The bottom line is that arguments for Brexit are the same for Scottish Independence, you can’t logically believe in one and reject the other. But unfortunately logic plays no role in C21 politics, it’s all emotional nationalist bullshit so we end up with right wing and nationalist parties passionately arguing contradictory points depending on what day of the week it is.
My biggest contempt is for my own party. The coherent argument of the left that we’re all better off forming unions and collaborating seems to be expressed in the most dull, boring and apologetic terms. Frustrating.
Well, I think David L is quite logical in believing in one, and rejecting the other.
As other posters have commented, the economic arguments don't really drive many votes one way or the other. It's about identity. There's nothing illogical about feeling an attachment to the United Kingdom, but no attachment to the European Union.
The problem is what you then do about it.
If a majority of Scots have little to no attachment to the U.K., Brexiteers should sympathise and set them free. Instead the Brexiteers argue that they should stay in the union.
Equally the SNP argue that unions with London are inherently bad, but unions with Brussels are inherently good.
It’s pathetic.
Well, if most Scots do desire independence, there's no point holding them against their will.
That's been my view not just since Brexit, but since the Conservatives came to power in 2010, depsite holding just one Scottish seat. The argument at that point was that Scotland would not tolerate a government with so little Scottish support. Even if that's true, that's no reason why the rest of us can't vote for a centre-eight eurosceptic government.
Our constitution, unlike the US senate, offers no mechanism to restrain the executive when it pursued policies that di not give regard regional differences and create tensions inside the union.
When we have a government that aggressively takes advantage of our elective dictatorship,assert a majority position and pursue a policy supported by only parts of country problems will inevitably emerge.
Come off it, we don't have an elective dictatorship. We have an overcentralised democracy, with too much executive power, but the legislature and judiciary are capable of reigning in the executive, and we have free elections to decide the legislature.
Better, more experienced minds than ours disagree with you.
Here's a good place to start: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index Put together by experts, scoring countries in multiple dimensions to give an assessment on how democratic a country is. The UK consistently scores decently in all categories and very well in some of them. It is characterised as a "full democracy", along with almost all of Western and Northern Europe.
The DUP are so thick that if Irish jokes were not a throwback to the sort of bigoted, reactionary attitudes we must never revisit, I'd tell one right now. As it is, best if I find a different way to put it.
When it comes to the most pig-headed, self-harming party political decision of recent times, there are imo only 2 in the conversation. It's as much of a straight run off, and as excitingly in the balance, as that original series of Pop Idol which gripped the nation in the first weeks of 2002. In this case the contenders are -
(i) The LDs in Coalition tripling tuition fees when they had taken an oath in blood to abolish them and attracted a big chunk of votes on that basis.
(ii) The DUP, with the balance of power, not backing Theresa May when she had fought for and achieved a Brexit deal which safeguarded the position of NI in the UK.
Only question is, which is the Will Young and which the Gareth Gates?
Andrew RT Davies unanimously elected leader of the Welsh Tories in the Senedd again after Paul Davies' resignation.
RT is a firm Unionist and will have no time for any deals with Plaid and is ideally placed to win back votes for the Tories lost to Abolish the Assembly and to take the fight to Welsh Labour over their failures on vaccinations etc.
Andrew RT Davies unanimously elected leader of the Welsh Tories in the Senedd again after Paul Davies' resignation.
RT is a firm Unionist and will have no time for any deals with Plaid and is ideally placed to win back votes for the Tories lost to Abolish the Assembly and to take the fight to Welsh Labour over their failures on vaccinations etc.
So the choice in May for Wales is between the polite but inept Drakeford, RT Davies - the man who equivocated the Capitol riot with peaceful anti-Brexit demonstrations; or Price who sees himself as a mini Nicola in that he would spend zero time governing Wales and would bang on about independence 24/7.
In fairness, it wwas Ruth Davidson, not Ms Sturgeon, who kept on going on and on and on and on about No to Independence. But that is an interesting point in itself. Maybe Mr Davies will take a leaf out of her book and do the same thing, and rebrand the Welsh Torties as the RT Davies No to Independence Party.
PS Is Mr D good at sitting for funny photographs? I don't know the man.
NHS workers have been asked if they want to turn down Nicola Sturgeon’s controversial £500 Covid-19 bonus. Managers have written to employees offering them the chance to opt out of the payment after it emerged it could impact on other benefits. Low-paid health service workers receive government top-ups to wages from schemes including Universal Credit.
The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) confirmed the bonus – due to be paid next month – would be considered earnings, resulting in some payments being cut.
Andrew RT Davies unanimously elected leader of the Welsh Tories in the Senedd again after Paul Davies' resignation.
RT is a firm Unionist and will have no time for any deals with Plaid and is ideally placed to win back votes for the Tories lost to Abolish the Assembly and to take the fight to Welsh Labour over their failures on vaccinations etc.
The argument is that brexit has turbo charged the Scottish Indy movement.
The SNP would still be arguing for Indy even if remain had won. Makes 0 difference.
Makes a big difference to the support though, why do you think it is rising as we are torn out of EU and Westminster start demolishing devolution, are you blind.
I was under the impression that since Brexit has actually become a reality (the uncomfortable aspects) support for independence has fallen slightly - at least plateaued. It doesn't surprise me.
"their older supporters will still spit out references to “the Free State”, as if it were the Federation in Blake’s Seven"
People often talk about Blake's Seven as though it were just a bit of space opera, depicting a simplistic battle between good and evil.
In fact it was much more nuanced than that. The viewer was cleverly led to appreciate the positive virtues of the Federation, such as efficiency, decisiveness and a brand of conviction politics quite close to that of Margaret Thatcher. I'm sure many found themselves rooting for the Federation against the leftie subversives in the Liberator, just as many rooted for the Nazis while watching Secret Army, also in the late 1970s.
What most struck me about the Sunday Times piece is that only 50% of Scots want a referendum in the next 5 years and that support for independence was only 52-48. These are not the sort of figures to inspire confidence that Scotland will go down the independence route.
Ireland will be united sooner or later. It was the inevitable consequence of planting a border in the Irish sea, though in truth it has been headed that way for some time. Alastair's quite wrong to pin this on the DUP. The ethnic outlook of N Ireland has been changing and support for the union receding.
Good morning everybody. I seem to recall that, in other circumstances, 52-48 was held to be enough for some pretty significant changes.
The point that @Mysticrose was making is, of course, that it doesn't exactly look like a done deal. Using round numbers, if we assume an 85% turnout in the next independence referendum then 2% of participating voters equals about 75,000 people. If 52:48 is in any way an accurate reflection of sentiment and a net 75,000 pro-independence electors can be convinced to switch horses during the campaign then that narrow majority is erased.
It's why there was some suggestion in the past of attaining a consistent 60:40 gap before pressing for an actual vote, so as to avoid the prospect of a narrow defeat at the ballot box. The 1995 Quebec referendum was lost by a wafer thin majority and twenty-five years later there's no prospect of a third tilt on the horizon. Though that said, I think that Scotland's a different case and if there is a second defeat the campaign for a third vote begins the following morning. Stability cannot be achieved within the existing settlement, which is one more good reason for wanting to see the back of the Union.
