If they sign Grealish and Kane for £250m, how does that work out with financial fair play?
Well they've got £60 million banked from last summer from the Sane money.
Apparently they will try and sell Silva and Sterling, but if that doesn't happen I'm sure Etihad Airways will sign a new £350 million a season sponsorship deal with City because that's the market rate, ahem.
Was listening to Athletic football podcast and they didn't think Sterling was going anywhere after the Euros. And there is a problem that across Europe, outside EPL nobody has any money to pay big buck / wages outside perhaps PSG...and no City player wants to go to say Spurs as part of in kind swap.
I thought they have been told they can't play those silly games anymore?
Apparently they are going to try.
Argument will be airlines are suffering because of the pandemic and will spend lots of money on advertising.
The other way they may and get around it is get another club in the City Football Group to buy players. New York City buy Fernandinho for £50 million.
The position Barcelona find themselves is worth sharing as well, they cannot register new players/contracts until they make cuts so they cannot register Aguero, Depay, and Messi so the solution they are thinking of is letting them sign for Segunda División teams and then loan them to Barca for this season.
Apparently Chelsea have a big problem with the collapse in the market. They have so many players who aren't good enough but on massive wages. They might have to end up paying big portions of their wages at any new club they sell them to, or try to settle the contracts.
There's a few clubs about to get screwed.
One of the reasons I expect Kane to end at City, Spurs need the money.
That new stadium was built on the plans the concerts and NFL matches helping pay for it, oh and the fans turning up.
The pandemic absolutely shit the bed for Spurs and Levy.
Dropping out of the Champions League for two seasons and counting wasn't in the plan.
The new stadium is a mill around the clubs neck.
It wouldn't have been, it was funded with decent interest rates, say compared to the rates Arsenal had for Ashburton Grove.
The pandemic came along and then it became a mill.
Honestly, it is a fantastic stadium.
Sure but it has affected Spurs as it badly affected Arsenal. And yes I.meant millstone.
Arsenal haven't won a title since they moved stadium, just like Spurs, who haven't won a title since they moved to their new place.
Neither Biden nor Harris on the Dem ticket in 2024.
It would need a big price as it takes few things to happen for it to come off. Biden has to go or be removed via the 25th because his brain's a piece of shit. Somebody (Buttigieg, AOC?) has to run and beat Kamala to the Democrat nomination.
The only thing that makes a slightly attractive betting notion is that if Biden does get hauled off then the Democrats must realise that Kamala can't possibly beat Trump (for it is he).
The problem is I think Harris will dig her heels in on this. Why is she going to give up the shot of the Presidency when it is so close, especially when she knows the "Black Woman" card is strong in the party? She stands aside, she is never getting another chance at the Presidency.
Which is why it has to be something that pushes her out as opposed to someone having a chat.
Trump's dream scenario is of course ill health forces Biden, his most dangerous opponent, to stand down before 2024 and Harris takes over. As VP if Biden is forced to step down Harris would automatically become POTUS in his place and would then be near unstoppable for the 2024 Democratic nomination. Trump would then easily win the GOP nomination and would fancy his chances of portraying Harris as an ultra woke Hillary so that he becomes the first President to lose re election but then return 4 years later to the Oval office since Grover Cleveland in 1893.
If Biden's health holds though he will almost certainly run for re election
The Republicans are making noises about blocking the confirmation of a VP if Harris becomes President (and therefore no longer has the casting Senate vote). Charming and reasonable people!
They would need to win control of either the House or Senate in 2022 to do that however.
Under the 25th amendment of the US constitution a new VP nominated by the President outside of a Presidential election when the office becomes vacant only needs to be confirmed by a simple majority of both chambers of Congress
The Democrats do not have a simple majority in the Senate until a replacement VP is confirmed.
Probably the odd Republican like Romney who'd not be a complete arse, though.
My favourite is Leicester Forest, has been for many years. It’s a cut above imo. I wouldn’t make a special trip there – it’s not that good! – but I always choose it if I’m on the M1. I actually quite like motorway service stations generally. I like the sense of transience about them, everyone just passing through, taking a pause from life, almost stopping the clock; also (and I don’t know why this is) the level of physical attractiveness of the people you see there tends to be bottom quartile, which boosts my own relative standing in this department above what it usually is. There are times, especially if it’s off peak and in an out of the way location, when I’ve been arguably the most comely man on site.
Scottish Government PR machine in overdrive to try to persuade people that the shameful record of drug deaths under their governance is actually someone else's fault, and they they are actually the brave underdogs fighting for the right to improve lives. Revoltingly dishonest.
Have the English overlords explained the explosion in deaths down south yet.
While bad they’re only one fifth the level of Scotland’s.
You think that is great do you, rocketing numbers but it is ok , we have nobbled Scotland so they look worse. Not difficult to see you are a Tory with that callousness.
Motes & Beams Malc.
And AFAIK the issue with drug deaths in Scotland is more to do with pills than injections - so “safe injection rooms” main purpose is to pick a fight with London, rather than seriously address the problem.
It's very often a combination of injecting and street vallium that does the killing. Drug users are not noted for discrimination in what drugs they use.
If they sign Grealish and Kane for £250m, how does that work out with financial fair play?
Well they've got £60 million banked from last summer from the Sane money.
Apparently they will try and sell Silva and Sterling, but if that doesn't happen I'm sure Etihad Airways will sign a new £350 million a season sponsorship deal with City because that's the market rate, ahem.
Was listening to Athletic football podcast and they didn't think Sterling was going anywhere after the Euros. And there is a problem that across Europe, outside EPL nobody has any money to pay big buck / wages outside perhaps PSG...and no City player wants to go to say Spurs as part of in kind swap.
I thought they have been told they can't play those silly games anymore?
Apparently they are going to try.
Argument will be airlines are suffering because of the pandemic and will spend lots of money on advertising.
The other way they may and get around it is get another club in the City Football Group to buy players. New York City buy Fernandinho for £50 million.
The position Barcelona find themselves is worth sharing as well, they cannot register new players/contracts until they make cuts so they cannot register Aguero, Depay, and Messi so the solution they are thinking of is letting them sign for Segunda División teams and then loan them to Barca for this season.
Apparently Chelsea have a big problem with the collapse in the market. They have so many players who aren't good enough but on massive wages. They might have to end up paying big portions of their wages at any new club they sell them to, or try to settle the contracts.
There's a few clubs about to get screwed.
One of the reasons I expect Kane to end at City, Spurs need the money.
That new stadium was built on the plans the concerts and NFL matches helping pay for it, oh and the fans turning up.
The pandemic absolutely shit the bed for Spurs and Levy.
Dropping out of the Champions League for two seasons and counting wasn't in the plan.
The new stadium is a mill around the clubs neck.
It wouldn't have been, it was funded with decent interest rates, say compared to the rates Arsenal had for Ashburton Grove.
The pandemic came along and then it became a mill.
Honestly, it is a fantastic stadium.
Sure but it has affected Spurs as it badly affected Arsenal. And yes I.meant millstone.
Arsenal haven't won a title since they moved stadium, just like Spurs, who haven't won a title since they moved to their new place.
Tottenham’s last League title was closer to the reign of Queen Victoria than to the present day.
Do you mean millstone? Or is it so bad it’s the whole mill, not just the grinding bit?
The whole mill.
They took a £175 million loan from the BoE last summer.
Which they then refinanced for £250 million this summer.
Ouch
Spurs have gone from making a world record profit of £113 million in 2017/18 to most recently making a loss of £64 million in 2019/20 and 2020/21 will be much worse because of no fans in and no CL revenue.
Neither Biden nor Harris on the Dem ticket in 2024.
It would need a big price as it takes few things to happen for it to come off. Biden has to go or be removed via the 25th because his brain's a piece of shit. Somebody (Buttigieg, AOC?) has to run and beat Kamala to the Democrat nomination.
The only thing that makes a slightly attractive betting notion is that if Biden does get hauled off then the Democrats must realise that Kamala can't possibly beat Trump (for it is he).
The problem is I think Harris will dig her heels in on this. Why is she going to give up the shot of the Presidency when it is so close, especially when she knows the "Black Woman" card is strong in the party? She stands aside, she is never getting another chance at the Presidency.
Which is why it has to be something that pushes her out as opposed to someone having a chat.
Trump's dream scenario is of course ill health forces Biden, his most dangerous opponent, to stand down before 2024 and Harris takes over. As VP if Biden is forced to step down Harris would automatically become POTUS in his place and would then be near unstoppable for the 2024 Democratic nomination. Trump would then easily win the GOP nomination and would fancy his chances of portraying Harris as an ultra woke Hillary so that he becomes the first President to lose re election but then return 4 years later to the Oval office since Grover Cleveland in 1893.
If Biden's health holds though he will almost certainly run for re election
The Republicans are making noises about blocking the confirmation of a VP if Harris becomes President (and therefore no longer has the casting Senate vote). Charming and reasonable people!
They would need to win control of either the House or Senate in 2022 to do that however.
Under the 25th amendment of the US constitution a new VP nominated by the President outside of a Presidential election when the office becomes vacant only needs to be confirmed by a simple majority of both chambers of Congress
The Democrats do not have a simple majority in the Senate until a replacement VP is confirmed.
Which would only be an issue before the 2022 midterms and after if no change.
Otherwise either the Democrats get a Senate majority next year in which case the new VP is easily approved or the GOP get a Senate majority or a House majority and can block the appointment of a new VP until the next election.
Indeed until the 25th amendment in 1965 if the President died or resigned and the VP assumed the presidency, the Vice Presidency remained vacant until the next Presidential election and the EC approved the President and Vice Presidential nominee of the winning ticket
Neither Biden nor Harris on the Dem ticket in 2024.
It would need a big price as it takes few things to happen for it to come off. Biden has to go or be removed via the 25th because his brain's a piece of shit. Somebody (Buttigieg, AOC?) has to run and beat Kamala to the Democrat nomination.
The only thing that makes a slightly attractive betting notion is that if Biden does get hauled off then the Democrats must realise that Kamala can't possibly beat Trump (for it is he).
I think it depends on why Biden didn't stand again. If it was just poor health or a personal decision then Harris would just step up, but if it was due to a scandal in the administration she may well be tarred enough to not be realistically able to run in 2024.
I'm on the record many times as saying I think Biden is very likely (75% minimum) to run again and almost certain to be renominated if so. The above is a hypothetical, to be clear.
If they sign Grealish and Kane for £250m, how does that work out with financial fair play?
Well they've got £60 million banked from last summer from the Sane money.
Apparently they will try and sell Silva and Sterling, but if that doesn't happen I'm sure Etihad Airways will sign a new £350 million a season sponsorship deal with City because that's the market rate, ahem.
Was listening to Athletic football podcast and they didn't think Sterling was going anywhere after the Euros. And there is a problem that across Europe, outside EPL nobody has any money to pay big buck / wages outside perhaps PSG...and no City player wants to go to say Spurs as part of in kind swap.
I thought they have been told they can't play those silly games anymore?
Apparently they are going to try.
Argument will be airlines are suffering because of the pandemic and will spend lots of money on advertising.
The other way they may and get around it is get another club in the City Football Group to buy players. New York City buy Fernandinho for £50 million.
The position Barcelona find themselves is worth sharing as well, they cannot register new players/contracts until they make cuts so they cannot register Aguero, Depay, and Messi so the solution they are thinking of is letting them sign for Segunda División teams and then loan them to Barca for this season.
Apparently Chelsea have a big problem with the collapse in the market. They have so many players who aren't good enough but on massive wages. They might have to end up paying big portions of their wages at any new club they sell them to, or try to settle the contracts.
There's a few clubs about to get screwed.
One of the reasons I expect Kane to end at City, Spurs need the money.
