Time to bet that Trump will take the controversial step of pardoning himself? – politicalbetting.com
Comments
-
Churchill of course never agreed to Indian independence as Tory PM of the UK, it was only the election of the Attlee Labour government in 1945 in the UK that enabled Indian independence to be granted by 1947.Carnyx said:<
I once asked him if he thought India* should have been given its independence. He never replied.Mary_Batty said:
Unfortunately, that is exactly what he believes. In HYUFD's world, consent to being governed is not the sole gift of the governed. I can't think of a better adjective than "imperialist" to describe the attitude, but with so many literary experts on here I will await advice.Richard_Tyndall said:
But that means that even if 100% of the population of Catalonia wanted independence they would not be allowed to vote for it because it would be illegal for the Spanish Government to allow such a vote and you would consider any vote without Spanish permission to be unlawful and therefore should be repressed.HYUFD said:
If the Catalan government's declaration of UDI had not been challenged by Madrid then Catalonia would in effect have become an independent state, the law is meaningless unless it is upheld and enforced.SouthamObserver said:
The Spanish government - whether PP, PSOE or whatever - has no legal right to allow a referendum on independence for any part of Spain. That is clearly set out in Spain's written constitution.HYUFD said:
Confirms the PP Spanish government did the right thing in 2017 then refusing a legal independence referendum when support for Catalan independence was much higher and ignoring the Catalan nationalist government's declaration of a UDI.SouthamObserver said:In other news, support for Catalan independence continues to fall. The change from a hard-line, confrontational, right-wing government in Madrid to one run by the centre left that has focused on dialogue has led to a split in the Catalan separatist movement. There is even an outside chance the separatists may lose control of the Catalan parliament after next month's regional elections.
https://twitter.com/RupertCocke/status/1348568129685901312
Had they not done that Catalonia would now be an independent state not seeing support for independence fall
Westminster must equally enforce the legal principle of our constitution that Westminster is sovereign and when the UK government says 2014 was a once in a generation vote it means it
In which case why bother asking for permission? They should just do it. Unless you think that it is justifiable to hold a whole population captive against their will and they should not be allowed to express their opposition to that?
*In the old, not modern, sense.
Though of course at that time India had not voted just 7 years prior to stay in the UK in a once in a generation vote as Scotland has0 -
Yes, that’s my reading. BUT I think they will have a crucial window of opportunity at the Westminster GE of 2024. They are quite likely to hold the balance of power in a hung Parliament. Labour, by then desperate to get back into office, might then offer Sturgeon (or Cherry, or whoever) a voteSouthamObserver said:
My only point is that Scotland is not Catalonia. I think your scenario is the correct one and that ultimately this puts the SNP in a very difficult position as UDI will not work: the Scottish government does not have the legal right to do it, so the Scottish courts would almost certainly strike it down; and, more important, it does not have the means to enforce UDI because it does not control enough levers of power to do so. What's more, the international community will not accept it because Scotland is split enough for any referendum that precedes UDI to be boycotted by enough people to provide cover and, in any case, Scotland is not a country living under a tyranny. The longer Johnson says no, the more likely a split in the SNP between pragmatists and revolutionaries becomes.Leon said:
But Southam has made his wearyingly obvious point several million times as well. It’s why Sindyref debates are so boring, it’s the same talking points every time, from all sides.DougSeal said:
I think you may, just may, have made this point before.HYUFD said:
It is also absolutely one the UK government can refuse to grant based on the principle of Westminster sovereignty on which our unwritten constitution is based.SouthamObserver said:
Yep - a referendum on Scottish independence is absolutely one that the UK government can grant.RochdalePioneers said:
Catalonia is not Scotland. As the Baronet of Epping Forest refuses to recognise.SouthamObserver said:
The Spanish government - whether PP, PSOE or whatever - has no legal right to allow a referendum on independence for any part of Spain. That is clearly set out in Spain's written constitution.HYUFD said:
Confirms the PP Spanish government did the right thing in 2017 then refusing a legal independence referendum when support for Catalan independence was much higher and ignoring the Catalan nationalist government's declaration of a UDI.SouthamObserver said:In other news, support for Catalan independence continues to fall. The change from a hard-line, confrontational, right-wing government in Madrid to one run by the centre left that has focused on dialogue has led to a split in the Catalan separatist movement. There is even an outside chance the separatists may lose control of the Catalan parliament after next month's regional elections.
https://twitter.com/RupertCocke/status/1348568129685901312
Had they not done that Catalonia would now be an independent state not seeing support for independence fall
This Tory government will do precisely that and uphold the manifesto promise we won a majority in 2019 on that 2014 was 'a once in a generation referendum.'
Hopefully the SNP will not win a majority in May avoiding the need for a decision from the UK government anyway but even if they do this Tory government will follow the example of our conservative cousins in the PP in Spain in 2017 and ban any legal indyref.
No ifs, no buts, no concessions whatsoever to the Nationalists. Indeed legally and constitutionally Westminster could even abolish Holyrood tomorrow and reimpose direct rule, though politically it may be ill advised to go quite that far
To close the argument, here’s the deal.
Sturgeon will win a maj in Holyrood - or enough seats allied with the Greens, to form a government
She will ask Boris for Sindyref2
Boris will refuse
Sturgeon will go to the courts, a laborious process. It will end in the SCOTUK, who will say Sorry, referendums are reserved for Westminster
A huge internal row will then kick off inside the SNP, UDI-ers versus non-mad-people
By then it will be 2024 and time for another UK GE
So we can all stop talking about it til 2024. If we want.0 -
Actually, I believe that you're wrong on the bit in bold. Meeting one other person outside is legally permitted if the purpose is exercise, AIUI.Leon said:This is completely mad and self-contradictory
https://twitter.com/danbloom1/status/1348619475646611456?s=21
You are officially allowed to meet one other person outdoors to ‘socialise’. It’s in the rules. But this must not be combined with exercise, like walking or running? So how are you legally allowed to meet them, if you’re not walking together? You’re not allowed to sit down on a bench and chat.
Perhaps the government wants us to meet our friend and for both people to stand utterly and perfectly still, like those human statues in covent garden
As it is quite clear that walking is exercise, and there is nothing prohibiting drinking liquid during exercise, then I can't see how legally an exercise walk with another person can be anything but legal. But the purpose is key.0 -
Farage has always been duplicitous in his positions. If Nawaz is doing it for the clicks, he is very stupid, as he got his show on LBC and plenty of media opportunities for the reason he wasn't just another party man or a big mouth who you know exactly their position on everything before they say it and often there was a level of nuance.kinabalu said:
"Kicked in the head by a horse" a la the great own of Farage? Maybe so. Or possibly another who has succumbed to the need for clicks and money.FrancisUrquhart said:
His USP was a moderate voice in a maddening world. Stood as a Lib Dem MP, but somebody people from all across the political spectrum thought was a more of what MPs should be.kinabalu said:
He has. He's pumping out absolute bat shit. I now discount everything he says regardless of topic. I don't go as far as to assume the opposite is true - as with a Toby Young or a Boris Johnson - but I do just simply not bother to process it. Sad really. He once seemed a important "tough love" voice on Islam and was good on the telly.Cyclefree said:
Majiid Nawaz has gone a bit weird these days. Very strong on criticising China over the Uighurs but a bit loopy on lockdowns etc.Andy_JS said:
Now, are we sure he hasn't had a bash to the head or something?
Yes he stood as a LD in my seat a couple of GEs ago. I remember thinking, hmm. impressive bloke, I'd vote for him if I wasn't a donkey-in-a-red-rosette type.
Not that Glenda Jackson was in any way shape or form a donkey.0 -
Tough, but fair point.Scott_xP said:This is the same argument the Brexiteers employed
https://twitter.com/jbouie/status/1348445014645493761
Any criticism of Brexit is an attack on the voters...0 -
Reading the actual article "“We know we need to get to herd immunity and we need that in a majority of countries, so we are not going to see that in 2021,” Fisher told Reuters Next. “There might be some countries that might achieve it but even then that will not create ‘normal’ especially in terms of border controls.”Scott_xP said:
Sadly, given the way our pandemic is going, I think we might actually achieve herd immunity in the UK this year - just not in the way we wanted to,0 -
More than 2.4 million people in the UK have now received a Covid-19 vaccine, the minister in charge of the deployment, Nadhim Zahawi, has said.
No wonder Hancock was looking more jolly yesterday on his media round, clearly there has been a decent acceleration. Now just need to get to doing that every single week.3 -
My 2 favourite authors are Haruki Murakami and Brett Easton Ellis. Don't know why I shouldn't get that on the record.1
-
The rules have been crafted to make money. So the failure of these walkers was to have brought their own beverage from home. Had they travelled to a Starbucks - legal - to drink their takeawy twatty coffees whilst walking together (legal) then not even Derbyshire plod could nick them.Leon said:This is completely mad and self-contradictory
https://twitter.com/danbloom1/status/1348619475646611456?s=21
You are officially allowed to meet one other person outdoors to ‘socialise’. It’s in the rules. But this must not be combined with exercise, like walking or running? So how are you legally allowed to meet them, if you’re not walking together? You’re not allowed to sit down on a bench and chat.
Perhaps the government wants us to meet our friend and for both people to stand utterly and perfectly still, like those human statues in covent garden0 -
NopeFrancisUrquhart said:More than 2.4 million people in the UK have now received a Covid-19 vaccine, the minister in charge of the deployment, Nadhim Zahawi, has said.
No wonder Hancock was looking more jolly yesterday on his media round, clearly there has been a decent acceleration. Now just need to get to doing that every single week.
https://twitter.com/PippaCrerar/status/13486241432358993950 -
Your argument seems to me to be wrong. See Quebec.SouthamObserver said:
There is a process to getting to a referendum for independence, but it is one that involves gaining the explicit consent of the majority of voters in Spain. That's because Catalonia is regarded constitutionally as an integral part of a unitary Spanish state. The UK is very different as it is a union of two kingdoms and so, it could fairly be argued, explicitly requires ongoing consent from all parts of the union to continue. The bar for, say, Yorkshire or Cornwall to leave the Union (or to become independent of England) would be much higher. The same argument might also apply to the Shetlands or to the Borders in Scotland.Richard_Tyndall said:
But that means that even if 100% of the population of Catalonia wanted independence they would not be allowed to vote for it because it would be illegal for the Spanish Government to allow such a vote and you would consider any vote without Spanish permission to be unlawful and therefore should be repressed.HYUFD said:
If the Catalan government's declaration of UDI had not been challenged by Madrid then Catalonia would in effect have become an independent state, the law is meaningless unless it is upheld and enforced.SouthamObserver said:
The Spanish government - whether PP, PSOE or whatever - has no legal right to allow a referendum on independence for any part of Spain. That is clearly set out in Spain's written constitution.HYUFD said:
Confirms the PP Spanish government did the right thing in 2017 then refusing a legal independence referendum when support for Catalan independence was much higher and ignoring the Catalan nationalist government's declaration of a UDI.SouthamObserver said:In other news, support for Catalan independence continues to fall. The change from a hard-line, confrontational, right-wing government in Madrid to one run by the centre left that has focused on dialogue has led to a split in the Catalan separatist movement. There is even an outside chance the separatists may lose control of the Catalan parliament after next month's regional elections.
https://twitter.com/RupertCocke/status/1348568129685901312
Had they not done that Catalonia would now be an independent state not seeing support for independence fall
Westminster must equally enforce the legal principle of our constitution that Westminster is sovereign and when the UK government says 2014 was a once in a generation vote it means it
In which case why bother asking for permission? They should just do it. Unless you think that it is justifiable to hold a whole population captive against their will and they should not be allowed to express their opposition to that?
The consent of the people of Catalunya is required for Spain to govern Catalunya. It doesn't matter what powers the Spanish Constitution has or has not claimed.
Just as the consent of the people of Scotland (or Wales) is needed for the UK to govern those countries.
Quebec was forcibly joined to Canada. Just because there was no Union of free states, it does not mean that Quebec can't have a referendum and is inexorably joined to Canada.
The Canadian constitution says (just as Spain's does) that there is no right to unilateral secession.
In fact, there have been two Quebec referendums. And if Quebec seceded, what is Canada going to do? Send in the Canadian HYUFDs?
1 -
Aw mate, so sorry to hear thatFloater said:Well that's shit
My dad will soon be joining the growing list of covid victims
He is in his 80's - no real quality of life - but this fucking hurts.