In 1995 Yes to independence from Canada got 49% in Quebec but 26 years later there has been no indyref3.
Devomax for Quebec resolved the matter as would devomax for Scotland
Because throwing them more powers has always worked for Unionists before.
And Devomax does nothing at all to address the dreaded West Lothian Question. Au contraire: the issue of the 59 Scottish squatters in the House of Commons only becomes more acute.
Again, there is no problem in the constitutional mess that is the United Kingdom that is not resolved by getting rid of the United Kingdom.
Devomax for Holyrood plus an English Parliament would be my preferred option, though I would accept regional Assemblies within England.
Most large nations in the world now are Federal and we should become more Federal too
I suspect that England is simply too big to work well as a devolved unit alongside the other nations.
I also suspect that part of the trouble is that word "regions"- it sounds beige, bureaucratic and British Rail knocking down Euston Arch. Ugh.
We need a better name for them.
If Starmer becomes PM in 2024 expect Lord Gordon Brown to be appointed Grand High Minister for the Union and indeed to give Scotland devomax and break England up into regions and regional assemblies, or provinces if you prefer.
England in effect at the moment only exists on the rugby and football pitch (even the cricket team is actually England and Wales), otherwise it is a non existent merely ceremonial nation so it would not make that much difference
Cricket won't be a problem. The West Indies operate as a collective. You are scraping the bottom of the barrel using national sporting teams as justification for the continuation of the Union.
The Union is over. Scotland has already packed it's bags. A United Ireland will follow on shortly, by which time the demand for an independent Wales will peak over 50% shortly thereafter. You can quote me figures that Wales voted Brexit, but the demand will be one of "if they are having some of that I want some too", and the argument will again be over sovereignty rather than economics.
Boris unleashing the monster that is "sovereignty" might work against his planned legacy.
Just 49% of Scots backing independence including undecideds, only 42% of Northern Irish voters backing a United Ireland and a mere 23% of Welsh voters backing independence, little different to the 15% of English voters who currently want independence on today's ST poll does not suggest that.
Indeed the UK is more likely to rejoin the EU than Wales is to ever be independent
You should look at longer-term direction of travel, rather than the current headline figure.
Prior to all the excitement over Scotland leaving the Union and a United Ireland, people here in Wales are deciding they no longer want to be English serfs. When the mood changes, it will change quickly.
They're not "serfs", of course, but that makes not a jot of difference to anything. Multi-national federations always fail, primarily because the extent of the differences between the members and agitation around the edges eventually becomes unmanageable, but also because of resentment towards the central power. Austria Hungary, the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia... the UK has actually lasted an unusually long time, but it will founder. As will the European Union, in time.
The UK, to put it bluntly, consists of one medium sized country, and three small ones that despise absolutely everything about it except for its money. It's worthless. That's all there is to it.
We're running at over a thousand deaths per day and the twats are talking about easing lockdown. FFS.
Do they have any concept of how fucked we currently are?
At a guess, I'd say some of the opponents have a libertarian monomania around tearing down all the restrictions, others are worried merely that the Government will swing into overcautious territory and we'll all be locked down tighter and for longer than is actually necessary. Personally, I suspect that easing will be very tentative indeed and that substantial chunks of the economy (notably hotels, pubs and restaurants) will be kept firmly closed until the entire adult population has been lanced. This is probably the sort of thing that the latter group of opponents is afraid of as well: first jabs for all the young and fit might very well not be completed before August or September.
Because Captain Cautious keeps merrily voting with the Govt, or decisively abstaining, the only opposition to Govt is coming from the backbenches.
We cannot stay locked down for longer than the spring when at the same time lots of people will have acquired protection from vaccines.
Even if we continue to do well and get to the end of phase one at some point in April, the script for extreme caution has already been written. It is likely to include the following themes:
1. The vaccines are not 100% effective for the old and vulnerable, and Covid remains a threat to the young more generally as well. If we open too much up we still run the risk of overwhelming the hospitals 2. If there is widespread transmission of Covid amongst the young then the risk of a disastrous new variant emerging increases. It also leaves a lot more people potentially vulnerable to Long Covid, the evidence of the seriousness of which continues to increase 3. The NHS is knackered, the staff are exhausted and the routine treatment backlogs are enormous. We need to keep the pressure firmly off them, to allow them to recover and start to catch up
Conclusion: we've already been going through this for over a year now. An extra few months isn't going to make that much of a difference, and at the end of it everyone will have been jabbed and we can all be let out to play a lot more safely.
I reckon primary schools, gyms and hairdressers upon completion of phase one; shops about a month later, if there's no sign of a major disease spike; but pubs, restaurants and holidays are off until everyone's been lanced at least once, at a guess by the end of July or possibly a bit later.
There will be no hospitality sector to reopen without proper support. Which there isn't now.
Daughter has received £4000 since being closed again, for the third time. That's it. She cannot even sell alcohol on a takeaway basis, unlike before.
How is her business supposed to survive until May let alone July on that? It can't.
I am not arguing for early lifting of restrictions. I have 2 sons and a husband laid low with it.
I am arguing that there needs to be:-
1. A proper generous support package to the affected sectors to cover the next 6 months, to be renewed if the epidemic is not over by then. 2. Continuing focus on improving vaccination rates - the one thing the government is doing well on. 3. Clear communication about the need to comply with social distancing / hygiene etc even after vaccination until there is better evidence about vaccination's effect on transmission. 4. No travel abroad without vaccination. 5. No inbound travel without vaccination and effective quarantine in hotels, properly enforced at the border.
The Quebec precedent is often brought up - of support for independence ebbing away/collapsing following a second referendum defeat.
Does anyone have an explanation for why this happened? I can think of a few possibilities, but I have no knowledge.
Was there infighting in the independence movement?
Was the next generation of independence politicians relatively less impressive?
Was it simply a loss of confidence among supporters following two defeats?
We're there constitutional changes that satisfied some independence voters?
Economic changes?
The precedent is brought up so often that someone must have at least a good idea why it happened.
When they narrowly lost the 1995 referendum the leader of the pro-independence campaign famously declared "We won" which alienated many progressives and minorities.
Anecdata on why people refuse vaccinations (source: council colleagues): Primarily, they are confused by media messaging and it's really that which needs addressing with public information broadcasts. Commandeer the BBC for 10 minutes a day, throw money at Facebook and Twitter and Snapchat and YouTube, just get the message out, use diverse multi-ethnic multi-party messengers (here we really do need community leaders) and keep it honest.
1. Are there serious side-effects? (Virtually never.) 2. Might they get the bug anyway? (Yes, but much less likely, and stay sensibly distanced for now anyway.) 3. Is the 12(+?)-week gap scientifically based? (Not really, but it's still much better than nothing.) 4. Is vaccine X better than vaccine Y? (Yes, but they're all much better than nothing.) 5. Should we trust Boris Johnson? (Not relevant.)
On the upside, someone who runs a chain of care homes says that reports of resistance there seem overblown - in her homes, 99% are taking the jab with more or less enthusiasm.