That new stadium was built on the plans the concerts and NFL matches helping pay for it, oh and the fans turning up.
The pandemic absolutely shit the bed for Spurs and Levy.
Dropping out of the Champions League for two seasons and counting wasn't in the plan.
The new stadium is a mill around the clubs neck.
It wouldn't have been, it was funded with decent interest rates, say compared to the rates Arsenal had for Ashburton Grove.
The pandemic came along and then it became a mill.
Honestly, it is a fantastic stadium.
Sure but it has affected Spurs as it badly affected Arsenal. And yes I.meant millstone.
Arsenal haven't won a title since they moved stadium, just like Spurs, who haven't won a title since they moved to their new place.
Tottenham’s last League title was closer to the reign of Queen Victoria than to the present day.
Neither Biden nor Harris on the Dem ticket in 2024.
It would need a big price as it takes few things to happen for it to come off. Biden has to go or be removed via the 25th because his brain's a piece of shit. Somebody (Buttigieg, AOC?) has to run and beat Kamala to the Democrat nomination.
The only thing that makes a slightly attractive betting notion is that if Biden does get hauled off then the Democrats must realise that Kamala can't possibly beat Trump (for it is he).
The problem is I think Harris will dig her heels in on this. Why is she going to give up the shot of the Presidency when it is so close, especially when she knows the "Black Woman" card is strong in the party? She stands aside, she is never getting another chance at the Presidency.
Which is why it has to be something that pushes her out as opposed to someone having a chat.
Trump's dream scenario is of course ill health forces Biden, his most dangerous opponent, to stand down before 2024 and Harris takes over. As VP if Biden is forced to step down Harris would automatically become POTUS in his place and would then be near unstoppable for the 2024 Democratic nomination. Trump would then easily win the GOP nomination and would fancy his chances of portraying Harris as an ultra woke Hillary so that he becomes the first President to lose re election but then return 4 years later to the Oval office since Grover Cleveland in 1893.
If Biden's health holds though he will almost certainly run for re election
The Republicans are making noises about blocking the confirmation of a VP if Harris becomes President (and therefore no longer has the casting Senate vote). Charming and reasonable people!
They would need to win control of either the House or Senate in 2022 to do that however.
Under the 25th amendment of the US constitution a new VP nominated by the President outside of a Presidential election when the office becomes vacant only needs to be confirmed by a simple majority of both chambers of Congress
The Democrats do not have a simple majority in the Senate until a replacement VP is confirmed.
Probably the odd Republican like Romney who'd not be a complete arse, though.
Or he could put himself forward as temporary VP to break the deadlock
My favourite is Leicester Forest, has been for many years. It’s a cut above imo. I wouldn’t make a special trip there – it’s not that good! – but I always choose it if I’m on the M1. I actually quite like motorway service stations generally. I like the sense of transience about them, everyone just passing through, taking a pause from life, almost stopping the clock; also (and I don’t know why this is) the level of physical attractiveness of the people you see there tends to be bottom quartile, which boosts my own relative standing in this department above what it usually is. There are times, especially if it’s off peak and in an out of the way location, when I’ve been arguably the most comely man on site.
Neither Biden nor Harris on the Dem ticket in 2024.
It would need a big price as it takes few things to happen for it to come off. Biden has to go or be removed via the 25th because his brain's a piece of shit. Somebody (Buttigieg, AOC?) has to run and beat Kamala to the Democrat nomination.
The only thing that makes a slightly attractive betting notion is that if Biden does get hauled off then the Democrats must realise that Kamala can't possibly beat Trump (for it is he).
The problem is I think Harris will dig her heels in on this. Why is she going to give up the shot of the Presidency when it is so close, especially when she knows the "Black Woman" card is strong in the party? She stands aside, she is never getting another chance at the Presidency.
Which is why it has to be something that pushes her out as opposed to someone having a chat.
Trump's dream scenario is of course ill health forces Biden, his most dangerous opponent, to stand down before 2024 and Harris takes over. As VP if Biden is forced to step down Harris would automatically become POTUS in his place and would then be near unstoppable for the 2024 Democratic nomination. Trump would then easily win the GOP nomination and would fancy his chances of portraying Harris as an ultra woke Hillary so that he becomes the first President to lose re election but then return 4 years later to the Oval office since Grover Cleveland in 1893.
If Biden's health holds though he will almost certainly run for re election
The Republicans are making noises about blocking the confirmation of a VP if Harris becomes President (and therefore no longer has the casting Senate vote). Charming and reasonable people!
They would need to win control of either the House or Senate in 2022 to do that however.
Under the 25th amendment of the US constitution a new VP nominated by the President outside of a Presidential election when the office becomes vacant only needs to be confirmed by a simple majority of both chambers of Congress
The Democrats do not have a simple majority in the Senate until a replacement VP is confirmed.
Probably the odd Republican like Romney who'd not be a complete arse, though.
Or he could put himself forward as temporary VP to break the deadlock
My favourite is Leicester Forest, has been for many years. It’s a cut above imo. I wouldn’t make a special trip there – it’s not that good! – but I always choose it if I’m on the M1. I actually quite like motorway service stations generally. I like the sense of transience about them, everyone just passing through, taking a pause from life, almost stopping the clock; also (and I don’t know why this is) the level of physical attractiveness of the people you see there tends to be bottom quartile, which boosts my own relative standing in this department above what it usually is. There are times, especially if it’s off peak and in an out of the way location, when I’ve been arguably the most comely man on site.
If your favourite service station isn't Gloucester, Tebay or the other one run by Farm Shop you're doing something wrong. Actually pleasant places to be. Very middle class service stations mind you. The Waitrose of service stations. You don't necessarily get the ugliness of clientele you enjoy at LFE. I'm not sure, though, that people ar LFE are that ugly though. Service stations are the sorts of classless place which draw a fairly representative sample of humanity. British people really are that unattractive. The best thing about LFE is is name. I very much enjoy the triple 'st' sound.
Sounds great. I'll seek them out. To clarify, though, Leics Fst is not one of those where I look like George Clooney. That's more with some of the smaller ones in parts of the country where ... no, let's not fire up the Brexit wars again, enough of that on here the other day.
Re places that are extremely enjoyable to say out loud, try this one - "Little Italy".
It's totally addictive. Esp if you give the 'tees' a hint of 'dee'.
Sturgeon on brink of cooperation deal with Scottish Greens Exclusive: agreement would cement a pro-independence majority at Holyrood and may give Greens ministerial seats
The formal deal, which will stop short of a full coalition of the kind agreed by the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats under David Cameron and Nick Clegg in 2010, would give the Scottish National party and Scottish Greens a clear majority of seats at Holyrood.
It would allow the first minister to present a strong pro-climate agenda in advance of the Cop26 climate talks in Glasgow this November, and outvote anti-independence parties in Holyrood.
It would be the first time after 14 years in power the SNP had signed a formal deal with another party
The deal will present Scottish Labour, currently Holyrood’s third-largest party, with a significant political challenge. It is likely to give Sturgeon a resilient centre-left majority and removes her need to seek deals with Labour to get policies through the devolved parliament.
the Conservatives are taking a softer line on the potential for a fresh independence referendum
Forgive my pedantry, but if there is a formal deal which gives Greens ministerial seats then in what way does it stop short of full coalition?
Very good question, which the article fails to answer.
Any agreement which gives both parties seats in Cabinet, a shared programme of legislation and an agreed Budget is a coalition. End of.
It would be a sensible assumption that the Green Party will get the Environment brief. If they are in government but not in coalition then what? Are the SNP handing the entire environment brief and policy over to the Green Party to run independently?
Either way, Scotland elected 73 explicitly pro-independence MSPs giving a comfortable majority. Despite HYUFD's endless whining that it isn't a majority, it is. I will be greatly entertained to watch nippy bleat on about a referendum without actually producing one, but that is the "settled will of the Scottish people" or whatever the Tories latest phrase is.
Good morning
I agree with you about an indyref2 mandate but I genuinely believe it will not happen this side of the next GE
@HYUFD make lots of antagonistic comments on the subject but in truth we are little over 2 and a half years from GE 24 believe it or not and that is not long, especially with covid still an issue
Furthermore and notwithstanding the gung-ho nature of the Nationalists they have not even started to provide an answer to the big issues including
Currency Hard border Pensions The timing of re-admittance to the EU Investment decision deferred due to unknowns and uncertainty
(to name a few)
Additionally, there has been a drift away by the Scots themselves to even holding indyref2, let alone voting for it, that it seems to me that it is unlikely to happen anytime soon
They are all mouth and no trousers, but they *are* the 4 times elected government with their biggest ever vote this time on the biggest ever turnout.
On the issues you raise they need to say some fairly simple things. Currency: will maintain the existing sterling currency union until admitted to the Euro Border: the same solution as GB eventually reaches with the EU will apply (so not really a Scotland-specific problem) Pensions: a positive migration policy to have sufficient workers to pay them EU timing - apply for membership on morning 1 of independence etc
They won't. There seems to be a fear that if they go into detail people may start ignoring heart and feel and instead start making considered judgements...
1) There is no "currency union" currently. There is a single currency for a single country. London parties last time around said there would be no currency union with iScotland. 2) The act of Union created the common travel and customs area - repealing that ends both. What it is replaced with is not within the gift of the Scottish government. Also, see below. 3) Positive immigration militates against a common travel area. 4) EU membership militates against a common customs area.
The weird thing about the Sindy debate is that obviously there are similarities with Brexit, and positions may be reversed on it (eg UK/Indy Scotland not being able to guarantee what the EU/rUK will agree to, or assuming they will do it as it is in their interest) but it's only rarely we acknowledge the similarities and explain why it wi be different, usually just employing the same tactics as Brexit, in reverse (eg opportunities not difficulty from borders, or it now mattering if one area does not vote in favour).
The only weird thing is Tories like Carlotta who have no clue but spout endlessly about imaginary problems.
Neither Biden nor Harris on the Dem ticket in 2024.
It would need a big price as it takes few things to happen for it to come off. Biden has to go or be removed via the 25th because his brain's a piece of shit. Somebody (Buttigieg, AOC?) has to run and beat Kamala to the Democrat nomination.
The only thing that makes a slightly attractive betting notion is that if Biden does get hauled off then the Democrats must realise that Kamala can't possibly beat Trump (for it is he).
Why do you think she'd lose to ... not saying the name, don't like to.
I'd worry for her too, but interested in your thumbnail.
Neither Biden nor Harris on the Dem ticket in 2024.
It would need a big price as it takes few things to happen for it to come off. Biden has to go or be removed via the 25th because his brain's a piece of shit. Somebody (Buttigieg, AOC?) has to run and beat Kamala to the Democrat nomination.
The only thing that makes a slightly attractive betting notion is that if Biden does get hauled off then the Democrats must realise that Kamala can't possibly beat Trump (for it is he).
Why do you think she'd lose to ... not saying the name, don't like to.
I'd worry for her too, but interested in your thumbnail.
She has an average approval rating of just 46% compared to 51% for Biden, even Hillary got 48% in 2016.
In fact her approval rating is below the 47% of the popular vote Trump got in 2020
My favourite is Leicester Forest, has been for many years. It’s a cut above imo. I wouldn’t make a special trip there – it’s not that good! – but I always choose it if I’m on the M1. I actually quite like motorway service stations generally. I like the sense of transience about them, everyone just passing through, taking a pause from life, almost stopping the clock; also (and I don’t know why this is) the level of physical attractiveness of the people you see there tends to be bottom quartile, which boosts my own relative standing in this department above what it usually is. There are times, especially if it’s off peak and in an out of the way location, when I’ve been arguably the most comely man on site.
Rule of thumb for service station is - largely sh*t.