8 -
You are fibbing yet again about the generation thing.HYUFD said:
Churchill of course never agreed to Indian independence as Tory PM of the UK, it was only the election of the Attlee Labour government in 1945 in the UK that enabled Indian independence to be granted by 1947.Carnyx said:<
I once asked him if he thought India* should have been given its independence. He never replied.Mary_Batty said:
Unfortunately, that is exactly what he believes. In HYUFD's world, consent to being governed is not the sole gift of the governed. I can't think of a better adjective than "imperialist" to describe the attitude, but with so many literary experts on here I will await advice.Richard_Tyndall said:
But that means that even if 100% of the population of Catalonia wanted independence they would not be allowed to vote for it because it would be illegal for the Spanish Government to allow such a vote and you would consider any vote without Spanish permission to be unlawful and therefore should be repressed.HYUFD said:
If the Catalan government's declaration of UDI had not been challenged by Madrid then Catalonia would in effect have become an independent state, the law is meaningless unless it is upheld and enforced.SouthamObserver said:
The Spanish government - whether PP, PSOE or whatever - has no legal right to allow a referendum on independence for any part of Spain. That is clearly set out in Spain's written constitution.HYUFD said:
Confirms the PP Spanish government did the right thing in 2017 then refusing a legal independence referendum when support for Catalan independence was much higher and ignoring the Catalan nationalist government's declaration of a UDI.SouthamObserver said:In other news, support for Catalan independence continues to fall. The change from a hard-line, confrontational, right-wing government in Madrid to one run by the centre left that has focused on dialogue has led to a split in the Catalan separatist movement. There is even an outside chance the separatists may lose control of the Catalan parliament after next month's regional elections.
https://twitter.com/RupertCocke/status/1348568129685901312
Had they not done that Catalonia would now be an independent state not seeing support for independence fall
Westminster must equally enforce the legal principle of our constitution that Westminster is sovereign and when the UK government says 2014 was a once in a generation vote it means it
In which case why bother asking for permission? They should just do it. Unless you think that it is justifiable to hold a whole population captive against their will and they should not be allowed to express their opposition to that?
*In the old, not modern, sense.
Though of course at that time India had not voted just 7 years prior to stay in the UK in a once in a generation vote as Scotland has
And I'm not asking you what Attlee thought. I'm asking you what you think. Was Churchill right or wrong?0 -
How is this an edge case? There are hundreds of thousands of such occurrences daily, it is entirely mainstream and the govt should know if its legal or illegal. Its legal.Philip_Thompson said:
No. Just more media bollocks trying to find edge case hypotheticals and trip people up. It's been nearly a year of this idiocy.Scott_xP said:Once again the clown is in charge...
https://twitter.com/kateferguson4/status/13486167171115868181 -
They can, it would still be illegal and Boris could ignore itScott_xP said:
NoLeon said:To close the argument, here’s the deal.
Sturgeon will win a maj in Holyrood - or enough seats allied with the Greens, to form a government
She will ask Boris for Sindyref2
Boris will refuse
Sturgeon will go to the courts, a laborious process. It will end in the SCOTUK, who will say Sorry, referendums are reserved for Westminster
A huge internal row will then kick off inside the SNP, UDI-ers versus non-mad-people
By then it will be 2024 and time for another UK GE
The Nats need to hold the vote before the realities of Brexit are too terrible to ignore.
They can hold an advisory referendum like Brexit, and BoZo can't stop them0 -
Can't trust the BBC these days,Scott_xP said:
NopeFrancisUrquhart said:More than 2.4 million people in the UK have now received a Covid-19 vaccine, the minister in charge of the deployment, Nadhim Zahawi, has said.
No wonder Hancock was looking more jolly yesterday on his media round, clearly there has been a decent acceleration. Now just need to get to doing that every single week.
twitter.com/PippaCrerar/status/1348624143235899395
"More than 2.4 million people in the UK have now received a Covid-19 vaccine, the minister in charge of the deployment, Nadhim Zahawi, has said. Tens of thousands of more people are due to get a jab this week after seven mass centres opened across England."
https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-55614993
They messed up yesterday with their claim of 2 million in a week.
"I think we've done 2 million people so far, or 2.4 million jabs," Boris Johnson said as he visited a vaccination centre in the South West.0 -
Also Philip Pullman. I find his atheism tiresomely contrived, not least because he uses the supernatural and occult for great effect, through his famous series.DavidL said:For those showering contempt on LOTR I can only say, "Fly, you fools".
Yes, its weird that no one ever seems to think of sex, ever, but it is the creation of an entire world, copied many, many times yet never bettered.
For a similar feat of imagination I would give you Dune. Those books, and especially the 4th one, God Emperor, had a major impact on me, curing me of religion.
Dickens I have generally found pretty hard work but I am happy to accept the failings are mine.
But in terms of creating an entire new world? Fabulous0 -
You mean a vote to leave will be blocked for years until a government with a large UK-wide majority is elected on an explicit commitment to enact it?Scott_xP said:
It would have exactly the same legal, political and moral authority as the Brexit voteLeon said:It will have no authority, legal, political or moral
Fair enough.0 -
Cyclefree. I'm embarrassed to say I've never heard of William Trevor. I will give him a go. What book would you recommend to start with?Cyclefree said:
No doubt it does. I view that poll with some scepticism I must say. The only people I have ever heard praising it or talking about the film have been men and boys.Richard_Tyndall said:
Except a poll a couple of years ago showed it is read by more women than men. And if it is unreadable then how come it is one of the most read books of the twentieth century. Perhaps your dislike and inability to read it reflects more on yourself than on the book.Cyclefree said:
I'll bite.Leon said:Gardenwalker said:
Wait, are you citing LOTR as good writing?Mysticrose said:
Oh are you? Read one of my bestselling books. But it doesn't sound to me like you'd recognise it even if you were hit over the head by Lord of the Rings.TOPPING said:
Still waiting for those superior literary skills to manifest themselves.Mysticrose said:And I know no-one apart from myself who routinely wears a mask outdoors as they do in much of Asia and now elsewhere.
I am convinced this virus spreads outdoors. Undoubtedly less readily than indoors but nevertheless I'm sure it does. Again, as you would expect from an airborne virus which spreads by aerosol as well as droplet.
We are, and there's no other way to put this, f-ing stupid in this country. Nerys claims to be a nurse. What hope is there?
I recall early on an ITU nurse saying that she didn't see how it was possible to 'BE SAFE' when she couldn't 'see' the virus.
I mean, that's the level of f-ing ignorance with which we are dealing.
I keep the writing clean and simple on here. Actually I do in my books. Only Mike Smithson of the thread writers knows how to do that. A thread should have one point made succinctly and cleanly.
Less is more. Heck, even The Great Gatsby is only 47,000 words.
JFC.
By some measures it is the most popular novel ever written, anywhere on the planet, and also the most loved. It has also been hugely influential on popular AND elite culture. You see its influence everywhere
Why? Because it is an inspired piece of sustained human imagination, probably unexampled, AND it has a superb, mythic, driving narrative
It’s not entirely my cup of tea but I can still recognise it as quite exceptional. Anyone who doesn’t simply reveals their own idiocy. Sorry
It's unreadable rubbish, mostly read and admired by those with the minds of teenage boys.
By the same token I can't abide Dickens. Completely unreadable and believe me I've tried. Nor can I cope with many Russian novels - though I adore Anna Karenina. OTOH I love Vanity Fair - which is one of the best novels ever to my mind - and Middlemarch, Jane Eyre - and many 19th century French writers such as Balzac.
The one writer whose novels and short stories I would have with me on a desert island is William Trevor. One of the very finest writers ever.
On the general conversation. I couldn't get on with LOTR at all. I read at least a dozen "classics" in Lockdown 1. My favourite was ......"Great Expectations."0 -
Yep, he's definitely not Witty.Chris said:
The name is Whitty.FrancisUrquhart said:I see we are back to the media focusing on what are the loop holes they can find in the lockdown rules, rather than focus on what Witty said ...
0 -
Nope, what it is reported they did was entirely legal.RochdalePioneers said:
The rules have been crafted to make money. So the failure of these walkers was to have brought their own beverage from home. Had they travelled to a Starbucks - legal - to drink their takeawy twatty coffees whilst walking together (legal) then not even Derbyshire plod could nick them.Leon said:This is completely mad and self-contradictory
https://twitter.com/danbloom1/status/1348619475646611456?s=21
You are officially allowed to meet one other person outdoors to ‘socialise’. It’s in the rules. But this must not be combined with exercise, like walking or running? So how are you legally allowed to meet them, if you’re not walking together? You’re not allowed to sit down on a bench and chat.
Perhaps the government wants us to meet our friend and for both people to stand utterly and perfectly still, like those human statues in covent garden
It won't get as far as a court room, because Derbyshire police are reviewing all fines.1 -
I am not so sure. I think it would be disastrous for the SNP to do anything that could enable a Tory government keep or return to power. If the SNP made backing a Labour minority - especially one promising big increases in public spending and a more conciliatory approach to the EU - contingent on an independence referendum that would essentially be the outcome. Generally, I think that things are going to get a lot trickier for the SNP over the coming years.Leon said:
Yes, that’s my reading. BUT I think they will have a crucial window of opportunity at the Westminster GE of 2024. They are quite likely to hold the balance of power in a hung Parliament. Labour, by then desperate to get back into office, might then offer Sturgeon (or Cherry, or whoever) a voteSouthamObserver said:
My only point is that Scotland is not Catalonia. I think your scenario is the correct one and that ultimately this puts the SNP in a very difficult position as UDI will not work: the Scottish government does not have the legal right to do it, so the Scottish courts would almost certainly strike it down; and, more important, it does not have the means to enforce UDI because it does not control enough levers of power to do so. What's more, the international community will not accept it because Scotland is split enough for any referendum that precedes UDI to be boycotted by enough people to provide cover and, in any case, Scotland is not a country living under a tyranny. The longer Johnson says no, the more likely a split in the SNP between pragmatists and revolutionaries becomes.Leon said:
But Southam has made his wearyingly obvious point several million times as well. It’s why Sindyref debates are so boring, it’s the same talking points every time, from all sides.DougSeal said:
I think you may, just may, have made this point before.HYUFD said:
It is also absolutely one the UK government can refuse to grant based on the principle of Westminster sovereignty on which our unwritten constitution is based.SouthamObserver said:
Yep - a referendum on Scottish independence is absolutely one that the UK government can grant.RochdalePioneers said:
Catalonia is not Scotland. As the Baronet of Epping Forest refuses to recognise.SouthamObserver said:
The Spanish government - whether PP, PSOE or whatever - has no legal right to allow a referendum on independence for any part of Spain. That is clearly set out in Spain's written constitution.HYUFD said:
Confirms the PP Spanish government did the right thing in 2017 then refusing a legal independence referendum when support for Catalan independence was much higher and ignoring the Catalan nationalist government's declaration of a UDI.SouthamObserver said:In other news, support for Catalan independence continues to fall. The change from a hard-line, confrontational, right-wing government in Madrid to one run by the centre left that has focused on dialogue has led to a split in the Catalan separatist movement. There is even an outside chance the separatists may lose control of the Catalan parliament after next month's regional elections.
https://twitter.com/RupertCocke/status/1348568129685901312
Had they not done that Catalonia would now be an independent state not seeing support for independence fall
This Tory government will do precisely that and uphold the manifesto promise we won a majority in 2019 on that 2014 was 'a once in a generation referendum.'
Hopefully the SNP will not win a majority in May avoiding the need for a decision from the UK government anyway but even if they do this Tory government will follow the example of our conservative cousins in the PP in Spain in 2017 and ban any legal indyref.
No ifs, no buts, no concessions whatsoever to the Nationalists. Indeed legally and constitutionally Westminster could even abolish Holyrood tomorrow and reimpose direct rule, though politically it may be ill advised to go quite that far
To close the argument, here’s the deal.
Sturgeon will win a maj in Holyrood - or enough seats allied with the Greens, to form a government
She will ask Boris for Sindyref2
Boris will refuse
Sturgeon will go to the courts, a laborious process. It will end in the SCOTUK, who will say Sorry, referendums are reserved for Westminster
A huge internal row will then kick off inside the SNP, UDI-ers versus non-mad-people
By then it will be 2024 and time for another UK GE
So we can all stop talking about it til 2024. If we want.