Good post, an important point on 2 is not just that it is much less likely, but that if they do catch it the severe versions are extremely rare to the point of being non existent or close to in the trials.
TV and social media dream team to do the messaging:
HMQ Prince William David Attenborough Marcus Rashford Martin Lewis Helen Mirren Deborah Meeden Mo Farah Chris Whitty Ranvir Singh
i am sorry but FFS- If this is an idea worth doing you dont want woke establishment figures doing it (which they all are ) , you want oddbods . It is probably not your typical woke middle class social media rashford lovign person not wanting the jab . Try more like Clarkson , Hitchens (he maybe anti lockdown but pragmatic about the jab ) etc
That list would make you want to jump off a bridge, a bigger bunch of useless no-mark over privileged has beens would be hard to find. What kind of twisted mind would you need to have to think that lot would be relevant for anything other than filling sick buckets.
There might not be anyone on the backbenches willing to wield the knife in the middle of a national disaster. There certainly won't be the numbers required.
Letters have already been submitted because of the National disaster BoZo is presiding over
The mischievous part of me would be for Boris to form an alliance with Joe Biden around climate change, international vaccinations, NATO, and against China to the point that he actually sails past the 2024 GE in charge of all he surveys and on and on, just to see how long you keep going on about him or is this a lifelong crusade
You are "on a journey" as they say on the reality TV shows. Start point: Boris not fit to be PM, should go asap. Ultimate destination: Boris best PM ever and long may he reign! State of completion: 72%.
Anecdata on why people refuse vaccinations (source: council colleagues): Primarily, they are confused by media messaging and it's really that which needs addressing with public information broadcasts. Commandeer the BBC for 10 minutes a day, throw money at Facebook and Twitter and Snapchat and YouTube, just get the message out, use diverse multi-ethnic multi-party messengers (here we really do need community leaders) and keep it honest.
1. Are there serious side-effects? (Virtually never.) 2. Might they get the bug anyway? (Yes, but much less likely, and stay sensibly distanced for now anyway.) 3. Is the 12(+?)-week gap scientifically based? (Not really, but it's still much better than nothing.) 4. Is vaccine X better than vaccine Y? (Yes, but they're all much better than nothing.) 5. Should we trust Boris Johnson? (Not relevant.)
On the upside, someone who runs a chain of care homes says that reports of resistance there seem overblown - in her homes, 99% are taking the jab with more or less enthusiasm.
Good post, an important point on 2 is not just that it is much less likely, but that if they do catch it the severe versions are extremely rare to the point of being non existent or close to in the trials.
TV and social media dream team to do the messaging:
HMQ Prince William David Attenborough Marcus Rashford Martin Lewis Helen Mirren Deborah Meeden Mo Farah Chris Whitty Ranvir Singh
i am sorry but FFS- If this is an idea worth doing you dont want woke establishment figures doing it (which they all are ) , you want oddbods . It is probably not your typical woke middle class social media rashford lovign person not wanting the jab . Try more like Clarkson , Hitchens (he maybe anti lockdown but pragmatic about the jab ) etc
HMQ is woke nowadays apparently. Still learning something new everyday.
Shadow foreign secretary Lisa Nandy said Labour had been "pushing the government to take tougher measures at the border since last spring".
Bullshit.....even a few weeks ago, Brittas when asked to give an example.of tougher restrictions didn't say close the borders, he said close the zoos.
Brittas? That's hilarious...not.
Well, it's as hilarious as Bozo and The Clown.
I think Sir Abstain slot and Captain Hindsight are far more impressive from a comedic point of view. Of course you are right about Bozo the Clown, Johnson is beyond parody.
What most struck me about the Sunday Times piece is that only 50% of Scots want a referendum in the next 5 years and that support for independence was only 52-48. These are not the sort of figures to inspire confidence that Scotland will go down the independence route.
Ireland will be united sooner or later. It was the inevitable consequence of planting a border in the Irish sea, though in truth it has been headed that way for some time. Alastair's quite wrong to pin this on the DUP. The ethnic outlook of N Ireland has been changing and support for the union receding.
Good morning everybody. I seem to recall that, in other circumstances, 52-48 was held to be enough for some pretty significant changes.
The point that @Mysticrose was making is, of course, that it doesn't exactly look like a done deal. Using round numbers, if we assume an 85% turnout in the next independence referendum then 2% of participating voters equals about 75,000 people. If 52:48 is in any way an accurate reflection of sentiment and a net 75,000 pro-independence electors can be convinced to switch horses during the campaign then that narrow majority is erased.
It's why there was some suggestion in the past of attaining a consistent 60:40 gap before pressing for an actual vote, so as to avoid the prospect of a narrow defeat at the ballot box. The 1995 Quebec referendum was lost by a wafer thin majority and twenty-five years later there's no prospect of a third tilt on the horizon. Though that said, I think that Scotland's a different case and if there is a second defeat the campaign for a third vote begins the following morning. Stability cannot be achieved within the existing settlement, which is one more good reason for wanting to see the back of the Union.
In 1995 Yes to independence from Canada got 49% in Quebec but 26 years later there has been no indyref3.
Devomax for Quebec resolved the matter as would devomax for Scotland
Because throwing them more powers has always worked for Unionists before.
And Devomax does nothing at all to address the dreaded West Lothian Question. Au contraire: the issue of the 59 Scottish squatters in the House of Commons only becomes more acute.
Again, there is no problem in the constitutional mess that is the United Kingdom that is not resolved by getting rid of the United Kingdom.
Devomax for Holyrood plus an English Parliament would be my preferred option, though I would accept regional Assemblies within England.
Most large nations in the world now are Federal and we should become more Federal too
I suspect that England is simply too big to work well as a devolved unit alongside the other nations.
I also suspect that part of the trouble is that word "regions"- it sounds beige, bureaucratic and British Rail knocking down Euston Arch. Ugh.
We need a better name for them.
If Starmer becomes PM in 2024 expect Lord Gordon Brown to be appointed Grand High Minister for the Union and indeed to give Scotland devomax and break England up into regions and regional assemblies, or provinces if you prefer.
England in effect at the moment only exists on the rugby and football pitch (even the cricket team is actually England and Wales), otherwise it is a non existent merely ceremonial nation so it would not make that much difference
Cricket won't be a problem. The West Indies operate as a collective. You are scraping the bottom of the barrel using national sporting teams as justification for the continuation of the Union.
The Union is over. Scotland has already packed it's bags. A United Ireland will follow on shortly, by which time the demand for an independent Wales will peak over 50% shortly thereafter. You can quote me figures that Wales voted Brexit, but the demand will be one of "if they are having some of that I want some too", and the argument will again be over sovereignty rather than economics.
Boris unleashing the monster that is "sovereignty" might work against his planned legacy.
Just 49% of Scots backing independence including undecideds, only 42% of Northern Irish voters backing a United Ireland and a mere 23% of Welsh voters backing independence, little different to the 15% of English voters who currently want independence on today's ST poll does not suggest that.
Indeed the UK is more likely to rejoin the EU than Wales is to ever be independent
You should look at longer-term direction of travel, rather than the current headline figure.
