the Euro is it then it should do so, if not joining the Euro like a bunch of other EU States is it then they should do that.
stable institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities;
a functioning market economy and the capacity to cope with competition and market forces in the EU;
the ability to take on and implement effectively the obligations of membership, including adherence to the aims of political, economic and monetary union.
No need to join the Euro to join the EU because there is no timetable on joining the Euro in the maastricht treaty.
“…adherence to the aims of…monetary union” is what people are on about. New members have to adhere to the aim of monetary union, which means joining the Euro. Sure, there’s no timetable, but you can’t join the EU with a commitment to keep your own currency indefinitely.
Tell that to Sweden.
Sweden and Denmark is why those rules have been made clearer for members that came along later..
stable institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities;
a functioning market economy and the capacity to cope with competition and market forces in the EU;
the ability to take on and implement effectively the obligations of membership, including adherence to the aims of political, economic and monetary union.
No need to join the Euro to join the EU because there is no timetable on joining the Euro in the maastricht treaty.
“…adherence to the aims of…monetary union” is what people are on about. New members have to adhere to the aim of monetary union, which means joining the Euro. Sure, there’s no timetable, but you can’t join the EU with a commitment to keep your own currency indefinitely.
Tell that to Sweden.
At the time it joined, Sweden did plan to join the Euro but it was defeated in a referendum.
Maybe just me,but I wasn't sure how far the presence of any antibodies really indicated protection. Encouragingly, looking around it looks as though it probably does:
The difficulty with the ONS survey is the extent to which continuously sampling the same group makes them far more engaged and likely to be vaccinated than a random sample would be. Certainly the vaccination rates they model are in excess of reality.
Beat me to it - seems to be due to project delays...
I do like that PB is often how I find out about news occurring in my home town now. I haven't lived there in 10 years but I'm happy there seems to be a growing County Durham/Teesside group to the point where you and Taz posted this at the same time .
stable institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities;
a functioning market economy and the capacity to cope with competition and market forces in the EU;
the ability to take on and implement effectively the obligations of membership, including adherence to the aims of political, economic and monetary union.
No need to join the Euro to join the EU because there is no timetable on joining the Euro in the maastricht treaty.
“…adherence to the aims of…monetary union” is what people are on about. New members have to adhere to the aim of monetary union, which means joining the Euro. Sure, there’s no timetable, but you can’t join the EU with a commitment to keep your own currency indefinitely.
Tell that to Sweden.
Sweden and Denmark is why those rules have been made clearer for members that came along later..
Indeed and it is why we are never likely to rejoin the full EU, even if a future Labour government rejoined the single market or customs union as it would likely require us to commit to joining the Euro without the opt out we had before.
The EU would want us all in or fully out, we are too big to be half in and half out as we were before
Guildford is an interesting seat for a number of reasons:
1. Boundary changes: the hinterland of the seat is changing quite dramatically, though the town itself and most of the population stays as it was. If anything, I think this is good news for the Lib Dems as it adds the stations at Clandon, Horsley, and Effingham Junction to the seat, which might be more Lib Dem than the rural parts to the west and southeast of the town.
2. The Tory incumbent Angela Richardson might get a bit of boost when she defends the seat for the first time, though I don't think personal incumbency is as important as party incumbency.
3. What happens to Anne Milton's 4,356 votes? Did those people vote for her thinking she genuinely had a chance of winning? Or are these loyal Tories who might go home next time?
4. Working from home leading to people moving there from London.
That could apply to anywhere that isn't a big city to be honest. Is Guildford more likely to get those people? I doubt it as it is a very expensive place to live. I suspect the effect of Londoners moving out will be hard to see as they'll be spread fairly evenly around the country.
The fact that it is expensive is precisely why the Londoners who move there are more likely to be wealthier and better educated than the people moving to some of the other commuter towns. And therefore more likely to be ABC1 remainers, and therefore more likely to vote LibDem.
Alternatively, Guildford is already full of London commuters who tend to be a bit wealthier than those in neighbouring Woking.
stable institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities;
a functioning market economy and the capacity to cope with competition and market forces in the EU;
the ability to take on and implement effectively the obligations of membership, including adherence to the aims of political, economic and monetary union.