They are all mouth and no trousers, but they *are* the 4 times elected government with their biggest ever vote this time on the biggest ever turnout.
On the issues you raise they need to say some fairly simple things. Currency: will maintain the existing sterling currency union until admitted to the Euro Border: the same solution as GB eventually reaches with the EU will apply (so not really a Scotland-specific problem) Pensions: a positive migration policy to have sufficient workers to pay them EU timing - apply for membership on morning 1 of independence etc
They won't. There seems to be a fear that if they go into detail people may start ignoring heart and feel and instead start making considered judgements...
on entry to the EU, Entry into the EU wouldn't be automatic and would take a number of years of negotiating and implementing. all other things would follow on from that delay. the SNP would also be forced to hold a referendum on EU membership which they'd not be certain to win (although it's highly likely). The EU might also say that Scotland needs to finish negotiating with rUK first before they can start negotiating with them. on the currency, they said that they'd keep sterling in the last indiref and the UK said no. That wouldn't change in indiref2. There's no saying that people would vote for joining the Euro and the SNP couldn't force it on the country on the border, even if Scotland joins the EU it will take a fair amount of time and a medium term position on the border would be required which the UK would be stupid to base the timing of anything on the entry of Scotland into the EU. A fixed and determined situation needs to be agreed initially. Pensions, it's not about the new liabilities which is the problems it is the share of existing liabilities which will be the problem. (plus the share of accumulated debt).
I get all of that, I am just saying that none of it is the insurmountable "see, you can't go" barrier that is suggested.
EU membership? They are well practised at adding new countries, and in this case they would be reincorporating a territory. Easy enough to show alignment as Scotland is already aligned, and even as a UK nation it won't become particularly unaligned in the next few years.
On the currency the situation has changed from 2014. A 2023 (?) question where "independence means the EU and the Euro" is different to 2014 where EU membership wasn't part of the equation. It doesn't matter what the position was back then or what people thought, things have changed.
I think you are trying to complicate the border issue. Scotland will become an EU member state. By the time independence happens GB would already have a settled operating model for its EU border. Whatever we eventually end up doing with France is what you would do with Scotland, and as GB doesn't recognise the EU as anything other than a 3rd country it hardly matters if Scotland is an actual EU member or just an ascension state.
The border issue is more complex than you think. I get the impression from the SNP that they's want the equivalent frictionless border that currently exists. that's not going to happen, and I suspect that it'll be a long time before the UK has a settled border policy with the EU and it'll be nothing like what existed before. There may be some improvements but nothing major and not until Labour win an election (which won't happen before Sind)
Scotland are in the same position in relation to the UK as the UK was with the EU. They may think that they have the aces in the negotiations but if they want 'independence with all of the existing benefits' then they will not get it.
When it comes to the currency, the referendum will only be for Independence future scottish elections would have to deal with joining the EU and the Euro.
Scotland could get it. There is no upside for E&W&NI in wrecking an independent Scotland, tempting as it might be. There is no reason Scotland could not remain in an effective currency and customs union with the rest of the UK.
Unless, that is, Scotland tries to join the EU. As Boris and Lord Frost has discovered, the border needs to go somewhere.
And that might be the problem. Shades of the Brexit referendum; no-one wants to spell out what post-independence life for Scotland ought to look like. What does Scotland want to do outside the UK that it cannot do inside? If it is anything like Brexit, even its fiercest proponents have reached no consensus. Yet the Brexiteers still won.
Scotland may choose to have a currency pegged to the pound (in fact that's what'd happen initially) but they'd have no input to the BoE. it worked for the Republic of Ireland for 50 years (until the ERM). it would probably be Scotland's responsibility to maintain that peg. it'd be reasonably easy with support from the rUK but it'd be like it was with RoI (and is now with Jersey/Guensey/IoM) Scottish coins/notes wouldn't be accepted in rUK while rUK sterling would probably be accepted in Scotland
Denmark managed to defend their peg to the Euro in 2015 - maybe we can ask them for advice.
Sturgeon on brink of cooperation deal with Scottish Greens Exclusive: agreement would cement a pro-independence majority at Holyrood and may give Greens ministerial seats
The formal deal, which will stop short of a full coalition of the kind agreed by the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats under David Cameron and Nick Clegg in 2010, would give the Scottish National party and Scottish Greens a clear majority of seats at Holyrood.
It would allow the first minister to present a strong pro-climate agenda in advance of the Cop26 climate talks in Glasgow this November, and outvote anti-independence parties in Holyrood.
It would be the first time after 14 years in power the SNP had signed a formal deal with another party
The deal will present Scottish Labour, currently Holyrood’s third-largest party, with a significant political challenge. It is likely to give Sturgeon a resilient centre-left majority and removes her need to seek deals with Labour to get policies through the devolved parliament.
the Conservatives are taking a softer line on the potential for a fresh independence referendum
Forgive my pedantry, but if there is a formal deal which gives Greens ministerial seats then in what way does it stop short of full coalition?
Very good question, which the article fails to answer.
Any agreement which gives both parties seats in Cabinet, a shared programme of legislation and an agreed Budget is a coalition. End of.
It would be a sensible assumption that the Green Party will get the Environment brief. If they are in government but not in coalition then what? Are the SNP handing the entire environment brief and policy over to the Green Party to run independently?
Either way, Scotland elected 73 explicitly pro-independence MSPs giving a comfortable majority. Despite HYUFD's endless whining that it isn't a majority, it is. I will be greatly entertained to watch nippy bleat on about a referendum without actually producing one, but that is the "settled will of the Scottish people" or whatever the Tories latest phrase is.
Good morning
I agree with you about an indyref2 mandate but I genuinely believe it will not happen this side of the next GE
@HYUFD make lots of antagonistic comments on the subject but in truth we are little over 2 and a half years from GE 24 believe it or not and that is not long, especially with covid still an issue
Furthermore and notwithstanding the gung-ho nature of the Nationalists they have not even started to provide an answer to the big issues including
Currency Hard border Pensions The timing of re-admittance to the EU Investment decision deferred due to unknowns and uncertainty
(to name a few)
Additionally, there has been a drift away by the Scots themselves to even holding indyref2, let alone voting for it, that it seems to me that it is unlikely to happen anytime soon
They are all mouth and no trousers, but they *are* the 4 times elected government with their biggest ever vote this time on the biggest ever turnout.
On the issues you raise they need to say some fairly simple things. Currency: will maintain the existing sterling currency union until admitted to the Euro Border: the same solution as GB eventually reaches with the EU will apply (so not really a Scotland-specific problem) Pensions: a positive migration policy to have sufficient workers to pay them EU timing - apply for membership on morning 1 of independence etc
They won't. There seems to be a fear that if they go into detail people may start ignoring heart and feel and instead start making considered judgements...
1) There is no "currency union" currently. There is a single currency for a single country. London parties last time around said there would be no currency union with iScotland. 2) The act of Union created the common travel and customs area - repealing that ends both. What it is replaced with is not within the gift of the Scottish government. Also, see below. 3) Positive immigration militates against a common travel area. 4) EU membership militates against a common customs area.
The weird thing about the Sindy debate is that obviously there are similarities with Brexit, and positions may be reversed on it (eg UK/Indy Scotland not being able to guarantee what the EU/rUK will agree to, or assuming they will do it as it is in their interest) but it's only rarely we acknowledge the similarities and explain why it wi be different, usually just employing the same tactics as Brexit, in reverse (eg opportunities not difficulty from borders, or it now mattering if one area does not vote in favour).
The unexplored group in Scotland are Yes voters that have switched to No and the Conservatives following the Brexit vote. Apparently not an insignificant number, to set against those going the other way - No Voters, switched to Yes following the Brexit vote.
I should add the demographic divide of Yes/No is completely different from Remain/Leave. It is not mainly driven by age or educational attainment. Two groups were heavily No: the over 65s and those born outside Scotland. Every other group was nearly evenly split.
Since 2014 it looks like younger demographics have moved heavily to Yes.
Binotto[sp] has suggested teams that cause crashes should foot the bill.
Bottas for SPOTY.
Not very sporting. More likely we'll see Russell at Mercedes before the year end.
The thing that gets me from the Verstappen/Red Bull fanbois is that there is no way you could have planned that crash.
Bottas crashing into the back of Norris which led to Norris crashing into Verstappen whilst Bottas span into the other Red Bull.
Yet this was the Mercedes masterplan, you cannot carry a plan like that out.
It's all very reminiscent of Michael Schumacher crying like a baby after the Belgian Grand Prix of 1998 convinced that David Coulthard had tried to kill him to hand the title to Coulthard's team mate.
Accidents and mistakes happen in F1, especially in wet conditions.
Lol, hadn't realised that Lidl actually do Britain as part of their foods of Europe thing. That'll be the Brit immigrants..sorry.. expats happy as Larry then.
Binotto[sp] has suggested teams that cause crashes should foot the bill.
Funny how the big teams only start worrying about such things when they're on the receiving end. As such a change would require unanimity, it's not going to happen any time soon.
Individual dressage - Bronze Team dressage - Bronze Individual eventing - Silver Team eventing - Gold Individual showjumping - Gold
Team showjumping to go
My wife is an Eventer, my daughter Events and does Dressage. Both are American. Both are in awe of the depth of talent in UK Eventing (even if historically outside of the Europeans we have not actually dominated the medals). Good to see Dressage and Showjumping catching up.
Mr. Eagles, aye, clearly an innocent screwup by Bottas. But one that was hugely beneficial for his team.
Mr. B, there's a new cost cap, so teams who get crashed into now suffer grid penalties in addition to DNFs *and* take a financial hit they can't absorb, materially aiding their rivals.
Hmmm. Plantations of Sitka are great for wildlife. Was that sponsored by the forestry industry, by any chance...?
Pine martens are apparently the real solution to Grey squirrels. They Greys spend more time on the ground than Red squirrels and aren't quite as agile, so are easier pickings.
(There's a similar thing with Water voles and Otters - Otters drive out the non-native American mink, so Water voles do better where Otters are present)
I did wonder too.
"This work was funded by Forestry and Land Scotland, an executive agency of the Scottish Government responsible for managing the national forest estate."
So the Forestry Commission (Scottish branch), then!
In England the FC are generally trying to get rid of monoculture plantations. I thought the same applied in Scotland, so this seems like an odd article.
Sitka is crap and certainly not good unless it was for the punters getting tax relief dodges. Would not surprise me though , someone will be milking it for sure.
Ah, yes, that old environmental scheme with unintended (if entirely predictable) consequences. I do hope we continue to learn from it, although councils promising to plant a million trees in inappropriate places might suggest not.
The sad thing is that Sitka spruce is a fabulous tree and in its native environment grows almost as big as the redwoods. You can see that in a few estate plantations & arboretums in Scotland.
Binotto[sp] has suggested teams that cause crashes should foot the bill.
Bottas for SPOTY.
Not very sporting. More likely we'll see Russell at Mercedes before the year end.
The thing that gets me from the Verstappen/Red Bull fanbois is that there is no way you could have planned that crash.
Bottas crashing into the back of Norris which led to Norris crashing into Verstappen whilst Bottas span into the other Red Bull.
Yet this was the Mercedes masterplan, you cannot carry a plan like that out.
It's all very reminiscent of Michael Schumacher crying like a baby after the Belgian Grand Prix of 1998 convinced that David Coulthard had tried to kill him to hand the title to Coulthard's team mate.
Accidents and mistakes happen in F1, especially in wet conditions.
Yes, it's daft. Bottas can't find his ass in the wet. The idea that he might possess such billiards style finesse (and note the crash only missed collecting Hamilton too by about a metre) is more absurd than your average Horner opinion.