Prior to all the excitement over Scotland leaving the Union and a United Ireland, people here in Wales are deciding they no longer want to be English serfs. When the mood changes, it will change quickly.
They're not "serfs", of course, but that makes not a jot of difference to anything. Multi-national federations always fail, primarily because the extent of the differences between the members and agitation around the edges eventually becomes unmanageable, but also because of resentment towards the central power. Austria Hungary, the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia... the UK has actually lasted an unusually long time, but it will founder. As will the European Union, in time.
The UK, to put it bluntly, consists of one medium sized country, and three small ones that despise absolutely everything about it except for its money. It's worthless. That's all there is to it.
There’s a lot of truth in this. Ultimately - what’s the worse case scenario for the end of the UK? Yes, we lose world influence (which we don’t really have now - or won’t in a globalised world)
England still has a lot to give, albeit perhaps as a medium power as described. Other UK countries can determine their own affairs. The best position is independent countries in the British isles cooperating peacefully.
Anecdata on why people refuse vaccinations (source: council colleagues): Primarily, they are confused by media messaging and it's really that which needs addressing with public information broadcasts. Commandeer the BBC for 10 minutes a day, throw money at Facebook and Twitter and Snapchat and YouTube, just get the message out, use diverse multi-ethnic multi-party messengers (here we really do need community leaders) and keep it honest.
1. Are there serious side-effects? (Virtually never.) 2. Might they get the bug anyway? (Yes, but much less likely, and stay sensibly distanced for now anyway.) 3. Is the 12(+?)-week gap scientifically based? (Not really, but it's still much better than nothing.) 4. Is vaccine X better than vaccine Y? (Yes, but they're all much better than nothing.) 5. Should we trust Boris Johnson? (Not relevant.)
On the upside, someone who runs a chain of care homes says that reports of resistance there seem overblown - in her homes, 99% are taking the jab with more or less enthusiasm.
Good post, an important point on 2 is not just that it is much less likely, but that if they do catch it the severe versions are extremely rare to the point of being non existent or close to in the trials.
TV and social media dream team to do the messaging:
HMQ Prince William David Attenborough Marcus Rashford Martin Lewis Helen Mirren Deborah Meeden Mo Farah Chris Whitty Ranvir Singh
good list, plus people who sensible people dislike but who influence someone - George Galloway, Melanie Phillips, Nigel Farage, Anjem Choudhary... - just give the impression that EVERYONE is saying the same thing.
What most struck me about the Sunday Times piece is that only 50% of Scots want a referendum in the next 5 years and that support for independence was only 52-48. These are not the sort of figures to inspire confidence that Scotland will go down the independence route.
Ireland will be united sooner or later. It was the inevitable consequence of planting a border in the Irish sea, though in truth it has been headed that way for some time. Alastair's quite wrong to pin this on the DUP. The ethnic outlook of N Ireland has been changing and support for the union receding.
Good morning everybody. I seem to recall that, in other circumstances, 52-48 was held to be enough for some pretty significant changes.
The point that @Mysticrose was making is, of course, that it doesn't exactly look like a done deal. Using round numbers, if we assume an 85% turnout in the next independence referendum then 2% of participating voters equals about 75,000 people. If 52:48 is in any way an accurate reflection of sentiment and a net 75,000 pro-independence electors can be convinced to switch horses during the campaign then that narrow majority is erased.
It's why there was some suggestion in the past of attaining a consistent 60:40 gap before pressing for an actual vote, so as to avoid the prospect of a narrow defeat at the ballot box. The 1995 Quebec referendum was lost by a wafer thin majority and twenty-five years later there's no prospect of a third tilt on the horizon. Though that said, I think that Scotland's a different case and if there is a second defeat the campaign for a third vote begins the following morning. Stability cannot be achieved within the existing settlement, which is one more good reason for wanting to see the back of the Union.
In 1995 Yes to independence from Canada got 49% in Quebec but 26 years later there has been no indyref3.
Devomax for Quebec resolved the matter as would devomax for Scotland
Because throwing them more powers has always worked for Unionists before.
And Devomax does nothing at all to address the dreaded West Lothian Question. Au contraire: the issue of the 59 Scottish squatters in the House of Commons only becomes more acute.
Again, there is no problem in the constitutional mess that is the United Kingdom that is not resolved by getting rid of the United Kingdom.
Devomax for Holyrood plus an English Parliament would be my preferred option, though I would accept regional Assemblies within England.
Most large nations in the world now are Federal and we should become more Federal too
I suspect that England is simply too big to work well as a devolved unit alongside the other nations.
I also suspect that part of the trouble is that word "regions"- it sounds beige, bureaucratic and British Rail knocking down Euston Arch. Ugh.
We need a better name for them.
If Starmer becomes PM in 2024 expect Lord Gordon Brown to be appointed Grand High Minister for the Union and indeed to give Scotland devomax and break England up into regions and regional assemblies, or provinces if you prefer.
England in effect at the moment only exists on the rugby and football pitch (even the cricket team is actually England and Wales), otherwise it is a non existent merely ceremonial nation so it would not make that much difference
Cricket won't be a problem. The West Indies operate as a collective. You are scraping the bottom of the barrel using national sporting teams as justification for the continuation of the Union.
The Union is over. Scotland has already packed it's bags. A United Ireland will follow on shortly, by which time the demand for an independent Wales will peak over 50% shortly thereafter. You can quote me figures that Wales voted Brexit, but the demand will be one of "if they are having some of that I want some too", and the argument will again be over sovereignty rather than economics.
Boris unleashing the monster that is "sovereignty" might work against his planned legacy.
Just 49% of Scots backing independence including undecideds, only 42% of Northern Irish voters backing a United Ireland and a mere 23% of Welsh voters backing independence, little different to the 15% of English voters who currently want independence on today's ST poll does not suggest that.
Indeed the UK is more likely to rejoin the EU than Wales is to ever be independent
At least Scotland and Northern Ireland are viewed as problems which is better than the contemptuous disregard the Welsh seem to get.
The contemptuous disregard we Welsh voters receive comes from only one source, and that is Drakeford in charge of his failing labour Assembly
Which the Welsh voted for. They voted for Drakesford too.
We're running at over a thousand deaths per day and the twats are talking about easing lockdown. FFS.
Do they have any concept of how fucked we currently are?
At a guess, I'd say some of the opponents have a libertarian monomania around tearing down all the restrictions, others are worried merely that the Government will swing into overcautious territory and we'll all be locked down tighter and for longer than is actually necessary. Personally, I suspect that easing will be very tentative indeed and that substantial chunks of the economy (notably hotels, pubs and restaurants) will be kept firmly closed until the entire adult population has been lanced. This is probably the sort of thing that the latter group of opponents is afraid of as well: first jabs for all the young and fit might very well not be completed before August or September.
Because Captain Cautious keeps merrily voting with the Govt, or decisively abstaining, the only opposition to Govt is coming from the backbenches.
We cannot stay locked down for longer than the spring when at the same time lots of people will have acquired protection from vaccines.