No need to join the Euro to join the EU because there is no timetable on joining the Euro in the maastricht treaty.
It's literally right there.
Yes, but you don't have to be using the Euro to join the EU.
You don't have to be using the Euro to be a continuing member of the EU.
We can tell both of these facts are true by the numerous states who have joined the EU who were not using the Euro, have not adopted the Euro and did not meet the Euro convergence criteria when they joined the EU.
Meeting the Euro usage criteria is not a criteria for joining the EU.
No, but committing to joining the Euro is a criteria which all those nations that have joined since the Euro was launched have done - and that has been tightened up on since Sweden exposed a loophole in the rules to artificially give themselves an unofficial opt-out.
So the question is, is Scotland going to commit to joining the Euro? If no, then they will not be able to be admitted unless you think the rules are changed.
stable institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities;
a functioning market economy and the capacity to cope with competition and market forces in the EU;
the ability to take on and implement effectively the obligations of membership, including adherence to the aims of political, economic and monetary union.
No need to join the Euro to join the EU because there is no timetable on joining the Euro in the maastricht treaty.
It's literally right there.
Yes, but you don't have to be using the Euro to join the EU.
You don't have to be using the Euro to be a continuing member of the EU.
We can tell both of these facts are true by the numerous states who have joined the EU who were not using the Euro, have not adopted the Euro and did not meet the Euro convergence criteria when they joined the EU.
Meeting the Euro usage criteria is not a criteria for joining the EU.
Scotland isn't in the EU. Joining criteria is different from membership criteria. The accession process insists that candidate countries use the convergence to the Euro for their existing currency. They got fooled by a lot of the Eastern European countries and have further tightened the rules.
Simply, Scotland must commit to meeting monetary union criteria within an EU approved set period of time so it can join the Euro. It can't do that if it keeps Sterling.
On the Marcus Rashford thing, here's my (admittedly cynical take).
He's taken up social causes that are easy to support and difficult to challenge in order to build his brand - Saint Marcus the champion of the underprivileged, squeaky clean, future Knight of the Realm.
That his people have come out swinging with a pre-emptive strike against the Spectator is telling - get your retaliation in first, frame the narrative. The Luvvies are already circling the wagons in defence of Marcus (I'm looking at you BBC and your front page puff piece).
But that statement from the Rashford camp is very carefully worded, as some on here have noted. He doesn't "need" to partner with brands ... well no-one does, do they, unless they want them to pay for stuff. And "most" of any fees goes to the good good causes. Hmmm.
Brand building doesn't come cheap ... staffers to pay, "operating expenses" and so on.
Yes, I'm an old cynic, but the Spectator is right to shine a light on this.
On a related point, I'm amazed that there hasn't been more of an expose of footballer tax affairs given the public's appetite for taking the super rich down a peg or two. How much of Rashford's £10m salary finds it's way to the HMRC? If I were earning that amount I'd only see, what, £6m of it under PAYE and the rest would go to Rishi (but then I'm not a tax accountant).
Its always baffled me that the public are so supportive of someone who earns £15million plus per year, who has at least 8 houses, loads of super cars, but does not contribute any of that money to help his cause, just a bit of time, which he has plenty of. He could easily buy someone on UC a house per month and still have a £1 million quid to play aorund with. Now that would make a massive difference .He could also get his super rich team mates to do the same.
We should take our fair share. Obviously we cannot take 10 million but 80 - 100K is feasible.
Remember Labour thought only about 130,000 eastern Europeans would arrive in total. But over 6 million applied for the settled scheme status.
We have also given asylum status to 3 million Hong Kongers and take-up of that offer is brisk.
So we're already looking at nearly 10 million people seeking asylum from the EU's poor economy (the eastern europeans) and from China (the Hong Kongers).
If you open the door to new migrants from France, it won't stick to the 100k you envisage - it will be four to five million.
Also - the boat people seem to originate from Syria, Albania and Iran - these are not countries that Britain has ever had responsibility for. Syria used to be a French colony, Albania was Ottoman and Iran was independent. Not sure why Britain should be responsible for them.