‘The government’s replacement for the Europe-wide Erasmus student exchange scheme appears to have got off to a flying start
‘According to the DfE’s estimates, 120 universities have applied for a share of the £110m Turing scheme, alongside schools and further education colleges, to fund work and study placements. The 40,000 total is said to include 28,000 placements for university students in 2021-22, more than the 18,300 placements that took place under the Erasmus scheme in the 2018-19th academic year’
Binotto[sp] has suggested teams that cause crashes should foot the bill.
Bottas for SPOTY.
Not very sporting. More likely we'll see Russell at Mercedes before the year end.
The thing that gets me from the Verstappen/Red Bull fanbois is that there is no way you could have planned that crash.
Bottas crashing into the back of Norris which led to Norris crashing into Verstappen whilst Bottas span into the other Red Bull.
Yet this was the Mercedes masterplan, you cannot carry a plan like that out.
It's all very reminiscent of Michael Schumacher crying like a baby after the Belgian Grand Prix of 1998 convinced that David Coulthard had tried to kill him to hand the title to Coulthard's team mate.
Accidents and mistakes happen in F1, especially in wet conditions.
Yes, it's daft. Bottas can't find his ass in the wet. The idea that he might possess such billiards style finesse (and note the crash only missed collecting Hamilton too by about a metre) is more absurd than your average Horner opinion.
If I'm honest Lance Stroll's driving at the start was much worse than what Bottas did but they ended up with the same penalty.
As for Horner this reminds of the 2017 season when Max crashed into Räikkönen who then crashed into Vettel at the Singapore Grand Prix which ended ruining Vettel's chances of winning the title.
Sturgeon on R4 complaining that other leaders (Starmer, Johnson) aren't showing Scotland respect.....as ever conflating herself and the SNP with Scotland.
44% of infections were estimated to be in the fully vaccinated. Figure 5 shows that the hospitalisation rate per infection is now back to almost exactly where it has been through most of the pandemic (after a temporary dip, presumably owing to vaccination, between March and May this year). The death rate per infection is lower than it was at the beginning of the year, but also rose when the Delta variant became dominant. The figures are broken down by age (over/under 65) in Figure 6.
We’re not gonna catch up with any of the top 3 - China, USA, Japan - can we stay ahead of Oz and I-Can’t-Believe-It’s-Not-Russia?
Need golds from boxing and bicycles
Australia maybe, Russia have got a bunch of artistic swimming golds coming plus some others in stuff like wrestling.
If we manage to get 2-4 more golds it will be tough to see Australia finish ahead but it depends on the cyclists outperforming expectations and at least two of the boxers converting chances to gold medals.
1) There is no "currency union" currently. There is a single currency for a single country. London parties last time around said there would be no currency union with iScotland. 2) The act of Union created the common travel and customs area - repealing that ends both. What it is replaced with is not within the gift of the Scottish government. Also, see below. 3) Positive immigration militates against a common travel area. 4) EU membership militates against a common customs area.
Have to pick at a few of these. "A single currency for a single country". Not in practice. Whilst the local issues of Sterling are technically Sterling, in practice they are not. Sterling notes printed outside England tend not to be acceptable outside their local nation whether than be NornIron or Jersey or sadly even Scotland.
All these local issues are in a de facto currency union. Some of them - the Scottish pound as example - have to back up notes issued with BofE securities, but the smaller ones - Isle of Man etc - don't even have to do that.
The idea that iScotland must walk away from "the UK's Pound" just isn't true as there isn't a UK pound. English notes are accepted anywhere, non-English notes are not and have different legal status. If iScotland continues to back up its local sterling issue as it does now what is the difference?
As for the others, yes the current arrangements end. But de facto? You say that "positive immigration militates against a common travel area". And yet Ireland has freedom of movement AND common travel with the UK - so your statement is wrong de facto if not de jure.
I went to the Titanic Museum in Belfast. It is very good but there is a weirdness in a vast museum about something that isn't there.
Really? Some of the world's biggest museums are like that. The 9/11 memorial, and the major Holocaust memorials, are the two examples that spring most easily to mind.
We’re not gonna catch up with any of the top 3 - China, USA, Japan - can we stay ahead of Oz and I-Can’t-Believe-It’s-Not-Russia?
Need golds from boxing and bicycles
Australia maybe, Russia have got a bunch of artistic swimming golds coming plus some others in stuff like wrestling.
If we manage to get 2-4 more golds it will be tough to see Australia finish ahead but it depends on the cyclists outperforming expectations and at least two of the boxers converting chances to gold medals.
Sturgeon on R4 complaining that other leaders (Starmer, Johnson) aren't showing Scotland respect.....as ever conflating herself and the SNP with Scotland.
Neither Biden nor Harris on the Dem ticket in 2024.
It would need a big price as it takes few things to happen for it to come off. Biden has to go or be removed via the 25th because his brain's a piece of shit. Somebody (Buttigieg, AOC?) has to run and beat Kamala to the Democrat nomination.
The only thing that makes a slightly attractive betting notion is that if Biden does get hauled off then the Democrats must realise that Kamala can't possibly beat Trump (for it is he).
Why do you think she'd lose to ... not saying the name, don't like to.
I'd worry for her too, but interested in your thumbnail.
She doesn't poll well but more importantly is somebody Trump will find it easier to be fantastically offensive about than Biden - whom he never really managed to define.
As others have mentioned she's a NorCal liberal and will be a Republican turn out machine and the GOP will be the MAGA party by 2024.
On a broader point I would not be surprised if the election is an utter fiasco that produces no conclusive outcome resulting in a constitutional crisis. Every close some not close results are going to challenged and litigated. It's going to be the Maricopa audit x 10,000.
You will soon be able to secure your same day delivery at-home Covid19 tests from Amazon and it’s partner BGI.
Chances are your DNA will soon be decoded at conveyor-belt speed and genetic data surveillance will become the norm.
It looks like 50% fear mongering and 50% ignorance.
BGI was formerly known as the Beijing Genomics Institute, based out of Shenzhen. They are the biggest genomics reading entity in the world, and have the second biggest data storage capacity in the world, behind only the NSA. They are hovering up genetic data from all sources, and are not very good about sharing what they learn. There are some real concerns about what they intend to do with the data, and how they ignore others' legitimate data ownership issues. Needless to say, BGI has strong links with the Chinese government. It's head also clashes with many of China's own top biological scientists.
I went to the Titanic Museum in Belfast. It is very good but there is a weirdness in a vast museum about something that isn't there.
Really? Some of the world's biggest museums are like that. The 9/11 memorial, and the major Holocaust memorials, are the two examples that spring most easily to mind.
Different, I think. The Titanic is an object absent at the museum dedicated to it. The difficult topic of the Holocaust unfortunately is still there.
I am entertained by the Horner Wolff spat even if it silly. Of course Valtteri wasn't ordered to take out the Red Bulls. Crashing into the McLaren hoping to take out the Red Bulls is too much of a stretch. Isn't the reality that Bottarse screwed up and took out the entire top half of the field that wasn't Hamilton. Not that it did serleris any good after the insane spectacle of only him on the grid for the restart.
Here is reality. Lewis Hamilton is a stunning driver. He is one of very few you can expect to cut through the entire field if needed - Perez being another example. It isn't the car - stick Bottarse at the back and watch him fail to make progress. Regardless of whatever comedy conspiracy Valtteri wasn't part of, Hamilton ended up plumb last and finished 3rd thanks to overtaking pretty much everyone.
44% of infections were estimated to be in the fully vaccinated. Figure 5 shows that the hospitalisation rate per infection is now back to almost exactly where it has been through most of the pandemic (after a temporary dip, presumably owing to vaccination, between March and May this year). The death rate per infection is lower than it was at the beginning of the year, but also rose when the Delta variant became dominant. The figures are broken down by age (over/under 65) in Figure 6.
And yet the case numbers are falling, along with hospitalisations.
Does the study estimate how many of the cases in the vaccinated originated from an unvaccinated individual? Be interesting / useful to know. I suspect vaccinated -> vaccinated will be a much lower risk.
1) There is no "currency union" currently. There is a single currency for a single country. London parties last time around said there would be no currency union with iScotland. 2) The act of Union created the common travel and customs area - repealing that ends both. What it is replaced with is not within the gift of the Scottish government. Also, see below. 3) Positive immigration militates against a common travel area. 4) EU membership militates against a common customs area.
Have to pick at a few of these. "A single currency for a single country". Not in practice. Whilst the local issues of Sterling are technically Sterling, in practice they are not. Sterling notes printed outside England tend not to be acceptable outside their local nation whether than be NornIron or Jersey or sadly even Scotland.
All these local issues are in a de facto currency union. Some of them - the Scottish pound as example - have to back up notes issued with BofE securities, but the smaller ones - Isle of Man etc - don't even have to do that.
The idea that iScotland must walk away from "the UK's Pound" just isn't true as there isn't a UK pound. English notes are accepted anywhere, non-English notes are not and have different legal status. If iScotland continues to back up its local sterling issue as it does now what is the difference?
As for the others, yes the current arrangements end. But de facto? You say that "positive immigration militates against a common travel area". And yet Ireland has freedom of movement AND common travel with the UK - so your statement is wrong de facto if not de jure.
Do Scottish people have any difficulty paying for things in England if they use credit or debit cards (like most of us do for most purchases)? Indeed, try using a Bank of England £50 note to pay for anything in most English shops.
The currency we use is not defined by the notes and coins we use; they are just a method of payment.
‘The government’s replacement for the Europe-wide Erasmus student exchange scheme appears to have got off to a flying start
‘According to the DfE’s estimates, 120 universities have applied for a share of the £110m Turing scheme, alongside schools and further education colleges, to fund work and study placements. The 40,000 total is said to include 28,000 placements for university students in 2021-22, more than the 18,300 placements that took place under the Erasmus scheme in the 2018-19th academic year’
Time will tell, but the whole Erasmus complaint seemed very dependent on any follow up scheme - if there wasn't one at all, that would have been bad, if there was one but it was under par in some way bad but not as much, but if the replacement works well the complaints will have seemed a bit histrionic.
In binning off free movement we have created in some sectors a massive labour shortage - of course wages have risen and sharply in some cases. But as has been pointed out, investment into higher wages is stealing talent not creating it - the shortage in drivers is still there despite Tesco opening the chequebook.
Nor will a return to status quo ante usher in some golden age of labour. People don't want to work in care homes. Or clean hotels. Or work as plumbers. So we end up with a shortage of labour (remember how hard it was to get a plumber before Poles filled the gaps...?) and higher costs.
The comment pages of the Mail always have a solution - "make the unemployed do the jobs". Yes, we just need to create plenty of affordable out of hours child care and 14 hour public transport that takes people from where they live to another part of a country where the vacancies are...
‘The government’s replacement for the Europe-wide Erasmus student exchange scheme appears to have got off to a flying start
‘According to the DfE’s estimates, 120 universities have applied for a share of the £110m Turing scheme, alongside schools and further education colleges, to fund work and study placements. The 40,000 total is said to include 28,000 placements for university students in 2021-22, more than the 18,300 placements that took place under the Erasmus scheme in the 2018-19th academic year’
Time will tell, but the whole Erasmus complaint seemed very dependent on any follow up scheme - if there wasn't one at all, that would have been bad, if there was one but it was under par in some way bad but not as much, but if the replacement works well the complaints will have seemed a bit histrionic.
Some apples and pears thinking going on here. Applications do not equal placements.
Neither Biden nor Harris on the Dem ticket in 2024.
It would need a big price as it takes few things to happen for it to come off. Biden has to go or be removed via the 25th because his brain's a piece of shit. Somebody (Buttigieg, AOC?) has to run and beat Kamala to the Democrat nomination.
The only thing that makes a slightly attractive betting notion is that if Biden does get hauled off then the Democrats must realise that Kamala can't possibly beat Trump (for it is he).