Even if we continue to do well and get to the end of phase one at some point in April, the script for extreme caution has already been written. It is likely to include the following themes:
1. The vaccines are not 100% effective for the old and vulnerable, and Covid remains a threat to the young more generally as well. If we open too much up we still run the risk of overwhelming the hospitals 2. If there is widespread transmission of Covid amongst the young then the risk of a disastrous new variant emerging increases. It also leaves a lot more people potentially vulnerable to Long Covid, the evidence of the seriousness of which continues to increase 3. The NHS is knackered, the staff are exhausted and the routine treatment backlogs are enormous. We need to keep the pressure firmly off them, to allow them to recover and start to catch up
Conclusion: we've already been going through this for over a year now. An extra few months isn't going to make that much of a difference, and at the end of it everyone will have been jabbed and we can all be let out to play a lot more safely.
I reckon primary schools, gyms and hairdressers upon completion of phase one; shops about a month later, if there's no sign of a major disease spike; but pubs, restaurants and holidays are off until everyone's been lanced at least once, at a guess by the end of July or possibly a bit later.
There will be no hospitality sector to reopen without proper support. Which there isn't now.
Daughter has received £4000 since being closed again, for the third time. That's it. She cannot even sell alcohol on a takeaway basis, unlike before.
How is her business supposed to survive until May let alone July on that? It can't.
I am not arguing for early lifting of restrictions. I have 2 sons and a husband laid low with it.
I am arguing that there needs to be:-
1. A proper generous support package to the affected sectors to cover the next 6 months, to be renewed if the epidemic is not over by then. 2. Continuing focus on improving vaccination rates - the one thing the government is doing well on. 3. Clear communication about the need to comply with social distancing / hygiene etc even after vaccination until there is better evidence about vaccination's effect on transmission. 4. No travel abroad without vaccination. 5. No inbound travel without vaccination and effective quarantine in hotels, properly enforced at the border.
The removal of takeaway alcohol sales has lead to three places near me shutting fully whereas before they were doing takeaway food as well.
It strikes me as one of the more perverse decisions made.
The Quebec precedent is often brought up - of support for independence ebbing away/collapsing following a second referendum defeat.
Does anyone have an explanation for why this happened? I can think of a few possibilities, but I have no knowledge.
Was there infighting in the independence movement?
Was the next generation of independence politicians relatively less impressive?
Was it simply a loss of confidence among supporters following two defeats?
We're there constitutional changes that satisfied some independence voters?
Economic changes?
The precedent is brought up so often that someone must have at least a good idea why it happened.
In any case the Canadian situation is truly a federal one, so not a useful comparison for the UK esp. under Mr Johnson.
We could become truly federal.
Indeed. In fact thje UK has gone in the other direction. As someone pointed out on PB a factor must be that sometimes the Canadian Premiers are Quebecois. The equivalent, of having a PM who is a MP for a Scottish seat, is now pretty much impossible under Mr Cameron's EVEL.
Anecdata on why people refuse vaccinations (source: council colleagues): Primarily, they are confused by media messaging and it's really that which needs addressing with public information broadcasts. Commandeer the BBC for 10 minutes a day, throw money at Facebook and Twitter and Snapchat and YouTube, just get the message out, use diverse multi-ethnic multi-party messengers (here we really do need community leaders) and keep it honest.
1. Are there serious side-effects? (Virtually never.) 2. Might they get the bug anyway? (Yes, but much less likely, and stay sensibly distanced for now anyway.) 3. Is the 12(+?)-week gap scientifically based? (Not really, but it's still much better than nothing.) 4. Is vaccine X better than vaccine Y? (Yes, but they're all much better than nothing.) 5. Should we trust Boris Johnson? (Not relevant.)
On the upside, someone who runs a chain of care homes says that reports of resistance there seem overblown - in her homes, 99% are taking the jab with more or less enthusiasm.
Marcus Rashford could have taken the vaccine in front of the cameras with maximum publicity for example.
The Quebec precedent is often brought up - of support for independence ebbing away/collapsing following a second referendum defeat.
Does anyone have an explanation for why this happened? I can think of a few possibilities, but I have no knowledge.
Was there infighting in the independence movement?
Was the next generation of independence politicians relatively less impressive?
Was it simply a loss of confidence among supporters following two defeats?
We're there constitutional changes that satisfied some independence voters?
Economic changes?
The precedent is brought up so often that someone must have at least a good idea why it happened.
In any case the Canadian situation is truly a federal one, so not a useful comparison for the UK esp. under Mr Johnson.
We could become truly federal.
No we could not, Westminster will never ever cede any powers that cede one iota of control. They retain all powers that are of any purpose and will fight tooth and nail to keep them. They have no intention of ever allowing devolution to work properly.
The bottom line is that arguments for Brexit are the same for Scottish Independence, you can’t logically believe in one and reject the other. But unfortunately logic plays no role in C21 politics, it’s all emotional nationalist bullshit so we end up with right wing and nationalist parties passionately arguing contradictory points depending on what day of the week it is.
My biggest contempt is for my own party. The coherent argument of the left that we’re all better off forming unions and collaborating seems to be expressed in the most dull, boring and apologetic terms. Frustrating.
Well, I think David L is quite logical in believing in one, and rejecting the other.
As other posters have commented, the economic arguments don't really drive many votes one way or the other. It's about identity. There's nothing illogical about feeling an attachment to the United Kingdom, but no attachment to the European Union.
Identity in that sense is the old fashioned nationalist argument used by tyrants and fascists through the ages. It has nothing in common with any argument I've heard David L use.
Anecdata on why people refuse vaccinations (source: council colleagues): Primarily, they are confused by media messaging and it's really that which needs addressing with public information broadcasts. Commandeer the BBC for 10 minutes a day, throw money at Facebook and Twitter and Snapchat and YouTube, just get the message out, use diverse multi-ethnic multi-party messengers (here we really do need community leaders) and keep it honest.
1. Are there serious side-effects? (Virtually never.) 2. Might they get the bug anyway? (Yes, but much less likely, and stay sensibly distanced for now anyway.) 3. Is the 12(+?)-week gap scientifically based? (Not really, but it's still much better than nothing.) 4. Is vaccine X better than vaccine Y? (Yes, but they're all much better than nothing.) 5. Should we trust Boris Johnson? (Not relevant.)
On the upside, someone who runs a chain of care homes says that reports of resistance there seem overblown - in her homes, 99% are taking the jab with more or less enthusiasm.
Marcus Rashford could have taken the vaccine in front of the cameras with maximum publicity for example.
Cue much teeth gnashing about young fit person jumping the queue.
Andrew RT Davies unanimously elected leader of the Welsh Tories in the Senedd after Paul Davies' resignation.
RT is a firm Unionist and will have no time for any deals with Plaid and is ideally placed to win back votes for the Tories lost to Abolish the Assembly
RT is an idiot of Paul Davies proportions. Infact, Paul was something of a wallflower that nobody noticed. RT is very noticeable, and not popular outside the confines of the wilder fringes of Welsh Conservativism.
Good news for Labour and PC.