2 -
Yes we know. Here is what is going to happen:HYUFD said:
In 1707 the old Scottish Parliament was abolished and all its members moved to Westminster.SouthamObserver said:
There is a process to getting to a referendum for independence, but it is one that involves gaining the explicit consent of the majority of voters in Spain. That's because Catalonia is regarded constitutionally as an integral part of a unitary Spanish state. The UK is very different as it is a union of two kingdoms and so, it could fairly be argued, explicitly requires ongoing consent from all parts of the union to continue. The bar for, say, Yorkshire or Cornwall to leave the Union (or to become independent of England) would be much higher. The same argument might also apply to the Shetlands or to the Borders in Scotland.Richard_Tyndall said:
But that means that even if 100% of the population of Catalonia wanted independence they would not be allowed to vote for it because it would be illegal for the Spanish Government to allow such a vote and you would consider any vote without Spanish permission to be unlawful and therefore should be repressed.HYUFD said:
If the Catalan government's declaration of UDI had not been challenged by Madrid then Catalonia would in effect have become an independent state, the law is meaningless unless it is upheld and enforced.SouthamObserver said:
The Spanish government - whether PP, PSOE or whatever - has no legal right to allow a referendum on independence for any part of Spain. That is clearly set out in Spain's written constitution.HYUFD said:
Confirms the PP Spanish government did the right thing in 2017 then refusing a legal independence referendum when support for Catalan independence was much higher and ignoring the Catalan nationalist government's declaration of a UDI.SouthamObserver said:In other news, support for Catalan independence continues to fall. The change from a hard-line, confrontational, right-wing government in Madrid to one run by the centre left that has focused on dialogue has led to a split in the Catalan separatist movement. There is even an outside chance the separatists may lose control of the Catalan parliament after next month's regional elections.
https://twitter.com/RupertCocke/status/1348568129685901312
Had they not done that Catalonia would now be an independent state not seeing support for independence fall
Westminster must equally enforce the legal principle of our constitution that Westminster is sovereign and when the UK government says 2014 was a once in a generation vote it means it
In which case why bother asking for permission? They should just do it. Unless you think that it is justifiable to hold a whole population captive against their will and they should not be allowed to express their opposition to that?
Ever since then it requires the consent of a majority of elected Westminster MPs and Westminster MPs and the UK government alone for Scottish independence to be legal
2021 - Scotland re-elects a government on a platform of seeking independence
2022 - Arguments about an independence referendum. Scotland announces an advisory referendum of the same legal basis (i.e. none) of the EU Referendum
2023 - Scotland votes for Independence
2024 - HYUFD tells Scotland "you can eff orf. Please vote Conservative"
Rather difficult to continue to ignore the will of the people. If Scotland wants Independence it shall have Independence.2 -
Carnyx said:
You are fibbing yet again about the generation thing.HYUFD said:
Churchill of course never agreed to Indian independence as Tory PM of the UK, it was only the election of the Attlee Labour government in 1945 in the UK that enabled Indian independence to be granted by 1947.Carnyx said:<
I once asked him if he thought India* should have been given its independence. He never replied.Mary_Batty said:
Unfortunately, that is exactly what he believes. In HYUFD's world, consent to being governed is not the sole gift of the governed. I can't think of a better adjective than "imperialist" to describe the attitude, but with so many literary experts on here I will await advice.Richard_Tyndall said:
But that means that even if 100% of the population of Catalonia wanted independence they would not be allowed to vote for it because it would be illegal for the Spanish Government to allow such a vote and you would consider any vote without Spanish permission to be unlawful and therefore should be repressed.HYUFD said:
If the Catalan government's declaration of UDI had not been challenged by Madrid then Catalonia would in effect have become an independent state, the law is meaningless unless it is upheld and enforced.SouthamObserver said:
The Spanish government - whether PP, PSOE or whatever - has no legal right to allow a referendum on independence for any part of Spain. That is clearly set out in Spain's written constitution.HYUFD said:
Confirms the PP Spanish government did the right thing in 2017 then refusing a legal independence referendum when support for Catalan independence was much higher and ignoring the Catalan nationalist government's declaration of a UDI.SouthamObserver said:In other news, support for Catalan independence continues to fall. The change from a hard-line, confrontational, right-wing government in Madrid to one run by the centre left that has focused on dialogue has led to a split in the Catalan separatist movement. There is even an outside chance the separatists may lose control of the Catalan parliament after next month's regional elections.
https://twitter.com/RupertCocke/status/1348568129685901312
Had they not done that Catalonia would now be an independent state not seeing support for independence fall
Westminster must equally enforce the legal principle of our constitution that Westminster is sovereign and when the UK government says 2014 was a once in a generation vote it means it
In which case why bother asking for permission? They should just do it. Unless you think that it is justifiable to hold a whole population captive against their will and they should not be allowed to express their opposition to that?
*In the old, not modern, sense.
Though of course at that time India had not voted just 7 years prior to stay in the UK in a once in a generation vote as Scotland has
And I'm not asking you what Attlee thought. I'm asking you what you think. Was Churchill right or wrong?
Lloyd George granted the creation of the Irish Free State and was a Liberal not a Tory, Attlee granted Indian independence and was a Labour PM not a Tory. Even Hong Kong only returned to China under Blair. If it was up to Tory PMs we would still have most of the British Empire.
Macmillan and the 'winds of change' through Africa the only major exception but by then India, the 'Jewel in the Crown' had already gained independence anyway0 -
"granted"HYUFD said:Carnyx said:
You are fibbing yet again about the generation thing.HYUFD said:
Churchill of course never agreed to Indian independence as Tory PM of the UK, it was only the election of the Attlee Labour government in 1945 in the UK that enabled Indian independence to be granted by 1947.Carnyx said:<
I once asked him if he thought India* should have been given its independence. He never replied.Mary_Batty said:
Unfortunately, that is exactly what he believes. In HYUFD's world, consent to being governed is not the sole gift of the governed. I can't think of a better adjective than "imperialist" to describe the attitude, but with so many literary experts on here I will await advice.Richard_Tyndall said:
But that means that even if 100% of the population of Catalonia wanted independence they would not be allowed to vote for it because it would be illegal for the Spanish Government to allow such a vote and you would consider any vote without Spanish permission to be unlawful and therefore should be repressed.HYUFD said:
If the Catalan government's declaration of UDI had not been challenged by Madrid then Catalonia would in effect have become an independent state, the law is meaningless unless it is upheld and enforced.SouthamObserver said:
The Spanish government - whether PP, PSOE or whatever - has no legal right to allow a referendum on independence for any part of Spain. That is clearly set out in Spain's written constitution.HYUFD said:
Confirms the PP Spanish government did the right thing in 2017 then refusing a legal independence referendum when support for Catalan independence was much higher and ignoring the Catalan nationalist government's declaration of a UDI.SouthamObserver said:In other news, support for Catalan independence continues to fall. The change from a hard-line, confrontational, right-wing government in Madrid to one run by the centre left that has focused on dialogue has led to a split in the Catalan separatist movement. There is even an outside chance the separatists may lose control of the Catalan parliament after next month's regional elections.
https://twitter.com/RupertCocke/status/1348568129685901312
Had they not done that Catalonia would now be an independent state not seeing support for independence fall
Westminster must equally enforce the legal principle of our constitution that Westminster is sovereign and when the UK government says 2014 was a once in a generation vote it means it
In which case why bother asking for permission? They should just do it. Unless you think that it is justifiable to hold a whole population captive against their will and they should not be allowed to express their opposition to that?
*In the old, not modern, sense.
Though of course at that time India had not voted just 7 years prior to stay in the UK in a once in a generation vote as Scotland has
And I'm not asking you what Attlee thought. I'm asking you what you think. Was Churchill right or wrong?
Lloyd George granted the creation of the Irish Free State and was a Liberal not a Tory, Attlee granted Indian independence and was a Labour PM not a Tory. Even Hong Kong only returned to China under Blair. If it was up to Tory PMs we would still have most of the British Empire.
Macmillan and the 'winds of change' through Africa the only major exception but by then India, the 'Jewel in the Crown' had already gained independence anyway0 -
Definitely in the list of terrible books that you probably should have read. Not sure what would come top of that list.TimT said:
Particularly the 56-page monologue.DougSeal said:
Atlas Shrugged. It made me want to give up reading for good.TimT said:
For me, undoubtedly Camus, La Peste.Benpointer said:Ok then, so if you are asked to name one book that had most imapct on you?
I would offer To Kill a Mockingbird.
I've read it 3 or 4 times and loved it each time but first read it a 13 when it really did make me think. Appreciate it may be a bit to 'woke' or sound like virtue signalling for some of you but there you go, it's the truth.0 -
This is a key point. Any functioning democracy has to have consent at its heart. If people of any given territory refuse consent to their government the position of the government is untenable.YBarddCwsc said:
Your argument seems to me to be wrong. See Quebec.SouthamObserver said:
There is a process to getting to a referendum for independence, but it is one that involves gaining the explicit consent of the majority of voters in Spain. That's because Catalonia is regarded constitutionally as an integral part of a unitary Spanish state. The UK is very different as it is a union of two kingdoms and so, it could fairly be argued, explicitly requires ongoing consent from all parts of the union to continue. The bar for, say, Yorkshire or Cornwall to leave the Union (or to become independent of England) would be much higher. The same argument might also apply to the Shetlands or to the Borders in Scotland.Richard_Tyndall said:
But that means that even if 100% of the population of Catalonia wanted independence they would not be allowed to vote for it because it would be illegal for the Spanish Government to allow such a vote and you would consider any vote without Spanish permission to be unlawful and therefore should be repressed.HYUFD said:
If the Catalan government's declaration of UDI had not been challenged by Madrid then Catalonia would in effect have become an independent state, the law is meaningless unless it is upheld and enforced.SouthamObserver said:
The Spanish government - whether PP, PSOE or whatever - has no legal right to allow a referendum on independence for any part of Spain. That is clearly set out in Spain's written constitution.HYUFD said:
Confirms the PP Spanish government did the right thing in 2017 then refusing a legal independence referendum when support for Catalan independence was much higher and ignoring the Catalan nationalist government's declaration of a UDI.SouthamObserver said:In other news, support for Catalan independence continues to fall. The change from a hard-line, confrontational, right-wing government in Madrid to one run by the centre left that has focused on dialogue has led to a split in the Catalan separatist movement. There is even an outside chance the separatists may lose control of the Catalan parliament after next month's regional elections.
https://twitter.com/RupertCocke/status/1348568129685901312
Had they not done that Catalonia would now be an independent state not seeing support for independence fall
Westminster must equally enforce the legal principle of our constitution that Westminster is sovereign and when the UK government says 2014 was a once in a generation vote it means it
In which case why bother asking for permission? They should just do it. Unless you think that it is justifiable to hold a whole population captive against their will and they should not be allowed to express their opposition to that?
The consent of the people of Catalunya is required for Spain to govern Catalunya. It doesn't matter what powers the Spanish Constitution has or has not claimed.
Just as the consent of the people of Scotland (or Wales) is needed for the UK to govern those countries.
Quebec was forcibly joined to Canada. Just because there was no Union of free states, it does not mean that Quebec can't have a referendum and is inexorably joined to Canada.
The Canadian constitution says (just as Spain's does) that there is no right to unilateral secession.
In fact, there have been two Quebec referendums. And if Quebec seceded, what is Canada going to do? Send in the Canadian HYUFDs?0 -
I absolutely loved Northern Lights, but I confess I got more than a bit lost in The amber Spyglass. The Book of Dust was a return to form.Leon said:
Also Philip Pullman. I find his atheism tiresomely contrived, not least because he uses the supernatural and occult for great effect, through his famous series.DavidL said:For those showering contempt on LOTR I can only say, "Fly, you fools".
Yes, its weird that no one ever seems to think of sex, ever, but it is the creation of an entire world, copied many, many times yet never bettered.
For a similar feat of imagination I would give you Dune. Those books, and especially the 4th one, God Emperor, had a major impact on me, curing me of religion.
Dickens I have generally found pretty hard work but I am happy to accept the failings are mine.
But in terms of creating an entire new world? Fabulous0 -
0
-
You have an interesting mental picture of meOllyT said:
You obviously have a huge chip on your shoulder about people who are comfortably off, particularly if they are old. There have always been disparities in wealth and I expect there always will be.
I'd like to hear more.
I am not anti-old -- I am pro-fairness.