Why do you think she'd lose to ... not saying the name, don't like to.
I'd worry for her too, but interested in your thumbnail.
She doesn't poll well but more importantly is somebody Trump will find it easier to be fantastically offensive about than Biden - whom he never really managed to define.
As others have mentioned she's a NorCal liberal and will be a Republican turn out machine and the GOP will be the MAGA party by 2024.
On a broader point I would not be surprised if the election is an utter fiasco that produces no conclusive outcome resulting in a constitutional crisis. Every close some not close results are going to challenged and litigated. It's going to be the Maricopa audit x 10,000.
Your last point seems highly likely, especially considering all the additional laws being put up all about the place, though what will be in place come 2024 who the hell knows.
Both sides will probably challenge lots of things (which doesn't make baseless challenges in 2020 ok in retrospect - each challenge is considered on its merits).
Sturgeon on R4 complaining that other leaders (Starmer, Johnson) aren't showing Scotland respect.....as ever conflating herself and the SNP with Scotland.
She is the First Minister - it's not just her or the SNP.
‘The government’s replacement for the Europe-wide Erasmus student exchange scheme appears to have got off to a flying start
‘According to the DfE’s estimates, 120 universities have applied for a share of the £110m Turing scheme, alongside schools and further education colleges, to fund work and study placements. The 40,000 total is said to include 28,000 placements for university students in 2021-22, more than the 18,300 placements that took place under the Erasmus scheme in the 2018-19th academic year’
Time will tell, but the whole Erasmus complaint seemed very dependent on any follow up scheme - if there wasn't one at all, that would have been bad, if there was one but it was under par in some way bad but not as much, but if the replacement works well the complaints will have seemed a bit histrionic.
Some apples and pears thinking going on here. Applications do not equal placements.
And, the funding is less generous.
Let’s see.
Precisely the point - it may well not be as stallar as that report summary suggests. Nevertheless, the initial complaints are quite likely to be overblown as they were treating the situation as if there was no replacement at all (whether or not they said as much), so the government cannot help but exceed expectations.
‘The government’s replacement for the Europe-wide Erasmus student exchange scheme appears to have got off to a flying start
‘According to the DfE’s estimates, 120 universities have applied for a share of the £110m Turing scheme, alongside schools and further education colleges, to fund work and study placements. The 40,000 total is said to include 28,000 placements for university students in 2021-22, more than the 18,300 placements that took place under the Erasmus scheme in the 2018-19th academic year’
Time will tell, but the whole Erasmus complaint seemed very dependent on any follow up scheme - if there wasn't one at all, that would have been bad, if there was one but it was under par in some way bad but not as much, but if the replacement works well the complaints will have seemed a bit histrionic.
How dare you have the temerity to accuse 'remoaners' of histrionics? Off to Con Home for a period of serious reflection.
1) There is no "currency union" currently. There is a single currency for a single country. London parties last time around said there would be no currency union with iScotland. 2) The act of Union created the common travel and customs area - repealing that ends both. What it is replaced with is not within the gift of the Scottish government. Also, see below. 3) Positive immigration militates against a common travel area. 4) EU membership militates against a common customs area.
Have to pick at a few of these. "A single currency for a single country". Not in practice. Whilst the local issues of Sterling are technically Sterling, in practice they are not. Sterling notes printed outside England tend not to be acceptable outside their local nation whether than be NornIron or Jersey or sadly even Scotland.
All these local issues are in a de facto currency union. Some of them - the Scottish pound as example - have to back up notes issued with BofE securities, but the smaller ones - Isle of Man etc - don't even have to do that.
The idea that iScotland must walk away from "the UK's Pound" just isn't true as there isn't a UK pound. English notes are accepted anywhere, non-English notes are not and have different legal status. If iScotland continues to back up its local sterling issue as it does now what is the difference?
As for the others, yes the current arrangements end. But de facto? You say that "positive immigration militates against a common travel area". And yet Ireland has freedom of movement AND common travel with the UK - so your statement is wrong de facto if not de jure.
Sounds like you are proposing "dollarisation" with sterling - using the currency of a foreign country. The SNP don't want that:
An independent Scotland could continue using sterling without the rest of the UK's consent in the same way some Latin American countries have adopted the US dollar and Montenegro uses the Euro.
Under this option—known as dollarisation—Scotland would have no formal central bank and no access to the services of, or influence over, the Bank of England. But Scotland has a large financial services sector which relies on access to central bank services. Professor Jim Gallagher of Nuffield College, Oxford said that, because of this, dollarisation "is not a viable option" for somewhere like Scotland
The Scottish Government is not therefore interested in dollarisation and favours a monetary union between an independent Scotland and the rest of the UK. Mr John Swinney MSP, Cabinet Secretary for Finance, Employment and Sustainable Growth in the Scottish Government, told us:
They are all mouth and no trousers, but they *are* the 4 times elected government with their biggest ever vote this time on the biggest ever turnout.
On the issues you raise they need to say some fairly simple things. Currency: will maintain the existing sterling currency union until admitted to the Euro Border: the same solution as GB eventually reaches with the EU will apply (so not really a Scotland-specific problem) Pensions: a positive migration policy to have sufficient workers to pay them EU timing - apply for membership on morning 1 of independence etc
They won't. There seems to be a fear that if they go into detail people may start ignoring heart and feel and instead start making considered judgements...
on entry to the EU, Entry into the EU wouldn't be automatic and would take a number of years of negotiating and implementing. all other things would follow on from that delay. the SNP would also be forced to hold a referendum on EU membership which they'd not be certain to win (although it's highly likely). The EU might also say that Scotland needs to finish negotiating with rUK first before they can start negotiating with them. on the currency, they said that they'd keep sterling in the last indiref and the UK said no. That wouldn't change in indiref2. There's no saying that people would vote for joining the Euro and the SNP couldn't force it on the country on the border, even if Scotland joins the EU it will take a fair amount of time and a medium term position on the border would be required which the UK would be stupid to base the timing of anything on the entry of Scotland into the EU. A fixed and determined situation needs to be agreed initially. Pensions, it's not about the new liabilities which is the problems it is the share of existing liabilities which will be the problem. (plus the share of accumulated debt).
I get all of that, I am just saying that none of it is the insurmountable "see, you can't go" barrier that is suggested.
EU membership? They are well practised at adding new countries, and in this case they would be reincorporating a territory. Easy enough to show alignment as Scotland is already aligned, and even as a UK nation it won't become particularly unaligned in the next few years.
On the currency the situation has changed from 2014. A 2023 (?) question where "independence means the EU and the Euro" is different to 2014 where EU membership wasn't part of the equation. It doesn't matter what the position was back then or what people thought, things have changed.
I think you are trying to complicate the border issue. Scotland will become an EU member state. By the time independence happens GB would already have a settled operating model for its EU border. Whatever we eventually end up doing with France is what you would do with Scotland, and as GB doesn't recognise the EU as anything other than a 3rd country it hardly matters if Scotland is an actual EU member or just an ascension state.
The border issue is more complex than you think. I get the impression from the SNP that they's want the equivalent frictionless border that currently exists. that's not going to happen, and I suspect that it'll be a long time before the UK has a settled border policy with the EU and it'll be nothing like what existed before. There may be some improvements but nothing major and not until Labour win an election (which won't happen before Sind)
Scotland are in the same position in relation to the UK as the UK was with the EU. They may think that they have the aces in the negotiations but if they want 'independence with all of the existing benefits' then they will not get it.
When it comes to the currency, the referendum will only be for Independence future scottish elections would have to deal with joining the EU and the Euro.
Scotland could get it. There is no upside for E&W&NI in wrecking an independent Scotland, tempting as it might be. There is no reason Scotland could not remain in an effective currency and customs union with the rest of the UK.
Unless, that is, Scotland tries to join the EU. As Boris and Lord Frost has discovered, the border needs to go somewhere.
And that might be the problem. Shades of the Brexit referendum; no-one wants to spell out what post-independence life for Scotland ought to look like. What does Scotland want to do outside the UK that it cannot do inside? If it is anything like Brexit, even its fiercest proponents have reached no consensus. Yet the Brexiteers still won.
We are all post-Brexit now and that has educated many. The next Scottish independence referendum debates will take place in the light of that additional knowledge. The other change is that an independent Scotland can't simply fast track into the EU to solve most of the freedom of movement and trade issues with rUK.
Brexit has strengthened the case for Scottish independence, but also increased the cost. On balance it probably makes independence less likely, because the theoretical case for independence is already clear, but the Scots are careful people and the costs are probably the deciding factor at the margin. The net result: the Union persists but with the Scots increasingly miserable participants, the sucker punch of being told to vote no in 2014 to stay in the EU only to be dragged out by the English a festering and legitimate source of grievance. An unhappy marriage indeed.
I agree with this assessment. Curiously reflecting the 1707 vote for the Act of Union. There was a complexity of reasons for voting to dissolve the Scottish parliament, including bribery, not wanting a Catholic King and greater market opportunities. But the big motivation was so that England didn't invade
We are back to Scotland again...
I am literally going back to Scotland at the weekend. I will send breathless Leonesque dispatches from the front line, PB's roaming Scotch correspondent fearlessly taking the local pulse. I expect my main scoop will be that midges are bastards.
Sturgeon on R4 complaining that other leaders (Starmer, Johnson) aren't showing Scotland respect.....as ever conflating herself and the SNP with Scotland.
She is the First Minister - it's not just her or the SNP.
This is one of those situations where neither side actually wants what they say though. Sturgeon wouldn't really want to be treated with respect by Boris or the UK Gov, since complaining about a lack of respect would be politically very useful. Boris wouldn't really want to engage meaningfully with Sturgeon whatever he might say, because politically he benefits from frustrating her in any way he can.
1) There is no "currency union" currently. There is a single currency for a single country. London parties last time around said there would be no currency union with iScotland. 2) The act of Union created the common travel and customs area - repealing that ends both. What it is replaced with is not within the gift of the Scottish government. Also, see below. 3) Positive immigration militates against a common travel area. 4) EU membership militates against a common customs area.
Have to pick at a few of these. "A single currency for a single country". Not in practice. Whilst the local issues of Sterling are technically Sterling, in practice they are not. Sterling notes printed outside England tend not to be acceptable outside their local nation whether than be NornIron or Jersey or sadly even Scotland.
All these local issues are in a de facto currency union. Some of them - the Scottish pound as example - have to back up notes issued with BofE securities, but the smaller ones - Isle of Man etc - don't even have to do that.
The idea that iScotland must walk away from "the UK's Pound" just isn't true as there isn't a UK pound. English notes are accepted anywhere, non-English notes are not and have different legal status. If iScotland continues to back up its local sterling issue as it does now what is the difference?
As for the others, yes the current arrangements end. But de facto? You say that "positive immigration militates against a common travel area". And yet Ireland has freedom of movement AND common travel with the UK - so your statement is wrong de facto if not de jure.
Do Scottish people have any difficulty paying for things in England if they use credit or debit cards (like most of us do for most purchases)? Indeed, try using a Bank of England £50 note to pay for anything in most English shops.
The currency we use is not defined by the notes and coins we use; they are just a method of payment.
And the same is true in any of the places that use Sterling that aren't England. I can spend Sterling by debit card on the Isle of Man without any problem because shops on the non-UK IOM accept it for payment. An iScotland where you pay your taxes in Sterling would be the same.
Lot of places accept foreign currency. Odd as you say that you can't usually spend British currency (a £50) in Britain...