RT is a hard hitter and firm Unionist and Brexiteer, he will unite the Welsh right behind the Tories and give Drakeford no respite.
It is bad news for Labour and also ensures no deals of any form between Plaid and the Tories after the election, RT will have no truck with that.
I do not share your view about RT and you show your credentials with the reference to the Welsh right whoever they are
Drakeford will be responsible for Drakeford doing poorly in May, not RT Davies
Andrew RT Davies unanimously elected leader of the Welsh Tories in the Senedd again after Paul Davies' resignation.
RT is a firm Unionist and will have no time for any deals with Plaid and is ideally placed to win back votes for the Tories lost to Abolish the Assembly and to take the fight to Welsh Labour over their failures on vaccinations etc.
So the choice in May for Wales is between the polite but inept Drakeford, RT Davies - the man who equivocated the Capitol riot with peaceful anti-Brexit demonstrations; or Price who sees himself as a mini Nicola in that he would spend zero time governing Wales and would bang on about independence 24/7.
In fairness, it wwas Ruth Davidson, not Ms Sturgeon, who kept on going on and on and on and on about No to Independence. But that is an interesting point in itself. Maybe Mr Davies will take a leaf out of her book and do the same thing, and rebrand the Welsh Torties as the RT Davies No to Independence Party.
No need here in Wales, independence is not on the agenda
Anecdata on why people refuse vaccinations (source: council colleagues): Primarily, they are confused by media messaging and it's really that which needs addressing with public information broadcasts. Commandeer the BBC for 10 minutes a day, throw money at Facebook and Twitter and Snapchat and YouTube, just get the message out, use diverse multi-ethnic multi-party messengers (here we really do need community leaders) and keep it honest.
1. Are there serious side-effects? (Virtually never.) 2. Might they get the bug anyway? (Yes, but much less likely, and stay sensibly distanced for now anyway.) 3. Is the 12(+?)-week gap scientifically based? (Not really, but it's still much better than nothing.) 4. Is vaccine X better than vaccine Y? (Yes, but they're all much better than nothing.) 5. Should we trust Boris Johnson? (Not relevant.)
On the upside, someone who runs a chain of care homes says that reports of resistance there seem overblown - in her homes, 99% are taking the jab with more or less enthusiasm.
Good post, an important point on 2 is not just that it is much less likely, but that if they do catch it the severe versions are extremely rare to the point of being non existent or close to in the trials.
TV and social media dream team to do the messaging:
HMQ Prince William David Attenborough Marcus Rashford Martin Lewis Helen Mirren Deborah Meeden Mo Farah Chris Whitty Ranvir Singh
good list, plus people who sensible people dislike but who influence someone - George Galloway, Melanie Phillips, Nigel Farage, Anjem Choudhary... - just give the impression that EVERYONE is saying the same thing.
Andrew RT Davies unanimously elected leader of the Welsh Tories in the Senedd after Paul Davies' resignation.
RT is a firm Unionist and will have no time for any deals with Plaid and is ideally placed to win back votes for the Tories lost to Abolish the Assembly
RT is an idiot of Paul Davies proportions. Infact, Paul was something of a wallflower that nobody noticed. RT is very noticeable, and not popular outside the confines of the wilder fringes of Welsh Conservativism.
Good news for Labour and PC.
RT is a hard hitter and firm Unionist and Brexiteer, he will unite the Welsh right behind the Tories and give Drakeford no respite.
It is bad news for Labour and also ensures no deals of any form between Plaid and the Tories after the election, RT will have no truck with that.
I do not share your view about RT and you show your credentials with the reference to the Welsh right whoever they are
Drakeford will be responsible for Drakeford doing poorly in May, not RT Davies
Though 26% of Welsh voters now want to scrap the Senedd, more than want Welsh independence.
RT is probably better placed to tap into that market than Paul Davies and win back votes from Abolish at least on the constituency vote. Remember 21% of Welsh voters voted Tory in 2016 and 13% voted UKIP so RT should increase the Tory voteshare and gain seats in May.
The Quebec precedent is often brought up - of support for independence ebbing away/collapsing following a second referendum defeat.
Does anyone have an explanation for why this happened? I can think of a few possibilities, but I have no knowledge.
Was there infighting in the independence movement?
Was the next generation of independence politicians relatively less impressive?
Was it simply a loss of confidence among supporters following two defeats?
We're there constitutional changes that satisfied some independence voters?
Economic changes?
The precedent is brought up so often that someone must have at least a good idea why it happened.
In any case the Canadian situation is truly a federal one, so not a useful comparison for the UK esp. under Mr Johnson.
We could become truly federal.
No we could not, Westminster will never ever cede any powers that cede one iota of control. They retain all powers that are of any purpose and will fight tooth and nail to keep them. They have no intention of ever allowing devolution to work properly.
The Quebec precedent is often brought up - of support for independence ebbing away/collapsing following a second referendum defeat.
Does anyone have an explanation for why this happened? I can think of a few possibilities, but I have no knowledge.
Was there infighting in the independence movement?
Was the next generation of independence politicians relatively less impressive?
Was it simply a loss of confidence among supporters following two defeats?
We're there constitutional changes that satisfied some independence voters?
Economic changes?
The precedent is brought up so often that someone must have at least a good idea why it happened.
In any case the Canadian situation is truly a federal one, so not a useful comparison for the UK esp. under Mr Johnson.
We could become truly federal.
No we could not, Westminster will never ever cede any powers that cede one iota of control. They retain all powers that are of any purpose and will fight tooth and nail to keep them. They have no intention of ever allowing devolution to work properly.
We're running at over a thousand deaths per day and the twats are talking about easing lockdown. FFS.
Do they have any concept of how fucked we currently are?
At a guess, I'd say some of the opponents have a libertarian monomania around tearing down all the restrictions, others are worried merely that the Government will swing into overcautious territory and we'll all be locked down tighter and for longer than is actually necessary. Personally, I suspect that easing will be very tentative indeed and that substantial chunks of the economy (notably hotels, pubs and restaurants) will be kept firmly closed until the entire adult population has been lanced. This is probably the sort of thing that the latter group of opponents is afraid of as well: first jabs for all the young and fit might very well not be completed before August or September.
Because Captain Cautious keeps merrily voting with the Govt, or decisively abstaining, the only opposition to Govt is coming from the backbenches.
We cannot stay locked down for longer than the spring when at the same time lots of people will have acquired protection from vaccines.
Even if we continue to do well and get to the end of phase one at some point in April, the script for extreme caution has already been written. It is likely to include the following themes:
1. The vaccines are not 100% effective for the old and vulnerable, and Covid remains a threat to the young more generally as well. If we open too much up we still run the risk of overwhelming the hospitals 2. If there is widespread transmission of Covid amongst the young then the risk of a disastrous new variant emerging increases. It also leaves a lot more people potentially vulnerable to Long Covid, the evidence of the seriousness of which continues to increase 3. The NHS is knackered, the staff are exhausted and the routine treatment backlogs are enormous. We need to keep the pressure firmly off them, to allow them to recover and start to catch up
Conclusion: we've already been going through this for over a year now. An extra few months isn't going to make that much of a difference, and at the end of it everyone will have been jabbed and we can all be let out to play a lot more safely.