I think the young have been treated badly -- and lied to -- by our politicians for well over a quarter of a century.0 -
You are Thomas Gradgrind and I claim my five shillings.HYUFD said:Carnyx said:
You are fibbing yet again about the generation thing.HYUFD said:
Churchill of course never agreed to Indian independence as Tory PM of the UK, it was only the election of the Attlee Labour government in 1945 in the UK that enabled Indian independence to be granted by 1947.Carnyx said:<
I once asked him if he thought India* should have been given its independence. He never replied.Mary_Batty said:
Unfortunately, that is exactly what he believes. In HYUFD's world, consent to being governed is not the sole gift of the governed. I can't think of a better adjective than "imperialist" to describe the attitude, but with so many literary experts on here I will await advice.Richard_Tyndall said:
But that means that even if 100% of the population of Catalonia wanted independence they would not be allowed to vote for it because it would be illegal for the Spanish Government to allow such a vote and you would consider any vote without Spanish permission to be unlawful and therefore should be repressed.HYUFD said:
If the Catalan government's declaration of UDI had not been challenged by Madrid then Catalonia would in effect have become an independent state, the law is meaningless unless it is upheld and enforced.SouthamObserver said:
The Spanish government - whether PP, PSOE or whatever - has no legal right to allow a referendum on independence for any part of Spain. That is clearly set out in Spain's written constitution.HYUFD said:
Confirms the PP Spanish government did the right thing in 2017 then refusing a legal independence referendum when support for Catalan independence was much higher and ignoring the Catalan nationalist government's declaration of a UDI.SouthamObserver said:In other news, support for Catalan independence continues to fall. The change from a hard-line, confrontational, right-wing government in Madrid to one run by the centre left that has focused on dialogue has led to a split in the Catalan separatist movement. There is even an outside chance the separatists may lose control of the Catalan parliament after next month's regional elections.
https://twitter.com/RupertCocke/status/1348568129685901312
Had they not done that Catalonia would now be an independent state not seeing support for independence fall
Westminster must equally enforce the legal principle of our constitution that Westminster is sovereign and when the UK government says 2014 was a once in a generation vote it means it
In which case why bother asking for permission? They should just do it. Unless you think that it is justifiable to hold a whole population captive against their will and they should not be allowed to express their opposition to that?
*In the old, not modern, sense.
Though of course at that time India had not voted just 7 years prior to stay in the UK in a once in a generation vote as Scotland has
And I'm not asking you what Attlee thought. I'm asking you what you think. Was Churchill right or wrong?
Lloyd George granted the creation of the Irish Free State and was a Liberal not a Tory, Attlee granted Indian independence and was a Labour PM not a Tory. Even Hong Kong only returned to China under Blair. If it was up to Tory PMs we would still have most of the British Empire.
Macmillan and the 'winds of change' through Africa the only major exception but by then India, the 'Jewel in the Crown' had already gained independence anyway1 -
Lawrence Durrell wrote some great poems while living in Greece, too, on both ancient and modern themes. One of the last of the waves of essentially upper-class Philhellenes living in Greece, from Byron to Patrick Leigh Fermor.Richard_Tyndall said:
For me I thinkBenpointer said:Ok then, so if you are asked to name one book that had most imapct on you?
I would offer To Kill a Mockingbird.
I've read it 3 or 4 times and loved it each time but first read it a 13 when it really did make me think. Appreciate it may be a bit to 'woke' or sound like virtue signalling for some of you but there you go, it's the truth.
The Alexandria Quartet by Lawrence Durrell.
A wonderful piece of writing where the same story is told from the perspectives of a number of different people.
Re: the mention of Proust below, there's amazing psychological and emotional depth in some of the Proust, particularly the first book of A la Recherche. Some people are wrongly intimidated by it as an intellectual exercise, as well as bad translations - I recommend reading it before going to bed, with a brandy.1 -
I don't get this one.SouthamObserver said:
The Catalan government suspended declaring independence, so it never actually happened. In any case, the Catalan government had no means to enforce it because it had no control over such basic things as the collection of taxes, currency, border control, the legal system etc.HYUFD said:
If the Catalan government's declaration of UDI had not been challenged by Madrid then Catalonia would in effect have become an independent state, the law is meaningless unless it is upheld and enforced.SouthamObserver said:
The Spanish government - whether PP, PSOE or whatever - has no legal right to allow a referendum on independence for any part of Spain. That is clearly set out in Spain's written constitution.HYUFD said:
Confirms the PP Spanish government did the right thing in 2017 then refusing a legal independence referendum when support for Catalan independence was much higher and ignoring the Catalan nationalist government's declaration of a UDI.SouthamObserver said:In other news, support for Catalan independence continues to fall. The change from a hard-line, confrontational, right-wing government in Madrid to one run by the centre left that has focused on dialogue has led to a split in the Catalan separatist movement. There is even an outside chance the separatists may lose control of the Catalan parliament after next month's regional elections.
https://twitter.com/RupertCocke/status/1348568129685901312
Had they not done that Catalonia would now be an independent state not seeing support for independence fall
Westminster must equally enforce the legal principle of our constitution that Westminster is sovereign and when the UK government says 2014 was a once in a generation vote it means it
I get that the written constitution prohibits independence and there's no "mechanism" for it to occur but, if 70%+ of the population of Catalonia wanted it, and Spain just continued to legally refuse citing the constitution, then what do both sides do?
It leaves little room for anywhere to go. Other than on the streets, and with violence.
Am I missing something?1 -
I think Waugh is the better writer - but I agree about him. Sword of Honour fails for me for the way it literally elevates snobbery to the level of religion. That, and Crouchback's father has always struck me as the most unintentionally irritating character in all fiction.Carnyx said:
It's so long since I read Powell as a teenager - though I did reread Waugh's Sword of Honour trilogy recently. What an arsehole the man was, and a snob - but oh he could write. How does Powell's whatever-ology compare?IshmaelZ said:
If you like Powell see also Simon Raven Alms for Oblivion.Theuniondivvie said:
When I was a voracious reader I tried À la recherche du temps perdu and it defeated me after 70 pages, though 'tits like hunting horns' stuck with me. Otoh I read (some of the volumes several times) and loved Dance To The Music of Time; wily, old Powell knew his audience and doled it out in chunks.Gardenwalker said:It is cultural cringe to bang on about Proust.
Perry Anderson makes a claim that Powell is better, and Dance to the Music of Time is certainly more relevant to PB.
Does it really say 'tits like hunting horns' in Proust?1 -
Decant your mulled wine into a Starbucks mug ?RochdalePioneers said:
The rules have been crafted to make money. So the failure of these walkers was to have brought their own beverage from home. Had they travelled to a Starbucks - legal - to drink their takeawy twatty coffees whilst walking together (legal) then not even Derbyshire plod could nick them.Leon said:This is completely mad and self-contradictory
https://twitter.com/danbloom1/status/1348619475646611456?s=21
You are officially allowed to meet one other person outdoors to ‘socialise’. It’s in the rules. But this must not be combined with exercise, like walking or running? So how are you legally allowed to meet them, if you’re not walking together? You’re not allowed to sit down on a bench and chat.
Perhaps the government wants us to meet our friend and for both people to stand utterly and perfectly still, like those human statues in covent garden
1 -
A small contribution to the debate on great works of fiction, and one where many people will not have heard of th author, let alone the books: The Aegypt Cycle, by John Crowley, consisting of The Solitudes*; Love and Sleep; Daemonomania; Endless Things.
The closest I can get to explaining it is as a combination of A Dance to the Music of Time and Foucault's Pendulum. It's densely layered, very literate, full of characters that would seem impossibly ridiculous if not for being so well fleshed out. It's set in the present day, the near past and in the sixteenth century: John Dee features a lot, Shakespeare makes a fleeting appearance. By the last volume, you may well be questioning the reality around you.
If you want an idea of where I'm coming from on books, in comparison to those already mentioned, I love LOTR, Dune, and Dance to the Music of Time; am looking forward to the Alexandria Quarter, have not read War & Peace
*The Solitudes was first published as Aegypt, but Crowley always intended this as the title for the sequence.3 -
-
The big thing we need to know from Hancock at 5pm is how are AZN partners doing on ramping up production. All well and good ramping up capacity, but if not enough supply we will still be stuck in lockdown forever.0
-
The Quebec referenda had the consent of the people of Quebec, as turnout demonstrated. The turnout in the last Catalan referendum was well under 50%. I agree that if the Catalan government organised a referendum and got a 95% turnout, as the 1995 Quebec one got, the result would be inarguable.YBarddCwsc said:
Your argument seems to me to be wrong. See Quebec.SouthamObserver said:
There is a process to getting to a referendum for independence, but it is one that involves gaining the explicit consent of the majority of voters in Spain. That's because Catalonia is regarded constitutionally as an integral part of a unitary Spanish state. The UK is very different as it is a union of two kingdoms and so, it could fairly be argued, explicitly requires ongoing consent from all parts of the union to continue. The bar for, say, Yorkshire or Cornwall to leave the Union (or to become independent of England) would be much higher. The same argument might also apply to the Shetlands or to the Borders in Scotland.Richard_Tyndall said:
But that means that even if 100% of the population of Catalonia wanted independence they would not be allowed to vote for it because it would be illegal for the Spanish Government to allow such a vote and you would consider any vote without Spanish permission to be unlawful and therefore should be repressed.HYUFD said:
If the Catalan government's declaration of UDI had not been challenged by Madrid then Catalonia would in effect have become an independent state, the law is meaningless unless it is upheld and enforced.SouthamObserver said:
The Spanish government - whether PP, PSOE or whatever - has no legal right to allow a referendum on independence for any part of Spain. That is clearly set out in Spain's written constitution.HYUFD said:
Confirms the PP Spanish government did the right thing in 2017 then refusing a legal independence referendum when support for Catalan independence was much higher and ignoring the Catalan nationalist government's declaration of a UDI.SouthamObserver said:In other news, support for Catalan independence continues to fall. The change from a hard-line, confrontational, right-wing government in Madrid to one run by the centre left that has focused on dialogue has led to a split in the Catalan separatist movement. There is even an outside chance the separatists may lose control of the Catalan parliament after next month's regional elections.
https://twitter.com/RupertCocke/status/1348568129685901312
Had they not done that Catalonia would now be an independent state not seeing support for independence fall
Westminster must equally enforce the legal principle of our constitution that Westminster is sovereign and when the UK government says 2014 was a once in a generation vote it means it
In which case why bother asking for permission? They should just do it. Unless you think that it is justifiable to hold a whole population captive against their will and they should not be allowed to express their opposition to that?
The consent of the people of Catalunya is required for Spain to govern Catalunya. It doesn't matter what powers the Spanish Constitution has or has not claimed.
Just as the consent of the people of Scotland (or Wales) is needed for the UK to govern those countries.
Quebec was forcibly joined to Canada. Just because there was no Union of free states, it does not mean that Quebec can't have a referendum and is inexorably joined to Canada.
The Canadian constitution says (just as Spain's does) that there is no right to unilateral secession.
In fact, there have been two Quebec referendums. And if Quebec seceded, what is Canada going to do? Send in the Canadian HYUFDs?
0 -
That's exactly right.IshmaelZ said:
I think Waugh is the better writer - but I agree about him. Sword of Honour fails for me for the way it literally elevates snobbery to the level of religion. That, and Crouchback's father has always struck me as the most unintentionally irritating character in all fiction.Carnyx said:
It's so long since I read Powell as a teenager - though I did reread Waugh's Sword of Honour trilogy recently. What an arsehole the man was, and a snob - but oh he could write. How does Powell's whatever-ology compare?IshmaelZ said:
If you like Powell see also Simon Raven Alms for Oblivion.Theuniondivvie said:
When I was a voracious reader I tried À la recherche du temps perdu and it defeated me after 70 pages, though 'tits like hunting horns' stuck with me. Otoh I read (some of the volumes several times) and loved Dance To The Music of Time; wily, old Powell knew his audience and doled it out in chunks.Gardenwalker said:It is cultural cringe to bang on about Proust.
Perry Anderson makes a claim that Powell is better, and Dance to the Music of Time is certainly more relevant to PB.
Does it really say 'tits like hunting horns' in Proust?1 -
I think we just have to vaccinate as many people as possible as quickly as possible, and see what happens to the infection rate. I doubt any of the modelling is within a mile of truth, as far as herd immunity is concerned. But if herd immunity is achieved it will be obvious enough. There's been far too much over the last year of people pretending they know what's going to happen, when they haven't had the slightest clue.DougSeal said:
Reading the actual article "“We know we need to get to herd immunity and we need that in a majority of countries, so we are not going to see that in 2021,” Fisher told Reuters Next. “There might be some countries that might achieve it but even then that will not create ‘normal’ especially in terms of border controls.”Scott_xP said:
Sadly, given the way our pandemic is going, I think we might actually achieve herd immunity in the UK this year - just not in the way we wanted to,2 -
You know you just used the words micro-, chip and covid in the same posting.logical_song said:Microfluidic chip detects COVID antibodies in seconds
https://www.theengineer.co.uk/microfluidic-chip-detects-covid-antibodies-in-seconds/
Now we just need billions of them.
The tin foil mob will be claiming you have confirmed their conspiracy theories about the vaccines! 1 -
You need therapy.Scott_xP said:
Indeed, but that's not the claim.david_herdson said:to attack Trump for his actions is not to attack his policies.