Now here's a headline you really don't ever want to read:
"Chipmunks near Lake Tahoe test positive for the plague"
Between escalating nuclear stockpiles, a rapidly deteriorating geopolitical climate, indications of Cold War II, a multi-year pandemic, the Greenland ice sheet close to total failure, the Arctic soon history, self-sufficiency being unfashionable, trade friction beginning to hamper food supplies, a population explosion and concomitant annihilation of other species and habitats and astonishingly poor world leaders, one wonders if we’re not about to get an uncomfortably realistic exposition of life in the Middle Ages.
… and now The Plague.
(...)
I am slightly shocked to learn that the average age of a civilisation is only 336 years!! That’s tiny! And then ponder how long ago The Enlightenment was.
Great civilisations are not murdered. Instead, they take their own lives.
Moscow Narodny Bank on King William Street EC4 and "vodka cola" and "chemical towns" apart, the western and Chinese economies are far too bound up with each other for a re-run of either the real Soviet-US cold war of 1948-62, or the following period of Soviet-US relations leading up to 1991, to be repeated with China. "The greatest victory is that which requires no battle."
That gobbledegook was too young and too Turkish.
Several of the phrases in it can easily be looked up. The US and its satellites traded LITTLE with the USSR. That was a deliberate policy both during the Cold War and afterwards, right up until Gorbachev and the early mass computer epoch. (Exceptions include Moscow Narodny Bank, and whole towns in the USSR in which convict labour worked for western chemical companies, and I could name a few others too, but all taken together these are insufficient to overturn the point.) Cut to 2021 and the US and its satellites trade a LOT with China. Much of their domestic consumption depends on that trade. Then there's Chinese ownership of major shares in assets such as western ports (e.g. the facilities at Felixstowe - through which about a half of Britain's containerised trade passes - where the facilities are owned by Chinese interests on land leased from Trinity College, Cambridge) and nuclear plants. British nuclear plants, for goodness' sake! The USSR didn't own any of them! Whoever in the west pushes for a Cold War with China would be making the home economy wave goodbye to a lot. And even putting like that is pretty mild. It isn't going to happen. With a nod to Sun Tzu: China has played an extremely strong game versus the west over the past 40 years. It has probably already won. Yes, empires fall. And empires rise.
Saying there might be a CW with China seems to be fashionable at the moment. It's stupid. Many who say it don't even stop to think what "CW" means, but in any sensible definition you gotta have an arms race, standoffs, and a low level of trade (the latter two constituting an "Iron Curtain").
You will soon be able to secure your same day delivery at-home Covid19 tests from Amazon and it’s partner BGI.
Chances are your DNA will soon be decoded at conveyor-belt speed and genetic data surveillance will become the norm.
It looks like 50% fear mongering and 50% ignorance.
BGI was formerly known as the Beijing Genomics Institute, based out of Shenzhen. They are the biggest genomics reading entity in the world, and have the second biggest data storage capacity in the world, behind only the NSA. They are hovering up genetic data from all sources, and are not very good about sharing what they learn. There are some real concerns about what they intend to do with the data, and how they ignore others' legitimate data ownership issues. Needless to say, BGI has strong links with the Chinese government. It's head also clashes with many of China's own top biological scientists.
Amazon providing logistics for tests that will go to UK laboratories does not imply "genetic data surveillance will become the norm" whatever concerns might exist about BGI.
‘The government’s replacement for the Europe-wide Erasmus student exchange scheme appears to have got off to a flying start
‘According to the DfE’s estimates, 120 universities have applied for a share of the £110m Turing scheme, alongside schools and further education colleges, to fund work and study placements. The 40,000 total is said to include 28,000 placements for university students in 2021-22, more than the 18,300 placements that took place under the Erasmus scheme in the 2018-19th academic year’
Time will tell, but the whole Erasmus complaint seemed very dependent on any follow up scheme - if there wasn't one at all, that would have been bad, if there was one but it was under par in some way bad but not as much, but if the replacement works well the complaints will have seemed a bit histrionic.
Alternatively, the complaints will have been effective. Anyway, let's see how it all works out.
‘The government’s replacement for the Europe-wide Erasmus student exchange scheme appears to have got off to a flying start
‘According to the DfE’s estimates, 120 universities have applied for a share of the £110m Turing scheme, alongside schools and further education colleges, to fund work and study placements. The 40,000 total is said to include 28,000 placements for university students in 2021-22, more than the 18,300 placements that took place under the Erasmus scheme in the 2018-19th academic year’
Time will tell, but the whole Erasmus complaint seemed very dependent on any follow up scheme - if there wasn't one at all, that would have been bad, if there was one but it was under par in some way bad but not as much, but if the replacement works well the complaints will have seemed a bit histrionic.
Some apples and pears thinking going on here. Applications do not equal placements.
And, the funding is less generous.
Let’s see.
Precisely the point - it may well not be as stallar as that report summary suggests. Nevertheless, the initial complaints are quite likely to be overblown as they were treating the situation as if there was no replacement at all (whether or not they said as much), so the government cannot help but exceed expectations.
As far as I can tell (one needs huge energy to wade across the mythologising bullshit of the British press), the EU stitched themselves up by offering Erasmus on too-expensive terms.
I bemoan, though, the lost opportunities for British students to study in Europe - honouring a tradition that dates back to the Grand Tour.
I see EU admissions to U.K. universities has collapsed by 50% this year, too.
1) There is no "currency union" currently. There is a single currency for a single country. London parties last time around said there would be no currency union with iScotland. 2) The act of Union created the common travel and customs area - repealing that ends both. What it is replaced with is not within the gift of the Scottish government. Also, see below. 3) Positive immigration militates against a common travel area. 4) EU membership militates against a common customs area.
Have to pick at a few of these. "A single currency for a single country". Not in practice. Whilst the local issues of Sterling are technically Sterling, in practice they are not. Sterling notes printed outside England tend not to be acceptable outside their local nation whether than be NornIron or Jersey or sadly even Scotland.
All these local issues are in a de facto currency union. Some of them - the Scottish pound as example - have to back up notes issued with BofE securities, but the smaller ones - Isle of Man etc - don't even have to do that.
The idea that iScotland must walk away from "the UK's Pound" just isn't true as there isn't a UK pound. English notes are accepted anywhere, non-English notes are not and have different legal status. If iScotland continues to back up its local sterling issue as it does now what is the difference?
As for the others, yes the current arrangements end. But de facto? You say that "positive immigration militates against a common travel area". And yet Ireland has freedom of movement AND common travel with the UK - so your statement is wrong de facto if not de jure.
Do Scottish people have any difficulty paying for things in England if they use credit or debit cards (like most of us do for most purchases)? Indeed, try using a Bank of England £50 note to pay for anything in most English shops.
The currency we use is not defined by the notes and coins we use; they are just a method of payment.
And the same is true in any of the places that use Sterling that aren't England. I can spend Sterling by debit card on the Isle of Man without any problem because shops on the non-UK IOM accept it for payment. An iScotland where you pay your taxes in Sterling would be the same.
Lot of places accept foreign currency. Odd as you say that you can't usually spend British currency (a £50) in Britain...
If you think the currency question is simply about being able to earn and spend it, you're utterly deluded.
Sturgeon on R4 complaining that other leaders (Starmer, Johnson) aren't showing Scotland respect.....as ever conflating herself and the SNP with Scotland.
She is the First Minister - it's not just her or the SNP.
This is one of those situations where neither side actually wants what they say though. Sturgeon wouldn't really want to be treated with respect by Boris or the UK Gov, since complaining about a lack of respect would be politically very useful. Boris wouldn't really want to engage meaningfully with Sturgeon whatever he might say, because politically he benefits from frustrating her in any way he can.
And the last thing Mr Starmer wants is to be seen shaking the First Minister's hand.
1) There is no "currency union" currently. There is a single currency for a single country. London parties last time around said there would be no currency union with iScotland. 2) The act of Union created the common travel and customs area - repealing that ends both. What it is replaced with is not within the gift of the Scottish government. Also, see below. 3) Positive immigration militates against a common travel area. 4) EU membership militates against a common customs area.
Have to pick at a few of these. "A single currency for a single country". Not in practice. Whilst the local issues of Sterling are technically Sterling, in practice they are not. Sterling notes printed outside England tend not to be acceptable outside their local nation whether than be NornIron or Jersey or sadly even Scotland.
All these local issues are in a de facto currency union. Some of them - the Scottish pound as example - have to back up notes issued with BofE securities, but the smaller ones - Isle of Man etc - don't even have to do that.
The idea that iScotland must walk away from "the UK's Pound" just isn't true as there isn't a UK pound. English notes are accepted anywhere, non-English notes are not and have different legal status. If iScotland continues to back up its local sterling issue as it does now what is the difference?
As for the others, yes the current arrangements end. But de facto? You say that "positive immigration militates against a common travel area". And yet Ireland has freedom of movement AND common travel with the UK - so your statement is wrong de facto if not de jure.
Sounds like you are proposing "dollarisation" with sterling - using the currency of a foreign country. The SNP don't want that:
An independent Scotland could continue using sterling without the rest of the UK's consent in the same way some Latin American countries have adopted the US dollar and Montenegro uses the Euro.
Under this option—known as dollarisation—Scotland would have no formal central bank and no access to the services of, or influence over, the Bank of England. But Scotland has a large financial services sector which relies on access to central bank services. Professor Jim Gallagher of Nuffield College, Oxford said that, because of this, dollarisation "is not a viable option" for somewhere like Scotland
The Scottish Government is not therefore interested in dollarisation and favours a monetary union between an independent Scotland and the rest of the UK. Mr John Swinney MSP, Cabinet Secretary for Finance, Employment and Sustainable Growth in the Scottish Government, told us:
The London political parties ruled out a currency union last time and there's nothing to suggest they'd agree to one this time.
There are effectively border controls between the RoI and the British mainland.
I'm not representing the SNP and wish they would make up their mind what they want. My point is simple enough though that Scotland can continue to issue local Sterling notes and accept non-local Sterling notes as it does now, formal currency union or not.
As for border checks? Of course! But it still a CTA - I can go and live and work in Ireland and vice-versa. Why would Scotland be different? If the EU makes it different then it doesn't in Ireland. If free movement makes it different then it doesn't in Ireland.
So it reads that you would want to make an example out of Scotland? In a way that we didn't with Ireland despite their UDI...
That's the 'thinker' who used the term rootless cosmopolitans pejoratively then claimed he had no idea of its historical provenance? Seems a bit of a thicko imo.
Mr. Pioneers, Hamilton's also been bloody lucky this year. With all being equal, Verstappen would be 40-50 points ahead.
I don't buy the 'amazing drive' line. The Hamilton-Mercedes combination is miles faster than everyone except Verstappen's Red Bull. He drove well but not incredibly.
Mr. Eagles, to be fair, Singapore then was absolutely sodden. Budapest was slightly damp.
In March the Financial Times reported that UK exports of lipid nanoparticles to the Pfizer/BioNTech plants in the EU was the input dependence that kept the European Commission from imposing export restrictions on AstraZeneca vaccines.
‘The government’s replacement for the Europe-wide Erasmus student exchange scheme appears to have got off to a flying start
‘According to the DfE’s estimates, 120 universities have applied for a share of the £110m Turing scheme, alongside schools and further education colleges, to fund work and study placements. The 40,000 total is said to include 28,000 placements for university students in 2021-22, more than the 18,300 placements that took place under the Erasmus scheme in the 2018-19th academic year’
Time will tell, but the whole Erasmus complaint seemed very dependent on any follow up scheme - if there wasn't one at all, that would have been bad, if there was one but it was under par in some way bad but not as much, but if the replacement works well the complaints will have seemed a bit histrionic.
Some apples and pears thinking going on here. Applications do not equal placements.
And, the funding is less generous.
Let’s see.