I reckon primary schools, gyms and hairdressers upon completion of phase one; shops about a month later, if there's no sign of a major disease spike; but pubs, restaurants and holidays are off until everyone's been lanced at least once, at a guess by the end of July or possibly a bit later.
There will be no hospitality sector to reopen without proper support. Which there isn't now.
Daughter has received £4000 since being closed again, for the third time. That's it. She cannot even sell alcohol on a takeaway basis, unlike before.
How is her business supposed to survive until May let alone July on that? It can't.
I am not arguing for early lifting of restrictions. I have 2 sons and a husband laid low with it.
I am arguing that there needs to be:-
1. A proper generous support package to the affected sectors to cover the next 6 months, to be renewed if the epidemic is not over by then. 2. Continuing focus on improving vaccination rates - the one thing the government is doing well on. 3. Clear communication about the need to comply with social distancing / hygiene etc even after vaccination until there is better evidence about vaccination's effect on transmission. 4. No travel abroad without vaccination. 5. No inbound travel without vaccination and effective quarantine in hotels, properly enforced at the border.
Sorry to hear that the illness has visited your family. We've dodged the bullets so far but this remains a constant source of anxiety in my life. As for your suggestions, and based on past experience...
1. Not happening. Probably. The Government has prioritised whacking hospitality to suppress the disease for most of the pandemic, there have been no serious initiatives to help it since EOTHO last Summer, and you just know that the scientists will do their pieces at the first hint of reopening. And restaurants have neither the extent of public sympathy nor a popular Rashfordesque figurehead to baseball bat the Treasury into submission on their behalf 2. Looks like we can at least rely on this if there are no disastrous setbacks 3. Clear communication from this lot? We'll get a display of humility and sensitivity from Donald Trump before that happens 4. and 5. I'm cautiously optimistic that the Government will at least budge on the borders, but again (a) they've not done so yet, and the flow of vast numbers of people into the country continues unchecked for now, and (b) they have previous for being inexplicably mad keen on getting folk to go on sunshine holidays, so it's not in the bag
I've enormous sympathy for the owners of many, many viable businesses that are at threat of going under because of the restrictions, but which the Government appears to have lumped in with failing retail chains as part of the inevitable Schumpeterian cycle of creative economic destruction. I strongly suspect that they've had enough of spraying around money, concluded that big chains like JD Wetherspoon and Greene King, and smaller concerns with deep pockets or generous bankers, can get through without any further help, and that consequently they're going to abandon the others to sink or swim on their own.
But maybe I'm being excessively pessimistic and cynical? We'll know more when the Budget comes around.
We're running at over a thousand deaths per day and the twats are talking about easing lockdown. FFS.
Do they have any concept of how fucked we currently are?
At a guess, I'd say some of the opponents have a libertarian monomania around tearing down all the restrictions, others are worried merely that the Government will swing into overcautious territory and we'll all be locked down tighter and for longer than is actually necessary. Personally, I suspect that easing will be very tentative indeed and that substantial chunks of the economy (notably hotels, pubs and restaurants) will be kept firmly closed until the entire adult population has been lanced. This is probably the sort of thing that the latter group of opponents is afraid of as well: first jabs for all the young and fit might very well not be completed before August or September.
Because Captain Cautious keeps merrily voting with the Govt, or decisively abstaining, the only opposition to Govt is coming from the backbenches.
We cannot stay locked down for longer than the spring when at the same time lots of people will have acquired protection from vaccines.
Even if we continue to do well and get to the end of phase one at some point in April, the script for extreme caution has already been written. It is likely to include the following themes:
1. The vaccines are not 100% effective for the old and vulnerable, and Covid remains a threat to the young more generally as well. If we open too much up we still run the risk of overwhelming the hospitals 2. If there is widespread transmission of Covid amongst the young then the risk of a disastrous new variant emerging increases. It also leaves a lot more people potentially vulnerable to Long Covid, the evidence of the seriousness of which continues to increase 3. The NHS is knackered, the staff are exhausted and the routine treatment backlogs are enormous. We need to keep the pressure firmly off them, to allow them to recover and start to catch up
Conclusion: we've already been going through this for over a year now. An extra few months isn't going to make that much of a difference, and at the end of it everyone will have been jabbed and we can all be let out to play a lot more safely.
I reckon primary schools, gyms and hairdressers upon completion of phase one; shops about a month later, if there's no sign of a major disease spike; but pubs, restaurants and holidays are off until everyone's been lanced at least once, at a guess by the end of July or possibly a bit later.
There will be no hospitality sector to reopen without proper support. Which there isn't now.
Daughter has received £4000 since being closed again, for the third time. That's it. She cannot even sell alcohol on a takeaway basis, unlike before.
How is her business supposed to survive until May let alone July on that? It can't.
I am not arguing for early lifting of restrictions. I have 2 sons and a husband laid low with it.
I am arguing that there needs to be:-
1. A proper generous support package to the affected sectors to cover the next 6 months, to be renewed if the epidemic is not over by then. 2. Continuing focus on improving vaccination rates - the one thing the government is doing well on. 3. Clear communication about the need to comply with social distancing / hygiene etc even after vaccination until there is better evidence about vaccination's effect on transmission. 4. No travel abroad without vaccination. 5. No inbound travel without vaccination and effective quarantine in hotels, properly enforced at the border.
The removal of takeaway alcohol sales has lead to three places near me shutting fully whereas before they were doing takeaway food as well.
It strikes me as one of the more perverse decisions made.
Unfortunately in many cases people weren't taking away, they were taking the piss.
The Quebec precedent is often brought up - of support for independence ebbing away/collapsing following a second referendum defeat.
Does anyone have an explanation for why this happened? I can think of a few possibilities, but I have no knowledge.
Was there infighting in the independence movement?
Was the next generation of independence politicians relatively less impressive?
Was it simply a loss of confidence among supporters following two defeats?
We're there constitutional changes that satisfied some independence voters?
Economic changes?
The precedent is brought up so often that someone must have at least a good idea why it happened.
In any case the Canadian situation is truly a federal one, so not a useful comparison for the UK esp. under Mr Johnson.
We could become truly federal.
No we could not, Westminster will never ever cede any powers that cede one iota of control. They retain all powers that are of any purpose and will fight tooth and nail to keep them. They have no intention of ever allowing devolution to work properly.
They already did it Malc...
Matt, control of road signs and a few other piddling things that they cannot influence as they get fixed pocket money is not proper devolution.
We're running at over a thousand deaths per day and the twats are talking about easing lockdown. FFS.
Do they have any concept of how fucked we currently are?
At a guess, I'd say some of the opponents have a libertarian monomania around tearing down all the restrictions, others are worried merely that the Government will swing into overcautious territory and we'll all be locked down tighter and for longer than is actually necessary. Personally, I suspect that easing will be very tentative indeed and that substantial chunks of the economy (notably hotels, pubs and restaurants) will be kept firmly closed until the entire adult population has been lanced. This is probably the sort of thing that the latter group of opponents is afraid of as well: first jabs for all the young and fit might very well not be completed before August or September.