To attack Trump is to attack the people that voted for him is the claim.
Like Brexit.4 -
You aren't missing much other than the responsibility of the politicians in Madrid, in such a scenario, to change the law and allow a referendum.Casino_Royale said:
I don't get this one.SouthamObserver said:
The Catalan government suspended declaring independence, so it never actually happened. In any case, the Catalan government had no means to enforce it because it had no control over such basic things as the collection of taxes, currency, border control, the legal system etc.HYUFD said:
If the Catalan government's declaration of UDI had not been challenged by Madrid then Catalonia would in effect have become an independent state, the law is meaningless unless it is upheld and enforced.SouthamObserver said:
The Spanish government - whether PP, PSOE or whatever - has no legal right to allow a referendum on independence for any part of Spain. That is clearly set out in Spain's written constitution.HYUFD said:
Confirms the PP Spanish government did the right thing in 2017 then refusing a legal independence referendum when support for Catalan independence was much higher and ignoring the Catalan nationalist government's declaration of a UDI.SouthamObserver said:In other news, support for Catalan independence continues to fall. The change from a hard-line, confrontational, right-wing government in Madrid to one run by the centre left that has focused on dialogue has led to a split in the Catalan separatist movement. There is even an outside chance the separatists may lose control of the Catalan parliament after next month's regional elections.
https://twitter.com/RupertCocke/status/1348568129685901312
Had they not done that Catalonia would now be an independent state not seeing support for independence fall
Westminster must equally enforce the legal principle of our constitution that Westminster is sovereign and when the UK government says 2014 was a once in a generation vote it means it
I get that the written constitution prohibits independence and there's no "mechanism" for it to occur but, if 70%+ of the population of Catalonia wanted it, and Spain just continued to legally refuse citing the constitution, then what do both sides do?
It leaves little room for anywhere to go. Other than on the streets, and with violence.
Am I missing something?
The Spanish constitution is broken if it cannot allow for secession in the case of a majority wanting it. Consent is a higher ideal than adherence to a constitution.0 -
Having a couple of pesky kids actually physically killing actual God really, really doesn't work for me. Nor do the daemons - do they eat? fuck? Need the vet? etc. Otherwise fabulous.Leon said:
Also Philip Pullman. I find his atheism tiresomely contrived, not least because he uses the supernatural and occult for great effect, through his famous series.DavidL said:For those showering contempt on LOTR I can only say, "Fly, you fools".
Yes, its weird that no one ever seems to think of sex, ever, but it is the creation of an entire world, copied many, many times yet never bettered.
For a similar feat of imagination I would give you Dune. Those books, and especially the 4th one, God Emperor, had a major impact on me, curing me of religion.
Dickens I have generally found pretty hard work but I am happy to accept the failings are mine.
But in terms of creating an entire new world? Fabulous0 -
Ok, you got me, going to give it a try.jamesdoyle said:A small contribution to the debate on great works of fiction, and one where many people will not have heard of th author, let alone the books: The Aegypt Cycle, by John Crowley, consisting of The Solitudes*; Love and Sleep; Daemonomania; Endless Things.
The closest I can get to explaining it is as a combination of A Dance to the Music of Time and Foucault's Pendulum. It's densely layered, very literate, full of characters that would seem impossibly ridiculous if not for being so well fleshed out. It's set in the present day, the near past and in the sixteenth century: John Dee features a lot, Shakespeare makes a fleeting appearance. By the last volume, you may well be questioning the reality around you.
If you want an idea of where I'm coming from on books, in comparison to those already mentioned, I love LOTR, Dune, and Dance to the Music of Time; am looking forward to the Alexandria Quarter, have not read War & Peace
*The Solitudes was first published as Aegypt, but Crowley always intended this as the title for the sequence.1 -
Great post - I may borrow itgeoffw said:
Borrowing ideas is not plagiarism. Textual replication or close copying is.ydoethur said:
Plagiarism is a well-known feature of some of our greatest authors. Hamlet was plagiarised from an earlier play by Thomas Kyd, which was plagiarised from a story by Francois de Belleforest, an improved translation of a work by Matteo Bandello, which itself drew from Danish mythology.Mary_Batty said:Just catching up on some of the literature comments below. Frankly I'm astounded that some people are belittling the Harry Potter books.
Such comments are an insult to the works JK Rowling plagiarised.
And some quite rubbish authors have been plagiarists too - Daphne du Maurier, who made a successful career stealing other people's plots, springs to mind.4 -
Nop. HYUFD argues exactly the same, only on the basis of the mythical unwritten constitution.Casino_Royale said:
I don't get this one.SouthamObserver said:
The Catalan government suspended declaring independence, so it never actually happened. In any case, the Catalan government had no means to enforce it because it had no control over such basic things as the collection of taxes, currency, border control, the legal system etc.HYUFD said:
If the Catalan government's declaration of UDI had not been challenged by Madrid then Catalonia would in effect have become an independent state, the law is meaningless unless it is upheld and enforced.SouthamObserver said:
The Spanish government - whether PP, PSOE or whatever - has no legal right to allow a referendum on independence for any part of Spain. That is clearly set out in Spain's written constitution.HYUFD said:
Confirms the PP Spanish government did the right thing in 2017 then refusing a legal independence referendum when support for Catalan independence was much higher and ignoring the Catalan nationalist government's declaration of a UDI.SouthamObserver said:In other news, support for Catalan independence continues to fall. The change from a hard-line, confrontational, right-wing government in Madrid to one run by the centre left that has focused on dialogue has led to a split in the Catalan separatist movement. There is even an outside chance the separatists may lose control of the Catalan parliament after next month's regional elections.
https://twitter.com/RupertCocke/status/1348568129685901312
Had they not done that Catalonia would now be an independent state not seeing support for independence fall
Westminster must equally enforce the legal principle of our constitution that Westminster is sovereign and when the UK government says 2014 was a once in a generation vote it means it
I get that the written constitution prohibits independence and there's no "mechanism" for it to occur but, if 70%+ of the population of Catalonia wanted it, and Spain just continued to legally refuse citing the constitution, then what do both sides do?
It leaves little room for anywhere to go. Other than on the streets, and with violence.
Am I missing something?0 -
She should come on this website.kle4 said:
Tough, but fair point.Scott_xP said:This is the same argument the Brexiteers employed
https://twitter.com/jbouie/status/1348445014645493761
Any criticism of Brexit is an attack on the voters...0 -
Sorry to hear that. Best wishes for your family.Floater said:Well that's shit
My dad will soon be joining the growing list of covid victims
He is in his 80's - no real quality of life - but this fucking hurts.1 -
Nope! The key point is that 70% don't want it. That means the constitutional argument works. If Catalonia ever got to a point where a large, demonstrable majority wanted independence, then the entire narrative would change. But that has never been the case. Independence has very rarely commanded even 50% support in Catalonia.Casino_Royale said:
I don't get this one.SouthamObserver said:
The Catalan government suspended declaring independence, so it never actually happened. In any case, the Catalan government had no means to enforce it because it had no control over such basic things as the collection of taxes, currency, border control, the legal system etc.HYUFD said:
If the Catalan government's declaration of UDI had not been challenged by Madrid then Catalonia would in effect have become an independent state, the law is meaningless unless it is upheld and enforced.SouthamObserver said:
The Spanish government - whether PP, PSOE or whatever - has no legal right to allow a referendum on independence for any part of Spain. That is clearly set out in Spain's written constitution.HYUFD said:
Confirms the PP Spanish government did the right thing in 2017 then refusing a legal independence referendum when support for Catalan independence was much higher and ignoring the Catalan nationalist government's declaration of a UDI.SouthamObserver said:In other news, support for Catalan independence continues to fall. The change from a hard-line, confrontational, right-wing government in Madrid to one run by the centre left that has focused on dialogue has led to a split in the Catalan separatist movement. There is even an outside chance the separatists may lose control of the Catalan parliament after next month's regional elections.
https://twitter.com/RupertCocke/status/1348568129685901312
Had they not done that Catalonia would now be an independent state not seeing support for independence fall
Westminster must equally enforce the legal principle of our constitution that Westminster is sovereign and when the UK government says 2014 was a once in a generation vote it means it
I get that the written constitution prohibits independence and there's no "mechanism" for it to occur but, if 70%+ of the population of Catalonia wanted it, and Spain just continued to legally refuse citing the constitution, then what do both sides do?
It leaves little room for anywhere to go. Other than on the streets, and with violence.
Am I missing something?
1 -
As long as Bill Gates isn't an investor it seems interesting.logical_song said:Microfluidic chip detects COVID antibodies in seconds
https://www.theengineer.co.uk/microfluidic-chip-detects-covid-antibodies-in-seconds/
Now we just need billions of them.0 -
Legally 100% of Scots could vote for independence but if the UK government at Westminster refused to grant it then legally it would remain part of the UK.RochdalePioneers said:
Yes we know. Here is what is going to happen:HYUFD said:
In 1707 the old Scottish Parliament was abolished and all its members moved to Westminster.SouthamObserver said:
There is a process to getting to a referendum for independence, but it is one that involves gaining the explicit consent of the majority of voters in Spain. That's because Catalonia is regarded constitutionally as an integral part of a unitary Spanish state. The UK is very different as it is a union of two kingdoms and so, it could fairly be argued, explicitly requires ongoing consent from all parts of the union to continue. The bar for, say, Yorkshire or Cornwall to leave the Union (or to become independent of England) would be much higher. The same argument might also apply to the Shetlands or to the Borders in Scotland.Richard_Tyndall said:
But that means that even if 100% of the population of Catalonia wanted independence they would not be allowed to vote for it because it would be illegal for the Spanish Government to allow such a vote and you would consider any vote without Spanish permission to be unlawful and therefore should be repressed.HYUFD said:
If the Catalan government's declaration of UDI had not been challenged by Madrid then Catalonia would in effect have become an independent state, the law is meaningless unless it is upheld and enforced.SouthamObserver said:
The Spanish government - whether PP, PSOE or whatever - has no legal right to allow a referendum on independence for any part of Spain. That is clearly set out in Spain's written constitution.HYUFD said:
Confirms the PP Spanish government did the right thing in 2017 then refusing a legal independence referendum when support for Catalan independence was much higher and ignoring the Catalan nationalist government's declaration of a UDI.SouthamObserver said:In other news, support for Catalan independence continues to fall. The change from a hard-line, confrontational, right-wing government in Madrid to one run by the centre left that has focused on dialogue has led to a split in the Catalan separatist movement. There is even an outside chance the separatists may lose control of the Catalan parliament after next month's regional elections.
https://twitter.com/RupertCocke/status/1348568129685901312
Had they not done that Catalonia would now be an independent state not seeing support for independence fall
Westminster must equally enforce the legal principle of our constitution that Westminster is sovereign and when the UK government says 2014 was a once in a generation vote it means it
In which case why bother asking for permission? They should just do it. Unless you think that it is justifiable to hold a whole population captive against their will and they should not be allowed to express their opposition to that?
Ever since then it requires the consent of a majority of elected Westminster MPs and Westminster MPs and the UK government alone for Scottish independence to be legal
2021 - Scotland re-elects a government on a platform of seeking independence
2022 - Arguments about an independence referendum. Scotland announces an advisory referendum of the same legal basis (i.e. none) of the EU Referendum
2023 - Scotland votes for Independence
2024 - HYUFD tells Scotland "you can eff orf. Please vote Conservative"
Rather difficult to continue to ignore the will of the people. If Scotland wants Independence it shall have Independence.
Even if politically it might be a bit more difficult for the UK to enforce UK law in Scotland at that point0 -
Delta shouldn’t have called him a terrorist (which I doubt they did but that’s what he claimed) but he is still innocent until proven guilty.RochdalePioneers said:I have enjoyed the various videos now on Twitter of insurgents now added to a no-fly list howling and yelling as they are banned from boarding planes or even removed from them. For years their sort has sanctimoniously screeched that ignorance of the law is not an excuse, and that if you do the crime then do the time.
Suck it up snowflakes. You participated in a failed coup. You are still breathing! So that's a bonus.
But at least he’s learnt that actions have consequences 😊0 -
Didn't we have a discussion of what the daemons do when their owners/pet humans have it off? I can't remember whast the conclusion was ...IshmaelZ said:
Having a couple of pesky kids actually physically killing actual God really, really doesn't work for me. Nor do the daemons - do they eat? fuck? Need the vet? etc. Otherwise fabulous.Leon said:
Also Philip Pullman. I find his atheism tiresomely contrived, not least because he uses the supernatural and occult for great effect, through his famous series.DavidL said:For those showering contempt on LOTR I can only say, "Fly, you fools".