Precisely the point - it may well not be as stallar as that report summary suggests. Nevertheless, the initial complaints are quite likely to be overblown as they were treating the situation as if there was no replacement at all (whether or not they said as much), so the government cannot help but exceed expectations.
As far as I can tell (one needs huge energy to wade across the mythologising bullshit of the British press), the EU stitched themselves up by offering Erasmus on too-expensive terms.
I bemoan, though, the lost opportunities for British students to study in Europe - honouring a tradition that dates back to the Grand Tour.
I see EU admissions to U.K. universities has collapsed by 50% this year, too.
Sad!
Hardly surprising given that EU students now have to pay the full overseas student rate and can no longer "borrow" the fees.
I suspect the EU students arriving this year will be a lot more profitable for the universities than existing ones.
‘The government’s replacement for the Europe-wide Erasmus student exchange scheme appears to have got off to a flying start
‘According to the DfE’s estimates, 120 universities have applied for a share of the £110m Turing scheme, alongside schools and further education colleges, to fund work and study placements. The 40,000 total is said to include 28,000 placements for university students in 2021-22, more than the 18,300 placements that took place under the Erasmus scheme in the 2018-19th academic year’
Time will tell, but the whole Erasmus complaint seemed very dependent on any follow up scheme - if there wasn't one at all, that would have been bad, if there was one but it was under par in some way bad but not as much, but if the replacement works well the complaints will have seemed a bit histrionic.
Alternatively, the complaints will have been effective. Anyway, let's see how it all works out.
No, because the complaints about the removal were happening even when we knew about the replacement scheme - so only proportionate complaints about the replacement not being as good would be valid, as opposed to the emotional 'the end of erasmus is an outrage' stuff. People who did the latter even when it was clear there would be something in place already look silly.
Sturgeon on R4 complaining that other leaders (Starmer, Johnson) aren't showing Scotland respect.....as ever conflating herself and the SNP with Scotland.
She just whines endlessly and is deceitful imho.
Thank goodness, a break from you whining endlessly about BJ being slagged off.
You will soon be able to secure your same day delivery at-home Covid19 tests from Amazon and it’s partner BGI.
Chances are your DNA will soon be decoded at conveyor-belt speed and genetic data surveillance will become the norm.
It looks like 50% fear mongering and 50% ignorance.
BGI was formerly known as the Beijing Genomics Institute, based out of Shenzhen. They are the biggest genomics reading entity in the world, and have the second biggest data storage capacity in the world, behind only the NSA. They are hovering up genetic data from all sources, and are not very good about sharing what they learn. There are some real concerns about what they intend to do with the data, and how they ignore others' legitimate data ownership issues. Needless to say, BGI has strong links with the Chinese government. It's head also clashes with many of China's own top biological scientists.
Amazon providing logistics for tests that will go to UK laboratories does not imply "genetic data surveillance will become the norm" whatever concerns might exist about BGI.
It does not imply that it necessarily will, but does not exclude that it could. With GWAS studies enabled by the combination of cheap genomics and Big Data, we are going down a route that will have to be regulated to prevent that.
Sturgeon on brink of cooperation deal with Scottish Greens Exclusive: agreement would cement a pro-independence majority at Holyrood and may give Greens ministerial seats
The formal deal, which will stop short of a full coalition of the kind agreed by the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats under David Cameron and Nick Clegg in 2010, would give the Scottish National party and Scottish Greens a clear majority of seats at Holyrood.
It would allow the first minister to present a strong pro-climate agenda in advance of the Cop26 climate talks in Glasgow this November, and outvote anti-independence parties in Holyrood.
It would be the first time after 14 years in power the SNP had signed a formal deal with another party
The deal will present Scottish Labour, currently Holyrood’s third-largest party, with a significant political challenge. It is likely to give Sturgeon a resilient centre-left majority and removes her need to seek deals with Labour to get policies through the devolved parliament.
the Conservatives are taking a softer line on the potential for a fresh independence referendum
Forgive my pedantry, but if there is a formal deal which gives Greens ministerial seats then in what way does it stop short of full coalition?
Very good question, which the article fails to answer.
Any agreement which gives both parties seats in Cabinet, a shared programme of legislation and an agreed Budget is a coalition. End of.
It would be a sensible assumption that the Green Party will get the Environment brief. If they are in government but not in coalition then what? Are the SNP handing the entire environment brief and policy over to the Green Party to run independently?
Either way, Scotland elected 73 explicitly pro-independence MSPs giving a comfortable majority. Despite HYUFD's endless whining that it isn't a majority, it is. I will be greatly entertained to watch nippy bleat on about a referendum without actually producing one, but that is the "settled will of the Scottish people" or whatever the Tories latest phrase is.
Good morning
I agree with you about an indyref2 mandate but I genuinely believe it will not happen this side of the next GE
@HYUFD make lots of antagonistic comments on the subject but in truth we are little over 2 and a half years from GE 24 believe it or not and that is not long, especially with covid still an issue
Furthermore and notwithstanding the gung-ho nature of the Nationalists they have not even started to provide an answer to the big issues including
Currency Hard border Pensions The timing of re-admittance to the EU Investment decision deferred due to unknowns and uncertainty
(to name a few)
Additionally, there has been a drift away by the Scots themselves to even holding indyref2, let alone voting for it, that it seems to me that it is unlikely to happen anytime soon
They are all mouth and no trousers, but they *are* the 4 times elected government with their biggest ever vote this time on the biggest ever turnout.
On the issues you raise they need to say some fairly simple things. Currency: will maintain the existing sterling currency union until admitted to the Euro Border: the same solution as GB eventually reaches with the EU will apply (so not really a Scotland-specific problem) Pensions: a positive migration policy to have sufficient workers to pay them EU timing - apply for membership on morning 1 of independence etc
They won't. There seems to be a fear that if they go into detail people may start ignoring heart and feel and instead start making considered judgements...
1) There is no "currency union" currently. There is a single currency for a single country. London parties last time around said there would be no currency union with iScotland. 2) The act of Union created the common travel and customs area - repealing that ends both. What it is replaced with is not within the gift of the Scottish government. Also, see below. 3) Positive immigration militates against a common travel area. 4) EU membership militates against a common customs area.
The weird thing about the Sindy debate is that obviously there are similarities with Brexit, and positions may be reversed on it (eg UK/Indy Scotland not being able to guarantee what the EU/rUK will agree to, or assuming they will do it as it is in their interest) but it's only rarely we acknowledge the similarities and explain why it wi be different, usually just employing the same tactics as Brexit, in reverse (eg opportunities not difficulty from borders, or it now mattering if one area does not vote in favour).
The unexplored group in Scotland are Yes voters that have switched to No and the Conservatives following the Brexit vote. Apparently not an insignificant number, to set against those going the other way - No Voters, switched to Yes following the Brexit vote.
I should add the demographic divide of Yes/No is completely different from Remain/Leave. It is not mainly driven by age or educational attainment. Two groups were heavily No: the over 65s and those born outside Scotland. Every other group was nearly evenly split.
Since 2014 it looks like younger demographics have moved heavily to Yes.
Yes won under 55s even in 2014.
Had only 55s been able to vote in the UK Scotland would have voted for independence in 2014 and the UK would have voted to stay in the EU in 2016
Sturgeon on brink of cooperation deal with Scottish Greens Exclusive: agreement would cement a pro-independence majority at Holyrood and may give Greens ministerial seats
The formal deal, which will stop short of a full coalition of the kind agreed by the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats under David Cameron and Nick Clegg in 2010, would give the Scottish National party and Scottish Greens a clear majority of seats at Holyrood.
It would allow the first minister to present a strong pro-climate agenda in advance of the Cop26 climate talks in Glasgow this November, and outvote anti-independence parties in Holyrood.
It would be the first time after 14 years in power the SNP had signed a formal deal with another party
The deal will present Scottish Labour, currently Holyrood’s third-largest party, with a significant political challenge. It is likely to give Sturgeon a resilient centre-left majority and removes her need to seek deals with Labour to get policies through the devolved parliament.
the Conservatives are taking a softer line on the potential for a fresh independence referendum
Forgive my pedantry, but if there is a formal deal which gives Greens ministerial seats then in what way does it stop short of full coalition?
Very good question, which the article fails to answer.
Any agreement which gives both parties seats in Cabinet, a shared programme of legislation and an agreed Budget is a coalition. End of.
It would be a sensible assumption that the Green Party will get the Environment brief. If they are in government but not in coalition then what? Are the SNP handing the entire environment brief and policy over to the Green Party to run independently?
Either way, Scotland elected 73 explicitly pro-independence MSPs giving a comfortable majority. Despite HYUFD's endless whining that it isn't a majority, it is. I will be greatly entertained to watch nippy bleat on about a referendum without actually producing one, but that is the "settled will of the Scottish people" or whatever the Tories latest phrase is.
Good morning
I agree with you about an indyref2 mandate but I genuinely believe it will not happen this side of the next GE
@HYUFD make lots of antagonistic comments on the subject but in truth we are little over 2 and a half years from GE 24 believe it or not and that is not long, especially with covid still an issue
Furthermore and notwithstanding the gung-ho nature of the Nationalists they have not even started to provide an answer to the big issues including
Currency Hard border Pensions The timing of re-admittance to the EU Investment decision deferred due to unknowns and uncertainty
(to name a few)
Additionally, there has been a drift away by the Scots themselves to even holding indyref2, let alone voting for it, that it seems to me that it is unlikely to happen anytime soon
They are all mouth and no trousers, but they *are* the 4 times elected government with their biggest ever vote this time on the biggest ever turnout.
On the issues you raise they need to say some fairly simple things. Currency: will maintain the existing sterling currency union until admitted to the Euro Border: the same solution as GB eventually reaches with the EU will apply (so not really a Scotland-specific problem) Pensions: a positive migration policy to have sufficient workers to pay them EU timing - apply for membership on morning 1 of independence etc
They won't. There seems to be a fear that if they go into detail people may start ignoring heart and feel and instead start making considered judgements...
1) There is no "currency union" currently. There is a single currency for a single country. London parties last time around said there would be no currency union with iScotland. 2) The act of Union created the common travel and customs area - repealing that ends both. What it is replaced with is not within the gift of the Scottish government. Also, see below. 3) Positive immigration militates against a common travel area. 4) EU membership militates against a common customs area.
The weird thing about the Sindy debate is that obviously there are similarities with Brexit, and positions may be reversed on it (eg UK/Indy Scotland not being able to guarantee what the EU/rUK will agree to, or assuming they will do it as it is in their interest) but it's only rarely we acknowledge the similarities and explain why it wi be different, usually just employing the same tactics as Brexit, in reverse (eg opportunities not difficulty from borders, or it now mattering if one area does not vote in favour).
To put it vulgarly: the growth of pro-exit fervour among "non-graduates" that gave us Brexit will have to continue apace north of the border if Scots are to give themselves an almighty kick up the arse and let the nationalist Partei have the go-ahead for Scexit.
Mr. Pioneers, Hamilton's also been bloody lucky this year. With all being equal, Verstappen would be 40-50 points ahead.
I don't buy the 'amazing drive' line. The Hamilton-Mercedes combination is miles faster than everyone except Verstappen's Red Bull. He drove well but not incredibly.
Mr. Eagles, to be fair, Singapore then was absolutely sodden. Budapest was slightly damp.
If it is the car then why has Bottas repeatedly demonstrated its inability to slice through the pack? Stick Bottas's car in the midfield and he is stuck. Yes of course the Mercedes is a leading car, but its not as all-dominant as in the past and only has 1 driver capable of getting performance out of it.