The international language of trade is English - and we are the only accessible country where English is the default language.
Other parts of Europe use fluency of local language as an employment filter in a way we cannot...
Easy solution: revert to Welsh as the national language.
Err… other indigenous languages are available, if we’re going to ditch the Germanic one.
What the Lib Dems need to do is just focus on about a dozen wealthy Remainer constituencies.
At the last general election they obviously found some insanely cheap printing rates to avoid breaching spending limits where I am, and they were no hopers. Bit alarmed for my post box next time round as they're likely to win this time.
stable institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities;
a functioning market economy and the capacity to cope with competition and market forces in the EU;
the ability to take on and implement effectively the obligations of membership, including adherence to the aims of political, economic and monetary union.
No need to join the Euro to join the EU because there is no timetable on joining the Euro in the maastricht treaty.
“…adherence to the aims of…monetary union” is what people are on about. New members have to adhere to the aim of monetary union, which means joining the Euro. Sure, there’s no timetable, but you can’t join the EU with a commitment to keep your own currency indefinitely.
Tell that to Sweden.
They are obliged to join at some point. As I say you cannot, with a straight face, say you can accede without at least a long term commitment to join.
stable institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities;
a functioning market economy and the capacity to cope with competition and market forces in the EU;
the ability to take on and implement effectively the obligations of membership, including adherence to the aims of political, economic and monetary union.
No need to join the Euro to join the EU because there is no timetable on joining the Euro in the maastricht treaty.
"obligations of membership, including adherence to the aims of ... monetary union"
So is Scotland going to commit to monetary union? Yes or no?
Scotland should do what is in its best economic interest.
If joining the Euro is it then it should do so, if not joining the Euro like a bunch of other EU States is it then they should do that.
That's not an option. You need to commit to joining the Euro in order to meet the admission criteria.
Denmark has an opt-out, Sweden has an unofficial opt-out by exploiting a loophole that was subsequently addressed. All other nations are committed to accession to the Euro as all new members must.
Beat me to it - seems to be due to project delays...
I do like that PB is often how I find out about news occurring in my home town now. I haven't lived there in 10 years but I'm happy there seems to be a growing County Durham/Teesside group to the point where you and Taz posted this at the same time .
This is a strange one - as I didn't have any clue this was going to happen - all previous close shaves have been obvious for ages.
For those betting on TeamGB medals... Team GB shooter Amber Hill has withdrawn from #Tokyo2020 after testing positive for COVID-19 in the UK prior to her departure.
On the Marcus Rashford thing, here's my (admittedly cynical take).
He's taken up social causes that are easy to support and difficult to challenge in order to build his brand - Saint Marcus the champion of the underprivileged, squeaky clean, future Knight of the Realm.
That his people have come out swinging with a pre-emptive strike against the Spectator is telling - get your retaliation in first, frame the narrative. The Luvvies are already circling the wagons in defence of Marcus (I'm looking at you BBC and your front page puff piece).
But that statement from the Rashford camp is very carefully worded, as some on here have noted. He doesn't "need" to partner with brands ... well no-one does, do they, unless they want them to pay for stuff. And "most" of any fees goes to the good good causes. Hmmm.
Brand building doesn't come cheap ... staffers to pay, "operating expenses" and so on.
Yes, I'm an old cynic, but the Spectator is right to shine a light on this.
On a related point, I'm amazed that there hasn't been more of an expose of footballer tax affairs given the public's appetite for taking the super rich down a peg or two. How much of Rashford's £10m salary finds it's way to the HMRC? If I were earning that amount I'd only see, what, £6m of it under PAYE and the rest would go to Rishi (but then I'm not a tax accountant).
Due to strict ownership rules I assume that PL footballers are on PAYE so I'd imagine that's all in order (probably getting on for 50:50 when you add NI contributions). The rest of their earnings (image rights, etc.) are where the fun and games begin. The football leaks stuff on Cristiano Ronaldo is interesting.
stable institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities;
a functioning market economy and the capacity to cope with competition and market forces in the EU;
the ability to take on and implement effectively the obligations of membership, including adherence to the aims of political, economic and monetary union.