Yes, its weird that no one ever seems to think of sex, ever, but it is the creation of an entire world, copied many, many times yet never bettered.
For a similar feat of imagination I would give you Dune. Those books, and especially the 4th one, God Emperor, had a major impact on me, curing me of religion.
Dickens I have generally found pretty hard work but I am happy to accept the failings are mine.
But in terms of creating an entire new world? Fabulous0 -
True, but I've allowed for that in the "standardized PB norm". Perhaps if I drop the heavy stats content and illustrate instead in the style of Abigail's Party. You're speaking -Leon said:
Given that, as we are constantly reminded, Remainers are generally ‘better educated’, I would actually guess the opposite is true. LOTR is a mighty tome to tackle, only more bookish people would have a go. So probably more Remainers than Leaverskinabalu said:
It's not the most weighty contribution I've ever made - grant you that - but I'm pretty confident it's true.Leon said:
Your most embarrassing comment ever, and I’m including the one where you ‘tried to stop your son watching Top Gear’kinabalu said:
But I bet there is a correlation between liking LOTR and voting for Brexit. By which I mean if you take the population of people who are readers of novels and they voted, say, X% Remain, then the sub-sample of those who like Tolkien would have voted Y% Remain and Y would be less than X. I'd put a grand on that without losing too much sleep.kle4 said:
I'm amazed how much people are ok with judging and insulting others based on their literature choices.Cyclefree said:
I'll bite.Leon said:Gardenwalker said:
Wait, are you citing LOTR as good writing?Mysticrose said:
Oh are you? Read one of my bestselling books. But it doesn't sound to me like you'd recognise it even if you were hit over the head by Lord of the Rings.TOPPING said:
Still waiting for those superior literary skills to manifest themselves.Mysticrose said:And I know no-one apart from myself who routinely wears a mask outdoors as they do in much of Asia and now elsewhere.
I am convinced this virus spreads outdoors. Undoubtedly less readily than indoors but nevertheless I'm sure it does. Again, as you would expect from an airborne virus which spreads by aerosol as well as droplet.
We are, and there's no other way to put this, f-ing stupid in this country. Nerys claims to be a nurse. What hope is there?
I recall early on an ITU nurse saying that she didn't see how it was possible to 'BE SAFE' when she couldn't 'see' the virus.
I mean, that's the level of f-ing ignorance with which we are dealing.
I keep the writing clean and simple on here. Actually I do in my books. Only Mike Smithson of the thread writers knows how to do that. A thread should have one point made succinctly and cleanly.
Less is more. Heck, even The Great Gatsby is only 47,000 words.
JFC.
By some measures it is the most popular novel ever written, anywhere on the planet, and also the most loved. It has also been hugely influential on popular AND elite culture. You see its influence everywhere
Why? Because it is an inspired piece of sustained human imagination, probably unexampled, AND it has a superb, mythic, driving narrative
It’s not entirely my cup of tea but I can still recognise it as quite exceptional. Anyone who doesn’t simply reveals their own idiocy. Sorry
It's unreadable rubbish, mostly read and admired by those with the minds of teenage boys.
Yes its all in good fun, but in saying you dislike it is really ok to insult those who do? And no people who dislike such things shouldn't be insulted either, but some people freely admit to dismissing entire genres of fiction, based on very narrow views of it, as a sign of superiority. And it is superiority because it inevitably involves judging, negatively, those who like them, rather than simply criticising the genre or work.
I've always thought that rather strange.
It can be verified here and now. Mentally count the posters who are Tolkien fans and calculate what % of them are Leavers. Bet you any money when you've done that you get a higher % than the standardized PB norm, i.e. the % of all PB posters who read novels who voted Leave.
"Kinabalu, I would like to hear some Tolkien. Richard Tyndall would like to hear Tolkien. Philip Thompson would like to hear Tolkien. Morris Dancer would like to hear Tolkien. So, Mr K, could we have some Tolkien, please?"0 -
If it is over 200K per day, that is the third highest rate per head in the world, I thinkFrancisUrquhart said:
Can't trust the BBC these days,Scott_xP said:
NopeFrancisUrquhart said:More than 2.4 million people in the UK have now received a Covid-19 vaccine, the minister in charge of the deployment, Nadhim Zahawi, has said.
No wonder Hancock was looking more jolly yesterday on his media round, clearly there has been a decent acceleration. Now just need to get to doing that every single week.
twitter.com/PippaCrerar/status/1348624143235899395
"More than 2.4 million people in the UK have now received a Covid-19 vaccine, the minister in charge of the deployment, Nadhim Zahawi, has said. Tens of thousands of more people are due to get a jab this week after seven mass centres opened across England."
https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-55614993
They messed up yesterday with their claim of 2 million in a week.
"I think we've done 2 million people so far, or 2.4 million jabs," Boris Johnson said as he visited a vaccination centre in the South West.
Israel is the leader, with a rate that would be equivalent to 580K per day, in UK2 -
Downing Street this afternoon said that a 24/7 roll-out was possible, but there was not the demand for jabs outside the current 8am to 8pm opening hours.
The Prime Minister's Press Secretary, Allegra Stratton, said: 'The NHS will tell you that when they are asking the people who are offered vaccinations, they are asking them when it would suit them, what time.
‘If people come back and say they would like an appointment after 8pm that is something they (the NHS) will consider.
‘My understanding is that at the moment there is not a clamour for appointments late into the night or early in the morning.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9133405/Englands-Covid-jab-blitz-begins-mass-vaccination-superhubs.html
I don't give a f##k if people say well I would rather do 12.30 on a Thursday please, because I have my online gym class in the morning and WI meeting in the afternoon.
If there is the supply and the manpower, we should be doing as many hours as possible. As of course people would say they prefer a nice middle of the day slot, but I am sure many of those shielding would also take a 6am slot if it meant being protected.
I would happily go at 3am if asked.
Like masks, its not about you, its about everybody.3 -
I am very sorry to hear that. I do hope things improve for him.Floater said:Well that's shit
My dad will soon be joining the growing list of covid victims
He is in his 80's - no real quality of life - but this fucking hurts.0 -
Yes, it's the realpolitik.Mary_Batty said:
You aren't missing much other than the responsibility of the politicians in Madrid, in such a scenario, to change the law and allow a referendum.Casino_Royale said:
I don't get this one.SouthamObserver said:
The Catalan government suspended declaring independence, so it never actually happened. In any case, the Catalan government had no means to enforce it because it had no control over such basic things as the collection of taxes, currency, border control, the legal system etc.HYUFD said:
If the Catalan government's declaration of UDI had not been challenged by Madrid then Catalonia would in effect have become an independent state, the law is meaningless unless it is upheld and enforced.SouthamObserver said:
The Spanish government - whether PP, PSOE or whatever - has no legal right to allow a referendum on independence for any part of Spain. That is clearly set out in Spain's written constitution.HYUFD said:
Confirms the PP Spanish government did the right thing in 2017 then refusing a legal independence referendum when support for Catalan independence was much higher and ignoring the Catalan nationalist government's declaration of a UDI.SouthamObserver said:In other news, support for Catalan independence continues to fall. The change from a hard-line, confrontational, right-wing government in Madrid to one run by the centre left that has focused on dialogue has led to a split in the Catalan separatist movement. There is even an outside chance the separatists may lose control of the Catalan parliament after next month's regional elections.
https://twitter.com/RupertCocke/status/1348568129685901312
Had they not done that Catalonia would now be an independent state not seeing support for independence fall
Westminster must equally enforce the legal principle of our constitution that Westminster is sovereign and when the UK government says 2014 was a once in a generation vote it means it
I get that the written constitution prohibits independence and there's no "mechanism" for it to occur but, if 70%+ of the population of Catalonia wanted it, and Spain just continued to legally refuse citing the constitution, then what do both sides do?
It leaves little room for anywhere to go. Other than on the streets, and with violence.
Am I missing something?
The Spanish constitution is broken if it cannot allow for secession in the case of a majority wanting it. Consent is a higher ideal than adherence to a constitution.
Lots of states eventually break away despite being "prohibited" from doing so. But rarely without lives being lost.
I'm not sure what the constitutional answer is in the case of Catalonia. I don't know an awful lot about it.0 -
Not terrible but really not worth the effort? Don Quixote?Flatlander said:
Definitely in the list of terrible books that you probably should have read. Not sure what would come top of that list.TimT said:
Particularly the 56-page monologue.DougSeal said:
Atlas Shrugged. It made me want to give up reading for good.TimT said:
For me, undoubtedly Camus, La Peste.Benpointer said:Ok then, so if you are asked to name one book that had most imapct on you?
I would offer To Kill a Mockingbird.
I've read it 3 or 4 times and loved it each time but first read it a 13 when it really did make me think. Appreciate it may be a bit to 'woke' or sound like virtue signalling for some of you but there you go, it's the truth.0 -
400k in a day that means, around 2.5m per week including a Sunday slowdown.FrancisUrquhart said:More than 2.4 million people in the UK have now received a Covid-19 vaccine, the minister in charge of the deployment, Nadhim Zahawi, has said.
No wonder Hancock was looking more jolly yesterday on his media round, clearly there has been a decent acceleration. Now just need to get to doing that every single week.0 -
No, you’re not. That is where it would lead. Spain has had a civil war within living memory, after all.Casino_Royale said:
I don't get this one.SouthamObserver said:
The Catalan government suspended declaring independence, so it never actually happened. In any case, the Catalan government had no means to enforce it because it had no control over such basic things as the collection of taxes, currency, border control, the legal system etc.HYUFD said:
If the Catalan government's declaration of UDI had not been challenged by Madrid then Catalonia would in effect have become an independent state, the law is meaningless unless it is upheld and enforced.SouthamObserver said:
The Spanish government - whether PP, PSOE or whatever - has no legal right to allow a referendum on independence for any part of Spain. That is clearly set out in Spain's written constitution.HYUFD said:
Confirms the PP Spanish government did the right thing in 2017 then refusing a legal independence referendum when support for Catalan independence was much higher and ignoring the Catalan nationalist government's declaration of a UDI.SouthamObserver said:In other news, support for Catalan independence continues to fall. The change from a hard-line, confrontational, right-wing government in Madrid to one run by the centre left that has focused on dialogue has led to a split in the Catalan separatist movement. There is even an outside chance the separatists may lose control of the Catalan parliament after next month's regional elections.
https://twitter.com/RupertCocke/status/1348568129685901312
Had they not done that Catalonia would now be an independent state not seeing support for independence fall
Westminster must equally enforce the legal principle of our constitution that Westminster is sovereign and when the UK government says 2014 was a once in a generation vote it means it
I get that the written constitution prohibits independence and there's no "mechanism" for it to occur but, if 70%+ of the population of Catalonia wanted it, and Spain just continued to legally refuse citing the constitution, then what do both sides do?
It leaves little room for anywhere to go. Other than on the streets, and with violence.
Am I missing something?
The great difference with Scotland is that, by constitutional standards, they have very recently HAD a referendum, one that their then leader, Mr Salmond, said was ‘once in a generation’. The Scottish people made their decision, on a vast turnout, and it was No, by a large margin
The SNP is completely entitled to ask for a 2nd vote whenever it likes. The government of the UK, which must govern in the economic and constitutional interests of the entire UK, is completely entitled to say No.
Boris will put the question - Sindyref2 or not - to a free vote in the Commons, which, of course, is the supreme parliament of all the UK, including Scottish MPs. The Commons will say No.
The ball will then go back over Hadrian’s Wall, and into the courts.
God, I’m just repeating myself. As warned. That is my last comment on Sindy for today
1 -
I think there's a difference between getting the prediction of a close election result wrong and failing to notice that Trump is a fascist. They're different sorts of errors.Casino_Royale said:Yes, and like I say it's all very unedifying. Particularly the finger-pointing towards those who got it wrong. Some people seem more interested in being right - and being seen to be right - than anything else. One presumes on the assumption so that their analysis and insight will be taken more seriously in future.
I have a long list of getting things wrong, including:
(1) GE2015 - I thought Cameron would get c.290-300 seats, not a majority
(2) EURef- I thought Remain would win 52:48 (not the other way round)
(3) 2016 Presidential - I thought Clinton would win (by an Obama 2012 margin)
[...]
Post-mortems are always more interesting when people go through both what they got right and what they got wrong, and I respect them all the more for it.