‘The government’s replacement for the Europe-wide Erasmus student exchange scheme appears to have got off to a flying start
‘According to the DfE’s estimates, 120 universities have applied for a share of the £110m Turing scheme, alongside schools and further education colleges, to fund work and study placements. The 40,000 total is said to include 28,000 placements for university students in 2021-22, more than the 18,300 placements that took place under the Erasmus scheme in the 2018-19th academic year’
Time will tell, but the whole Erasmus complaint seemed very dependent on any follow up scheme - if there wasn't one at all, that would have been bad, if there was one but it was under par in some way bad but not as much, but if the replacement works well the complaints will have seemed a bit histrionic.
Some apples and pears thinking going on here. Applications do not equal placements.
And, the funding is less generous.
Let’s see.
Precisely the point - it may well not be as stallar as that report summary suggests. Nevertheless, the initial complaints are quite likely to be overblown as they were treating the situation as if there was no replacement at all (whether or not they said as much), so the government cannot help but exceed expectations.
As far as I can tell (one needs huge energy to wade across the mythologising bullshit of the British press), the EU stitched themselves up by offering Erasmus on too-expensive terms.
I bemoan, though, the lost opportunities for British students to study in Europe - honouring a tradition that dates back to the Grand Tour.
I see EU admissions to U.K. universities has collapsed by 50% this year, too.
Comments
Otherwise either the Democrats get a Senate majority next year in which case the new VP is easily approved or the GOP get a Senate majority or a House majority and can block the appointment of a new VP until the next election.
Indeed until the 25th amendment in 1965 if the President died or resigned and the VP assumed the presidency, the Vice Presidency remained vacant until the next Presidential election and the EC approved the President and Vice Presidential nominee of the winning ticket
I'm on the record many times as saying I think Biden is very likely (75% minimum) to run again and almost certain to be renominated if so. The above is a hypothetical, to be clear.
https://twitter.com/ClaudiaWebbe/status/1422836623239176192
Are there no limits to what Amazon will do next?
You will soon be able to secure your same day delivery at-home Covid19 tests from Amazon and it’s partner BGI.
Chances are your DNA will soon be decoded at conveyor-belt speed and genetic data surveillance will become the norm.
Bubonic plague in chipmunks forces closure of top Lake Tahoe sites
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/aug/03/lake-tahoe-chipmunks-bubonic-plague
Individual dressage - Bronze
Team dressage - Bronze
Individual eventing - Silver
Team eventing - Gold
Individual showjumping - Gold
Team showjumping to go
Understandable that they're peeved:
https://twitter.com/thsoulis/status/1422856443775102977
Binotto[sp] has suggested teams that cause crashes should foot the bill.
Re places that are extremely enjoyable to say out loud, try this one - "Little Italy".
It's totally addictive. Esp if you give the 'tees' a hint of 'dee'.
I'd worry for her too, but interested in your thumbnail.
In fact her approval rating is below the 47% of the popular vote Trump got in 2020
He'll probably pull back up, but some of the shine is definitely off.
https://twitter.com/DaniMacYo/status/1422856408261824512
Three in four Britons back assisted dying for terminally ill – poll
Strong public support for change in law not shared by MPs, with only 35% agreeing,
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/aug/04/three-in-four-britons-back-assisted-dying-for-terminally-ill-poll
https://twitter.com/CoolForASecond/status/1421825180096253955
In France the service stations still serve wine. Very high quality places as I recall. You'd book.
More likely we'll see Russell at Mercedes before the year end.
I should add the demographic divide of Yes/No is completely different from Remain/Leave. It is not mainly driven by age or educational attainment. Two groups were heavily No: the over 65s and those born outside Scotland. Every other group was nearly evenly split.
Since 2014 it looks like younger demographics have moved heavily to Yes.
Bottas crashing into the back of Norris which led to Norris crashing into Verstappen whilst Bottas span into the other Red Bull.
Yet this was the Mercedes masterplan, you cannot carry a plan like that out.
It's all very reminiscent of Michael Schumacher crying like a baby after the Belgian Grand Prix of 1998 convinced that David Coulthard had tried to kill him to hand the title to Coulthard's team mate.
Accidents and mistakes happen in F1, especially in wet conditions.
As such a change would require unanimity, it's not going to happen any time soon.
Mr. B, there's a new cost cap, so teams who get crashed into now suffer grid penalties in addition to DNFs *and* take a financial hit they can't absorb, materially aiding their rivals.
It's a stupid position that needs changing.
The sad thing is that Sitka spruce is a fabulous tree and in its native environment grows almost as big as the redwoods. You can see that in a few estate plantations & arboretums in Scotland.
Bottas can't find his ass in the wet. The idea that he might possess such billiards style finesse (and note the crash only missed collecting Hamilton too by about a metre) is more absurd than your average Horner opinion.
Professor Jonathan-Van-Tam
Dr June Raine
Professor Wei Shen Lim
- Expected to be announcement on Covid vaccines for 16-17 year olds
https://twitter.com/PoliticsForAlI/status/1422894870012866561?s=20
Oh
‘The government’s replacement for the Europe-wide Erasmus student exchange scheme appears to have got off to a flying start
‘According to the DfE’s estimates, 120 universities have applied for a share of the £110m Turing scheme, alongside schools and further education colleges, to fund work and study placements. The 40,000 total is said to include 28,000 placements for university students in 2021-22, more than the 18,300 placements that took place under the Erasmus scheme in the 2018-19th academic year’
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2021/aug/04/students-apply-to-uk-version-of-erasmus-foreign-study-scheme?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
As for Horner this reminds of the 2017 season when Max crashed into Räikkönen who then crashed into Vettel at the Singapore Grand Prix which ended ruining Vettel's chances of winning the title.
We’re not gonna catch up with any of the top 3 - China, USA, Japan - can we stay ahead of Oz and I-Can’t-Believe-It’s-Not-Russia?
Need golds from boxing and bicycles
https://spiral.imperial.ac.uk/bitstream/10044/1/90800/2/react1_r13_final_preprint_final.pdf
44% of infections were estimated to be in the fully vaccinated. Figure 5 shows that the hospitalisation rate per infection is now back to almost exactly where it has been through most of the pandemic (after a temporary dip, presumably owing to vaccination, between March and May this year). The death rate per infection is lower than it was at the beginning of the year, but also rose when the Delta variant became dominant. The figures are broken down by age (over/under 65) in Figure 6.
If we manage to get 2-4 more golds it will be tough to see Australia finish ahead but it depends on the cyclists outperforming expectations and at least two of the boxers converting chances to gold medals.
or maybe we don't want it enough?
In Rugby Union the Scots/Welsh/Irish really want to beat England for example, not sure the reverse is true.
Henry Marsh, who likely has more practical and ethical knowledge of the issues than any of the timeservers in Parliament, is right.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/apr/01/top-uk-brain-surgeon-henry-marsh-cancer-calls-urgent-inquiry-assisted-dying
All these local issues are in a de facto currency union. Some of them - the Scottish pound as example - have to back up notes issued with BofE securities, but the smaller ones - Isle of Man etc - don't even have to do that.
The idea that iScotland must walk away from "the UK's Pound" just isn't true as there isn't a UK pound. English notes are accepted anywhere, non-English notes are not and have different legal status. If iScotland continues to back up its local sterling issue as it does now what is the difference?
As for the others, yes the current arrangements end. But de facto? You say that "positive immigration militates against a common travel area". And yet Ireland has freedom of movement AND common travel with the UK - so your statement is wrong de facto if not de jure.
Why won't the Left admit the truth about open borders?
BY PAUL EMBERY
Paul Embery is a firefighter, trade union activist, pro-Brexit campaigner and 'Blue Labour' thinker"
https://unherd.com/2021/08/leavers-were-right-about-immigration/
As others have mentioned she's a NorCal liberal and will be a Republican turn out machine and the GOP will be the MAGA party by 2024.
On a broader point I would not be surprised if the election is an utter fiasco that produces no conclusive outcome resulting in a constitutional crisis. Every close some not close results are going to challenged and litigated. It's going to be the Maricopa audit x 10,000.
Here is reality. Lewis Hamilton is a stunning driver. He is one of very few you can expect to cut through the entire field if needed - Perez being another example. It isn't the car - stick Bottarse at the back and watch him fail to make progress. Regardless of whatever comedy conspiracy Valtteri wasn't part of, Hamilton ended up plumb last and finished 3rd thanks to overtaking pretty much everyone.
Does the study estimate how many of the cases in the vaccinated originated from an unvaccinated individual? Be interesting / useful to know. I suspect vaccinated -> vaccinated will be a much lower risk.
The currency we use is not defined by the notes and coins we use; they are just a method of payment.
Nor will a return to status quo ante usher in some golden age of labour. People don't want to work in care homes. Or clean hotels. Or work as plumbers. So we end up with a shortage of labour (remember how hard it was to get a plumber before Poles filled the gaps...?) and higher costs.
The comment pages of the Mail always have a solution - "make the unemployed do the jobs". Yes, we just need to create plenty of affordable out of hours child care and 14 hour public transport that takes people from where they live to another part of a country where the vacancies are...
Applications do not equal placements.
And, the funding is less generous.
Let’s see.
Both sides will probably challenge lots of things (which doesn't make baseless challenges in 2020 ok in retrospect - each challenge is considered on its merits).
An independent Scotland could continue using sterling without the rest of the UK's consent in the same way some Latin American countries have adopted the US dollar and Montenegro uses the Euro.
Under this option—known as dollarisation—Scotland would have no formal central bank and no access to the services of, or influence over, the Bank of England. But Scotland has a large financial services sector which relies on access to central bank services. Professor Jim Gallagher of Nuffield College, Oxford said that, because of this, dollarisation "is not a viable option" for somewhere like Scotland
The Scottish Government is not therefore interested in dollarisation and favours a monetary union between an independent Scotland and the rest of the UK. Mr John Swinney MSP, Cabinet Secretary for Finance, Employment and Sustainable Growth in the Scottish Government, told us:
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201213/ldselect/ldeconaf/152/15205.htm
The London political parties ruled out a currency union last time and there's nothing to suggest they'd agree to one this time.
There are effectively border controls between the RoI and the British mainland.
Lot of places accept foreign currency. Odd as you say that you can't usually spend British currency (a £50) in Britain...
Saying there might be a CW with China seems to be fashionable at the moment. It's stupid. Many who say it don't even stop to think what "CW" means, but in any sensible definition you gotta have an arms race, standoffs, and a low level of trade (the latter two constituting an "Iron Curtain").
I bemoan, though, the lost opportunities for British students to study in Europe - honouring a tradition that dates back to the Grand Tour.
I see EU admissions to U.K. universities has collapsed by 50% this year, too.
Sad!
As for border checks? Of course! But it still a CTA - I can go and live and work in Ireland and vice-versa. Why would Scotland be different? If the EU makes it different then it doesn't in Ireland. If free movement makes it different then it doesn't in Ireland.
So it reads that you would want to make an example out of Scotland? In a way that we didn't with Ireland despite their UDI...
I don't buy the 'amazing drive' line. The Hamilton-Mercedes combination is miles faster than everyone except Verstappen's Red Bull. He drove well but not incredibly.
Mr. Eagles, to be fair, Singapore then was absolutely sodden. Budapest was slightly damp.
https://twitter.com/ChadBown/status/1422890817618915331?s=20
Includes this:
FUN FACT:
In March the Financial Times reported that UK exports of lipid nanoparticles to the Pfizer/BioNTech plants in the EU was the input dependence that kept the European Commission from imposing export restrictions on AstraZeneca vaccines.
The data confirm this... 8/
I suspect the EU students arriving this year will be a lot more profitable for the universities than existing ones.
Had only 55s been able to vote in the UK Scotland would have voted for independence in 2014 and the UK would have voted to stay in the EU in 2016
https://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Lord-Ashcroft-Polls-Referendum-day-poll-summary-1409191.pdf
I would also require at least 2 doctors to confirm that