No need to join the Euro to join the EU because there is no timetable on joining the Euro in the maastricht treaty.
“…adherence to the aims of…monetary union” is what people are on about. New members have to adhere to the aim of monetary union, which means joining the Euro. Sure, there’s no timetable, but you can’t join the EU with a commitment to keep your own currency indefinitely.
Tell that to Sweden.
Sweden and Denmark is why those rules have been made clearer for members that came along later..
And again since Poland, Hungary and other Eastern European countries have dodged the Euro. It's now impossible to join the EU without a very tight set of deadlines on when convergence criteria for EMU membership must be met.
Comments
People could maybe get pleasure from looking at these discs while waiting in the queue to have their car boots checked for smuggled booze and fags on returning from visiting family members in Berwick.
However will he cope?
One factor you also need to take into account is the number and quality of activists on the ground. Only so much can be done by a centralised operation (like the Conservative Party). The number of activists varies over time, as people move around. A good indicator of this factor is success in local elections. If there is a strong team of campaigners, they will do well in local elections as well.
I have no idea what the local Lib Dems in Arundel are like, but there is no reason at all why several strongly motivated activists should not move into the patch.
Nowhere is safe for the Tories - and you have no idea!
https://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/19457732.jobs-threat-darlingtons-cleveland-bridge-calls-administrators/
https://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/19457732.jobs-threat-darlingtons-cleveland-bridge-calls-administrators/
But Cleveland bridge closing is going to shock a lot of Red Wall seats but it's the consequence of some project delays due to Covid.
https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4961
Why does the BBC employ such poor journalists? Oh, wait, I know the answer to that one.
It is what it is, but just wanted to point out that even at 92% we can expect to see a lot of cases. Hopefully the government is readying the booster programme to commence in August as that would ensure everyone in groups 1-10 are better protected in the run up to November/December and we eliminate the risk of waning immunity, something Israel may be seeing.
I agree that Nicola is not a threat in Surrey or Wokingham in the same way she is in my English northern borders patch (if I stand up I can see Scotland). But neither is the idea of a government relying on the SNP a positive attraction anywhere in England. They may not be loathed but they are far from loved.
“The company has a full order book for the next 18-months, this coupled with the firm’s history, expertise and highly skilled workforce makes us optimistic that a buyer will come forward quickly for this iconic business. But it is critical that local jobs are protected as part of any deal to buy Cleveland Bridge.”
Cleveland Bridge is one of those strategic industrial companies that the region and the company needs. It should not be allowed to disappear.
1. Boundary changes: the hinterland of the seat is changing quite dramatically, though the town itself and most of the population stays as it was. If anything, I think this is good news for the Lib Dems as it adds the stations at Clandon, Horsley, and Effingham Junction to the seat, which might be more Lib Dem than the rural parts to the west and southeast of the town.
2. The Tory incumbent Angela Richardson might get a bit of boost when she defends the seat for the first time, though I don't think personal incumbency is as important as party incumbency.
3. What happens to Anne Milton's 4,356 votes? Did those people vote for her thinking she genuinely had a chance of winning? Or are these loyal Tories who might go home next time?
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9808319/Ofsted-finds-book-Muslim-boarding-schools-library-calling-gay-people-kille.html
Alternatively Gove could stab Cummings in the back. OK that continues the freak show but Gove could be in No.10 and then do the dirty deed before parliamentary half-time.
‘Nicola Sturgeon the most popular leader in the UK, poll finds’
By contrast, Boris Johnson scored -35% in Scotland and -8% across the UK, Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer was given a -17% by people in Scotland and +9% in the UK, and LibDem leader Ed Davey scored -15% and -12% respectively; making Sturgeon the most popular leader in both Scotland and the UK.
https://www.thenational.scot/news/19054486.nicola-sturgeon-popular-leader-uk-poll-finds/
Should Scotland do that in your eyes?