I lose respect for them when they start finger-pointing at others, unless they were utterly reckless.0 -
Got it. I made the number up to make a point.SouthamObserver said:
Nope! The key point is that 70% don't want it. That means the constitutional argument works. If Catalonia ever got to a point where a large, demonstrable majority wanted independence, then the entire narrative would change. But that has never been the case. Independence has very rarely commanded even 50% support in Catalonia.Casino_Royale said:
I don't get this one.SouthamObserver said:
The Catalan government suspended declaring independence, so it never actually happened. In any case, the Catalan government had no means to enforce it because it had no control over such basic things as the collection of taxes, currency, border control, the legal system etc.HYUFD said:
If the Catalan government's declaration of UDI had not been challenged by Madrid then Catalonia would in effect have become an independent state, the law is meaningless unless it is upheld and enforced.SouthamObserver said:
The Spanish government - whether PP, PSOE or whatever - has no legal right to allow a referendum on independence for any part of Spain. That is clearly set out in Spain's written constitution.HYUFD said:
Confirms the PP Spanish government did the right thing in 2017 then refusing a legal independence referendum when support for Catalan independence was much higher and ignoring the Catalan nationalist government's declaration of a UDI.SouthamObserver said:In other news, support for Catalan independence continues to fall. The change from a hard-line, confrontational, right-wing government in Madrid to one run by the centre left that has focused on dialogue has led to a split in the Catalan separatist movement. There is even an outside chance the separatists may lose control of the Catalan parliament after next month's regional elections.
https://twitter.com/RupertCocke/status/1348568129685901312
Had they not done that Catalonia would now be an independent state not seeing support for independence fall
Westminster must equally enforce the legal principle of our constitution that Westminster is sovereign and when the UK government says 2014 was a once in a generation vote it means it
I get that the written constitution prohibits independence and there's no "mechanism" for it to occur but, if 70%+ of the population of Catalonia wanted it, and Spain just continued to legally refuse citing the constitution, then what do both sides do?
It leaves little room for anywhere to go. Other than on the streets, and with violence.
Am I missing something?
Basically, the current line works because of the numbers; it won't if they decisively change.0 -
Maybe we should hold a prediction competition on the subject of where Trump's private jet will be heading on the morning of 20th January.0
-
My point is really that the Canadian constitution says that unilateral secession is not legal.SouthamObserver said:
The Quebec referenda had the consent of the people of Quebec, as turnout demonstrated. The turnout in the last Catalan referendum was well under 50%. I agree that if the Catalan government organised a referendum and got a 95% turnout, as the 1995 Quebec one got, the result would be inarguable.YBarddCwsc said:
Your argument seems to me to be wrong. See Quebec.SouthamObserver said:
There is a process to getting to a referendum for independence, but it is one that involves gaining the explicit consent of the majority of voters in Spain. That's because Catalonia is regarded constitutionally as an integral part of a unitary Spanish state. The UK is very different as it is a union of two kingdoms and so, it could fairly be argued, explicitly requires ongoing consent from all parts of the union to continue. The bar for, say, Yorkshire or Cornwall to leave the Union (or to become independent of England) would be much higher. The same argument might also apply to the Shetlands or to the Borders in Scotland.Richard_Tyndall said:
But that means that even if 100% of the population of Catalonia wanted independence they would not be allowed to vote for it because it would be illegal for the Spanish Government to allow such a vote and you would consider any vote without Spanish permission to be unlawful and therefore should be repressed.HYUFD said:
If the Catalan government's declaration of UDI had not been challenged by Madrid then Catalonia would in effect have become an independent state, the law is meaningless unless it is upheld and enforced.SouthamObserver said:
The Spanish government - whether PP, PSOE or whatever - has no legal right to allow a referendum on independence for any part of Spain. That is clearly set out in Spain's written constitution.HYUFD said:
Confirms the PP Spanish government did the right thing in 2017 then refusing a legal independence referendum when support for Catalan independence was much higher and ignoring the Catalan nationalist government's declaration of a UDI.SouthamObserver said:In other news, support for Catalan independence continues to fall. The change from a hard-line, confrontational, right-wing government in Madrid to one run by the centre left that has focused on dialogue has led to a split in the Catalan separatist movement. There is even an outside chance the separatists may lose control of the Catalan parliament after next month's regional elections.
https://twitter.com/RupertCocke/status/1348568129685901312
Had they not done that Catalonia would now be an independent state not seeing support for independence fall
Westminster must equally enforce the legal principle of our constitution that Westminster is sovereign and when the UK government says 2014 was a once in a generation vote it means it
In which case why bother asking for permission? They should just do it. Unless you think that it is justifiable to hold a whole population captive against their will and they should not be allowed to express their opposition to that?
The consent of the people of Catalunya is required for Spain to govern Catalunya. It doesn't matter what powers the Spanish Constitution has or has not claimed.
Just as the consent of the people of Scotland (or Wales) is needed for the UK to govern those countries.
Quebec was forcibly joined to Canada. Just because there was no Union of free states, it does not mean that Quebec can't have a referendum and is inexorably joined to Canada.
The Canadian constitution says (just as Spain's does) that there is no right to unilateral secession.
In fact, there have been two Quebec referendums. And if Quebec seceded, what is Canada going to do? Send in the Canadian HYUFDs?
But, in practice, if a province wants to secede unilaterally, there is not very much Canada can do about it.
So, these kind of statements in the constitution are bollocks.0 -
Yes to independence had a 16% lead in one Catalan poll in autumn 2018SouthamObserver said:
Nope! The key point is that 70% don't want it. That means the constitutional argument works. If Catalonia ever got to a point where a large, demonstrable majority wanted independence, then the entire narrative would change. But that has never been the case. Independence has very rarely commanded even 50% support in Catalonia.Casino_Royale said:
I don't get this one.SouthamObserver said:
The Catalan government suspended declaring independence, so it never actually happened. In any case, the Catalan government had no means to enforce it because it had no control over such basic things as the collection of taxes, currency, border control, the legal system etc.HYUFD said:
If the Catalan government's declaration of UDI had not been challenged by Madrid then Catalonia would in effect have become an independent state, the law is meaningless unless it is upheld and enforced.SouthamObserver said:
The Spanish government - whether PP, PSOE or whatever - has no legal right to allow a referendum on independence for any part of Spain. That is clearly set out in Spain's written constitution.HYUFD said:
Confirms the PP Spanish government did the right thing in 2017 then refusing a legal independence referendum when support for Catalan independence was much higher and ignoring the Catalan nationalist government's declaration of a UDI.SouthamObserver said:In other news, support for Catalan independence continues to fall. The change from a hard-line, confrontational, right-wing government in Madrid to one run by the centre left that has focused on dialogue has led to a split in the Catalan separatist movement. There is even an outside chance the separatists may lose control of the Catalan parliament after next month's regional elections.
https://twitter.com/RupertCocke/status/1348568129685901312
Had they not done that Catalonia would now be an independent state not seeing support for independence fall
Westminster must equally enforce the legal principle of our constitution that Westminster is sovereign and when the UK government says 2014 was a once in a generation vote it means it
I get that the written constitution prohibits independence and there's no "mechanism" for it to occur but, if 70%+ of the population of Catalonia wanted it, and Spain just continued to legally refuse citing the constitution, then what do both sides do?
It leaves little room for anywhere to go. Other than on the streets, and with violence.
Am I missing something?
https://www.icps.cat/archivos/sondeigs/dossiersc2018cat.pdf?noga=10 -
My dad made this point this morning. He said "why are they asking people to book an appointment? Surely you get what you're given."FrancisUrquhart said:Downing Street this afternoon said that a 24/7 roll-out was possible, but there was not the demand for jabs outside the current 8am to 8pm opening hours.
The Prime Minister's Press Secretary, Allegra Stratton, said: 'The NHS will tell you that when they are asking the people who are offered vaccinations, they are asking them when it would suit them, what time.
‘If people come back and say they would like an appointment after 8pm that is something they (the NHS) will consider.
‘My understanding is that at the moment there is not a clamour for appointments late into the night or early in the morning.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9133405/Englands-Covid-jab-blitz-begins-mass-vaccination-superhubs.html
I don't give a f##k if people say well I would rather do 12.30 on a Thursday please, because I have my online gym class in the morning and WI meeting in the afternoon.
If there is the supply and the manpower, we should be doing as many hours as possible. As of course people would say they prefer a nice middle of the day slot, but I am sure many of those shielding would also take a 6am slot if it meant being protected.
I would happily go at 3am if asked.
Like masks, its not about you, its about everybody.0 -
The Bible?Flatlander said:
Definitely in the list of terrible books that you probably should have read. Not sure what would come top of that list.TimT said:
Particularly the 56-page monologue.DougSeal said:
Atlas Shrugged. It made me want to give up reading for good.TimT said:
For me, undoubtedly Camus, La Peste.Benpointer said:Ok then, so if you are asked to name one book that had most imapct on you?
I would offer To Kill a Mockingbird.
I've read it 3 or 4 times and loved it each time but first read it a 13 when it really did make me think. Appreciate it may be a bit to 'woke' or sound like virtue signalling for some of you but there you go, it's the truth.
Edit: just kidding everyone!0 -
Meanwhile in North Carolina the Republicans are quietly making their moves to remake the State
https://twitter.com/davedaley3/status/13484022787310469140 -
No, as the SNP would have to win enough seats at Westminster to hold the balance of power in a hung parliament and try and force Starmer to hold a vote after the 2024 general election.Scott_xP said:
So we are agreedHYUFD said:True
The Nats can hold the vote and BoZo can't stop them.
Such a vote will have the same legal, moral and political authority of the Brexit vote
As long as we have a Tory majority government at Westminster however then of course Boris can legally stop them with any independence referendum being illegal without Boris' consent0 -
Yes, especially among the target group which is predominantly retirees and healthcare workers who will be onsite anyway.tlg86 said:
My dad made this point this morning. He said "why are they asking people to book an appointment? Surely you get what you're given."FrancisUrquhart said:Downing Street this afternoon said that a 24/7 roll-out was possible, but there was not the demand for jabs outside the current 8am to 8pm opening hours.
The Prime Minister's Press Secretary, Allegra Stratton, said: 'The NHS will tell you that when they are asking the people who are offered vaccinations, they are asking them when it would suit them, what time.
‘If people come back and say they would like an appointment after 8pm that is something they (the NHS) will consider.
‘My understanding is that at the moment there is not a clamour for appointments late into the night or early in the morning.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9133405/Englands-Covid-jab-blitz-begins-mass-vaccination-superhubs.html
I don't give a f##k if people say well I would rather do 12.30 on a Thursday please, because I have my online gym class in the morning and WI meeting in the afternoon.
If there is the supply and the manpower, we should be doing as many hours as possible. As of course people would say they prefer a nice middle of the day slot, but I am sure many of those shielding would also take a 6am slot if it meant being protected.
I would happily go at 3am if asked.
Like masks, its not about you, its about everybody.1 -
My nonagenarian neighbours have had their second dose of Pfizer. My octoganerian neighbours are having their first dose of Pfizer on Saturday.Scott_xP said:
NopeFrancisUrquhart said:More than 2.4 million people in the UK have now received a Covid-19 vaccine, the minister in charge of the deployment, Nadhim Zahawi, has said.
No wonder Hancock was looking more jolly yesterday on his media round, clearly there has been a decent acceleration. Now just need to get to doing that every single week.
https://twitter.com/PippaCrerar/status/13486241432358993951 -
That's not one book though. Revelations perhaps?kle4 said:
The Bible?Flatlander said:
Definitely in the list of terrible books that you probably should have read. Not sure what would come top of that list.TimT said:
Particularly the 56-page monologue.DougSeal said:
Atlas Shrugged. It made me want to give up reading for good.TimT said:
For me, undoubtedly Camus, La Peste.Benpointer said:Ok then, so if you are asked to name one book that had most imapct on you?
I would offer To Kill a Mockingbird.
I've read it 3 or 4 times and loved it each time but first read it a 13 when it really did make me think. Appreciate it may be a bit to 'woke' or sound like virtue signalling for some of you but there you go, it's the truth.
Edit: just kidding everyone!0 -
It had under 40% support, though. Between them, the unionist options - enhanced autonomy, the status quo and an end to autonomy - enjoyed greater support.HYUFD said:
Yes to independence had a 16% lead in one Catalan poll in autumn 2018SouthamObserver said:
Nope! The key point is that 70% don't want it. That means the constitutional argument works. If Catalonia ever got to a point where a large, demonstrable majority wanted independence, then the entire narrative would change. But that has never been the case. Independence has very rarely commanded even 50% support in Catalonia.Casino_Royale said:
I don't get this one.SouthamObserver said:
The Catalan government suspended declaring independence, so it never actually happened. In any case, the Catalan government had no means to enforce it because it had no control over such basic things as the collection of taxes, currency, border control, the legal system etc.HYUFD said:
If the Catalan government's declaration of UDI had not been challenged by Madrid then Catalonia would in effect have become an independent state, the law is meaningless unless it is upheld and enforced.SouthamObserver said:
The Spanish government - whether PP, PSOE or whatever - has no legal right to allow a referendum on independence for any part of Spain. That is clearly set out in Spain's written constitution.HYUFD said:
Confirms the PP Spanish government did the right thing in 2017 then refusing a legal independence referendum when support for Catalan independence was much higher and ignoring the Catalan nationalist government's declaration of a UDI.SouthamObserver said:In other news, support for Catalan independence continues to fall. The change from a hard-line, confrontational, right-wing government in Madrid to one run by the centre left that has focused on dialogue has led to a split in the Catalan separatist movement. There is even an outside chance the separatists may lose control of the Catalan parliament after next month's regional elections.
https://twitter.com/RupertCocke/status/1348568129685901312
Had they not done that Catalonia would now be an independent state not seeing support for independence fall
Westminster must equally enforce the legal principle of our constitution that Westminster is sovereign and when the UK government says 2014 was a once in a generation vote it means it
I get that the written constitution prohibits independence and there's no "mechanism" for it to occur but, if 70%+ of the population of Catalonia wanted it, and Spain just continued to legally refuse citing the constitution, then what do both sides do?
It leaves little room for anywhere to go. Other than on the streets, and with violence.
Am I missing something?
https://www.icps.cat/archivos/sondeigs/dossiersc2018cat.pdf?noga=1
0 -
He would presumably be entitled to use it until Biden is officially President.Carnyx said:
You might want to include Air Force 1 as a permissible option?Andy_JS said:Maybe we should hold a prediction competition on the subject of where Trump's private jet will be heading on the morning of 20th January.
This raises the interested prospect that he could be asked to disembark summarily, whatever the altitude.0 -
To ensure maximum take up.tlg86 said:
My dad made this point this morning. He said "why are they asking people to book an appointment? Surely you get what you're given."FrancisUrquhart said:Downing Street this afternoon said that a 24/7 roll-out was possible, but there was not the demand for jabs outside the current 8am to 8pm opening hours.
The Prime Minister's Press Secretary, Allegra Stratton, said: 'The NHS will tell you that when they are asking the people who are offered vaccinations, they are asking them when it would suit them, what time.
‘If people come back and say they would like an appointment after 8pm that is something they (the NHS) will consider.
‘My understanding is that at the moment there is not a clamour for appointments late into the night or early in the morning.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9133405/Englands-Covid-jab-blitz-begins-mass-vaccination-superhubs.html
I don't give a f##k if people say well I would rather do 12.30 on a Thursday please, because I have my online gym class in the morning and WI meeting in the afternoon.
If there is the supply and the manpower, we should be doing as many hours as possible. As of course people would say they prefer a nice middle of the day slot, but I am sure many of those shielding would also take a 6am slot if it meant being protected.
I would happily go at 3am if asked.
Like masks, its not about you, its about everybody.2 -
I think the earlier point that nerds of politics are more likely than average to be nerds of something else as well is more relevant.kinabalu said:
True, but I've allowed for that in the "standardized PB norm". Perhaps if I drop the heavy stats content and illustrate instead in the style of Abigail's Party. You're speaking -Leon said:
Given that, as we are constantly reminded, Remainers are generally ‘better educated’, I would actually guess the opposite is true. LOTR is a mighty tome to tackle, only more bookish people would have a go. So probably more Remainers than Leaverskinabalu said:
It's not the most weighty contribution I've ever made - grant you that - but I'm pretty confident it's true.Leon said:
Your most embarrassing comment ever, and I’m including the one where you ‘tried to stop your son watching Top Gear’kinabalu said:
But I bet there is a correlation between liking LOTR and voting for Brexit. By which I mean if you take the population of people who are readers of novels and they voted, say, X% Remain, then the sub-sample of those who like Tolkien would have voted Y% Remain and Y would be less than X. I'd put a grand on that without losing too much sleep.kle4 said:
I'm amazed how much people are ok with judging and insulting others based on their literature choices.Cyclefree said:
I'll bite.Leon said:Gardenwalker said:
Wait, are you citing LOTR as good writing?Mysticrose said:
Oh are you? Read one of my bestselling books. But it doesn't sound to me like you'd recognise it even if you were hit over the head by Lord of the Rings.TOPPING said:
Still waiting for those superior literary skills to manifest themselves.Mysticrose said:And I know no-one apart from myself who routinely wears a mask outdoors as they do in much of Asia and now elsewhere.
I am convinced this virus spreads outdoors. Undoubtedly less readily than indoors but nevertheless I'm sure it does. Again, as you would expect from an airborne virus which spreads by aerosol as well as droplet.
We are, and there's no other way to put this, f-ing stupid in this country. Nerys claims to be a nurse. What hope is there?
I recall early on an ITU nurse saying that she didn't see how it was possible to 'BE SAFE' when she couldn't 'see' the virus.
I mean, that's the level of f-ing ignorance with which we are dealing.
I keep the writing clean and simple on here. Actually I do in my books. Only Mike Smithson of the thread writers knows how to do that. A thread should have one point made succinctly and cleanly.
Less is more. Heck, even The Great Gatsby is only 47,000 words.
JFC.
By some measures it is the most popular novel ever written, anywhere on the planet, and also the most loved. It has also been hugely influential on popular AND elite culture. You see its influence everywhere
Why? Because it is an inspired piece of sustained human imagination, probably unexampled, AND it has a superb, mythic, driving narrative
It’s not entirely my cup of tea but I can still recognise it as quite exceptional. Anyone who doesn’t simply reveals their own idiocy. Sorry
It's unreadable rubbish, mostly read and admired by those with the minds of teenage boys.
Yes its all in good fun, but in saying you dislike it is really ok to insult those who do? And no people who dislike such things shouldn't be insulted either, but some people freely admit to dismissing entire genres of fiction, based on very narrow views of it, as a sign of superiority. And it is superiority because it inevitably involves judging, negatively, those who like them, rather than simply criticising the genre or work.
I've always thought that rather strange.
It can be verified here and now. Mentally count the posters who are Tolkien fans and calculate what % of them are Leavers. Bet you any money when you've done that you get a higher % than the standardized PB norm, i.e. the % of all PB posters who read novels who voted Leave.
"Kinabalu, I would like to hear some Tolkien. Richard Tyndall would like to hear Tolkien. Philip Thompson would like to hear Tolkien. Morris Dancer would like to hear Tolkien. So, Mr K, could we have some Tolkien, please?"
Ps I dont regard nerd as pejorative. What is a football star but a nerd of sport?0 -
I booked my mother's second jab this morning, her original second one having been cancelled. I took the first slot available (7pm) but absolutely asked whether there were any earlier ones and the person said that no, just the late ones on that day and the following day.tlg86 said:
My dad made this point this morning. He said "why are they asking people to book an appointment? Surely you get what you're given."FrancisUrquhart said:Downing Street this afternoon said that a 24/7 roll-out was possible, but there was not the demand for jabs outside the current 8am to 8pm opening hours.
The Prime Minister's Press Secretary, Allegra Stratton, said: 'The NHS will tell you that when they are asking the people who are offered vaccinations, they are asking them when it would suit them, what time.
‘If people come back and say they would like an appointment after 8pm that is something they (the NHS) will consider.
‘My understanding is that at the moment there is not a clamour for appointments late into the night or early in the morning.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9133405/Englands-Covid-jab-blitz-begins-mass-vaccination-superhubs.html
I don't give a f##k if people say well I would rather do 12.30 on a Thursday please, because I have my online gym class in the morning and WI meeting in the afternoon.
If there is the supply and the manpower, we should be doing as many hours as possible. As of course people would say they prefer a nice middle of the day slot, but I am sure many of those shielding would also take a 6am slot if it meant being protected.
I would happily go at 3am if asked.
Like masks, its not about you, its about everybody.
Two points to note:
a) This is a typical NHS pointy elbow situation. If you want it to happen you must make it happen.
b) Having explained that my mother's second jab three weeks after the first had been cancelled because the jabs now need to be 12 weeks apart, the (very helpful, quite cheery) person booked my mother's second jab exactly nine weeks after her first one.
Go figure.0 -
Exactly.Casino_Royale said:
Got it. I made the number up to make a point.SouthamObserver said:
Nope! The key point is that 70% don't want it. That means the constitutional argument works. If Catalonia ever got to a point where a large, demonstrable majority wanted independence, then the entire narrative would change. But that has never been the case. Independence has very rarely commanded even 50% support in Catalonia.Casino_Royale said:
I don't get this one.SouthamObserver said:
The Catalan government suspended declaring independence, so it never actually happened. In any case, the Catalan government had no means to enforce it because it had no control over such basic things as the collection of taxes, currency, border control, the legal system etc.HYUFD said:
If the Catalan government's declaration of UDI had not been challenged by Madrid then Catalonia would in effect have become an independent state, the law is meaningless unless it is upheld and enforced.SouthamObserver said:
The Spanish government - whether PP, PSOE or whatever - has no legal right to allow a referendum on independence for any part of Spain. That is clearly set out in Spain's written constitution.HYUFD said:
Confirms the PP Spanish government did the right thing in 2017 then refusing a legal independence referendum when support for Catalan independence was much higher and ignoring the Catalan nationalist government's declaration of a UDI.SouthamObserver said:In other news, support for Catalan independence continues to fall. The change from a hard-line, confrontational, right-wing government in Madrid to one run by the centre left that has focused on dialogue has led to a split in the Catalan separatist movement. There is even an outside chance the separatists may lose control of the Catalan parliament after next month's regional elections.
https://twitter.com/RupertCocke/status/1348568129685901312
Had they not done that Catalonia would now be an independent state not seeing support for independence fall
Westminster must equally enforce the legal principle of our constitution that Westminster is sovereign and when the UK government says 2014 was a once in a generation vote it means it
I get that the written constitution prohibits independence and there's no "mechanism" for it to occur but, if 70%+ of the population of Catalonia wanted it, and Spain just continued to legally refuse citing the constitution, then what do both sides do?
It leaves little room for anywhere to go. Other than on the streets, and with violence.
Am I missing something?
Basically, the current line works because of the numbers; it won't if they decisively change.
1 -
When they are doing the 50 year olds, I think it is fair to expect them to turn up whenever.tlg86 said:
My dad made this point this morning. He said "why are they asking people to book an appointment? Surely you get what you're given."FrancisUrquhart said:Downing Street this afternoon said that a 24/7 roll-out was possible, but there was not the demand for jabs outside the current 8am to 8pm opening hours.
The Prime Minister's Press Secretary, Allegra Stratton, said: 'The NHS will tell you that when they are asking the people who are offered vaccinations, they are asking them when it would suit them, what time.
‘If people come back and say they would like an appointment after 8pm that is something they (the NHS) will consider.
‘My understanding is that at the moment there is not a clamour for appointments late into the night or early in the morning.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9133405/Englands-Covid-jab-blitz-begins-mass-vaccination-superhubs.html
I don't give a f##k if people say well I would rather do 12.30 on a Thursday please, because I have my online gym class in the morning and WI meeting in the afternoon.
If there is the supply and the manpower, we should be doing as many hours as possible. As of course people would say they prefer a nice middle of the day slot, but I am sure many of those shielding would also take a 6am slot if it meant being protected.
I would happily go at 3am if asked.
Like masks, its not about you, its about everybody.
Not sure about the 80+ year olds that have to arrange transport or take the bus (aaagh!).0 -
This does really annoy me. My wife is 75 and I am 60. If they rang us up we would be there in minutes. It looks like I will have to wait until everyone else older than me can be available for an appointment!! We really should be vaccinating 24/7 with a use it or lose it appointment system.FrancisUrquhart said:Downing Street this afternoon said that a 24/7 roll-out was possible, but there was not the demand for jabs outside the current 8am to 8pm opening hours.
The Prime Minister's Press Secretary, Allegra Stratton, said: 'The NHS will tell you that when they are asking the people who are offered vaccinations, they are asking them when it would suit them, what time.
‘If people come back and say they would like an appointment after 8pm that is something they (the NHS) will consider.
‘My understanding is that at the moment there is not a clamour for appointments late into the night or early in the morning.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9133405/Englands-Covid-jab-blitz-begins-mass-vaccination-superhubs.html
I don't give a f##k if people say well I would rather do 12.30 on a Thursday please, because I have my online gym class in the morning and WI meeting in the afternoon.
If there is the supply and the manpower, we should be doing as many hours as possible. As of course people would say they prefer a nice middle of the day slot, but I am sure many of those shielding would also take a 6am slot if it meant being protected.
I would happily go at 3am if asked.
Like masks, its not about you, its about everybody.
1