@DPJHodges
·
2m
Boris says it's "common sense" to let people cram into nightclubs for ten weeks before demanding a Covid passport. It's a view.
https://twitter.com/KennyMacAskill/status/1415344843862298635?s=20
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-57912240
He's right. You can't demand proof of double-vaccination before you've offered the opportunity to be double-vaccinated.
What does Starmer think about these things?
So, the road might be a little longer than we think - although hopefully the added protection of jabs / previous illness will keep the severity of illness down
stable institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities;
a functioning market economy and the capacity to cope with competition and market forces in the EU;
the ability to take on and implement effectively the obligations of membership, including adherence to the aims of political, economic and monetary union.
No need to join the Euro to join the EU because there is no timetable on joining the Euro in the maastricht treaty.
He begins: "What has changed since we were thinking in those ways..."
Is that an admission?
https://twitter.com/PippaCrerar/status/1417806682999111687
@PippaCrerar Yes- unintentional admission.
https://twitter.com/steverichards14/status/1417807008972132352
Putin knows that, so 3 won’t happen
If you allow uncontrolled spread in nightclubs and then demand vaxports 10 weeks later, the clubs should in theory have quite a lot of naturally achieved immunity PLUS double jabbed which may well make them safer from September onwards than the counterfactual of instantly introducing vaxports........ Maybe this is what the PM is going for ?
So is Scotland going to commit to monetary union? Yes or no?
You underestimate how popular Scots are.
The embarassing element is that Davey may have started it....
2. Deficit isn’t debt…
2. Deficit isn’t debt…
He's taken up social causes that are easy to support and difficult to challenge in order to build his brand - Saint Marcus the champion of the underprivileged, squeaky clean, future Knight of the Realm.
That his people have come out swinging with a pre-emptive strike against the Spectator is telling - get your retaliation in first, frame the narrative. The Luvvies are already circling the wagons in defence of Marcus (I'm looking at you BBC and your front page puff piece).
But that statement from the Rashford camp is very carefully worded, as some on here have noted. He doesn't "need" to partner with brands ... well no-one does, do they, unless they want them to pay for stuff. And "most" of any fees goes to the good good causes. Hmmm.
Brand building doesn't come cheap ... staffers to pay, "operating expenses" and so on.
Yes, I'm an old cynic, but the Spectator is right to shine a light on this.
On a related point, I'm amazed that there hasn't been more of an expose of footballer tax affairs given the public's appetite for taking the super rich down a peg or two. How much of Rashford's £10m salary finds it's way to the HMRC? If I were earning that amount I'd only see, what, £6m of it under PAYE and the rest would go to Rishi (but then I'm not a tax accountant).
2 Of course the criteria for Euro membership won't be an impediment for Scotland's EU membership. We all know they fudge the criteria in practice so "ah but Scotland won't hit the criteria so won't be allowed in" is nonsense.
You don't have to be using the Euro to be a continuing member of the EU.
We can tell both of these facts are true by the numerous states who have joined the EU who were not using the Euro, have not adopted the Euro and did not meet the Euro convergence criteria when they joined the EU.
Meeting the Euro usage criteria is not a criteria for joining the EU.
Denial about the deep divide now emerging in Scottish Nationalism between Sturgeon and Salmond supporters
If joining the Euro is it then it should do so, if not joining the Euro like a bunch of other EU States is it then they should do that.
What the Lib Dems need to do is just focus on about a dozen wealthy Remainer constituencies.
The EU would want us all in or fully out, we are too big to be half in and half out as we were before
So the question is, is Scotland going to commit to joining the Euro? If no, then they will not be able to be admitted unless you think the rules are changed.
Simply, Scotland must commit to meeting monetary union criteria within an EU approved set period of time so it can join the Euro. It can't do that if it keeps Sterling.
Denmark has an opt-out, Sweden has an unofficial opt-out by exploiting a loophole that was subsequently addressed. All other nations are committed to accession to the Euro as all new members must.
Team GB shooter Amber Hill has withdrawn from #Tokyo2020 after testing positive for COVID-19 in the UK prior to her departure.
She is world number one in skeet and was a favourite for gold.
https://twitter.com/SarahDawkins23/status/1417809905847660546