Because Captain Cautious keeps merrily voting with the Govt, or decisively abstaining, the only opposition to Govt is coming from the backbenches.
We cannot stay locked down for longer than the spring when at the same time lots of people will have acquired protection from vaccines.
Even if we continue to do well and get to the end of phase one at some point in April, the script for extreme caution has already been written. It is likely to include the following themes:
1. The vaccines are not 100% effective for the old and vulnerable, and Covid remains a threat to the young more generally as well. If we open too much up we still run the risk of overwhelming the hospitals 2. If there is widespread transmission of Covid amongst the young then the risk of a disastrous new variant emerging increases. It also leaves a lot more people potentially vulnerable to Long Covid, the evidence of the seriousness of which continues to increase 3. The NHS is knackered, the staff are exhausted and the routine treatment backlogs are enormous. We need to keep the pressure firmly off them, to allow them to recover and start to catch up
Conclusion: we've already been going through this for over a year now. An extra few months isn't going to make that much of a difference, and at the end of it everyone will have been jabbed and we can all be let out to play a lot more safely.
I reckon primary schools, gyms and hairdressers upon completion of phase one; shops about a month later, if there's no sign of a major disease spike; but pubs, restaurants and holidays are off until everyone's been lanced at least once, at a guess by the end of July or possibly a bit later.
There will be no hospitality sector to reopen without proper support. Which there isn't now.
Daughter has received £4000 since being closed again, for the third time. That's it. She cannot even sell alcohol on a takeaway basis, unlike before.
How is her business supposed to survive until May let alone July on that? It can't.
I am not arguing for early lifting of restrictions. I have 2 sons and a husband laid low with it.
I am arguing that there needs to be:-
1. A proper generous support package to the affected sectors to cover the next 6 months, to be renewed if the epidemic is not over by then. 2. Continuing focus on improving vaccination rates - the one thing the government is doing well on. 3. Clear communication about the need to comply with social distancing / hygiene etc even after vaccination until there is better evidence about vaccination's effect on transmission. 4. No travel abroad without vaccination. 5. No inbound travel without vaccination and effective quarantine in hotels, properly enforced at the border.
The removal of takeaway alcohol sales has lead to three places near me shutting fully whereas before they were doing takeaway food as well.
It strikes me as one of the more perverse decisions made.
Unfortunately in many cases people weren't taking away, they were taking the piss.
In fact it was much more nuanced than that. The viewer was cleverly led to appreciate the positive virtues of the Federation, such as efficiency, decisiveness and a brand of conviction politics..
There might not be anyone on the backbenches willing to wield the knife in the middle of a national disaster. There certainly won't be the numbers required.
Letters have already been submitted because of the National disaster BoZo is presiding over
The mischievous part of me would be for Boris to form an alliance with Joe Biden around climate change, international vaccinations, NATO, and against China to the point that he actually sails past the 2024 GE in charge of all he surveys and on and on, just to see how long you keep going on about him or is this a lifelong crusade
You are "on a journey" as they say on the reality TV shows. Start point: Boris not fit to be PM, should go asap. Ultimate destination: Boris best PM ever and long may he reign! State of completion: 72%.
No I am not to be fair
Just being a bit naughty in winding up Scott
I am quite content for Boris to leave the stage, but in truth I do not see it happening this year with June G7 (10 with Australia, India and South Korea invited to attend by Boris) and certainly not before the November climate change conference in Glasgow
The Quebec precedent is often brought up - of support for independence ebbing away/collapsing following a second referendum defeat.
Does anyone have an explanation for why this happened? I can think of a few possibilities, but I have no knowledge.
Was there infighting in the independence movement?
Was the next generation of independence politicians relatively less impressive?
Was it simply a loss of confidence among supporters following two defeats?
We're there constitutional changes that satisfied some independence voters?
Economic changes?
The precedent is brought up so often that someone must have at least a good idea why it happened.
In any case the Canadian situation is truly a federal one, so not a useful comparison for the UK esp. under Mr Johnson.
We could become truly federal.
Indeed. In fact thje UK has gone in the other direction. As someone pointed out on PB a factor must be that sometimes the Canadian Premiers are Quebecois. The equivalent, of having a PM who is a MP for a Scottish seat, is now pretty much impossible under Mr Cameron's EVEL.
No it isn't, a Quebecois Canadian PM does not get to decide legislation determined by the Ontario government or the Alberta government. We just need an English Parliament or regional assemblies
Andrew RT Davies unanimously elected leader of the Welsh Tories in the Senedd again after Paul Davies' resignation.
RT is a firm Unionist and will have no time for any deals with Plaid and is ideally placed to win back votes for the Tories lost to Abolish the Assembly and to take the fight to Welsh Labour over their failures on vaccinations etc.
So the choice in May for Wales is between the polite but inept Drakeford, RT Davies - the man who equivocated the Capitol riot with peaceful anti-Brexit demonstrations; or Price who sees himself as a mini Nicola in that he would spend zero time governing Wales and would bang on about independence 24/7.
In fairness, it wwas Ruth Davidson, not Ms Sturgeon, who kept on going on and on and on and on about No to Independence. But that is an interesting point in itself. Maybe Mr Davies will take a leaf out of her book and do the same thing, and rebrand the Welsh Torties as the RT Davies No to Independence Party.
No need here in Wales, independence is not on the agenda
It is , if that is the alternative to abolishing the senate.
Fall in the 7 day infection rate per 100k from peak to 10 days afterwards:
East 37% London 34% South East 33% North East 31% North West 27% Yorkshire 25% South West 24% East Midlands 18% West Midlands 14%
To me that suggests the new variant is not as contagious as first feared but that it is slowly moving northwards.
And those rapid increases and falls in infection rates in south-eastern England do seem rather similar to what happened in various European countries during the autumn.
Andrew RT Davies unanimously elected leader of the Welsh Tories in the Senedd after Paul Davies' resignation.
RT is a firm Unionist and will have no time for any deals with Plaid and is ideally placed to win back votes for the Tories lost to Abolish the Assembly
RT is an idiot of Paul Davies proportions. Infact, Paul was something of a wallflower that nobody noticed. RT is very noticeable, and not popular outside the confines of the wilder fringes of Welsh Conservativism.
Good news for Labour and PC.
RT is a hard hitter and firm Unionist and Brexiteer, he will unite the Welsh right behind the Tories and give Drakeford no respite.
It is bad news for Labour and also ensures no deals of any form between Plaid and the Tories after the election, RT will have no truck with that.
I do not share your view about RT and you show your credentials with the reference to the Welsh right whoever they are
Drakeford will be responsible for Drakeford doing poorly in May, not RT Davies
Though 26% of Welsh voters now want to scrap the Senedd, more than want Welsh independence.
RT is probably better placed to tap into that market than Paul Davies and win back votes from Abolish at least on the constituency vote. Remember 21% of Welsh voters voted Tory in 2016 and 13% voted UKIP so RT should increase the Tory voteshare and gain seats in May.
Isn't the correct analysis to say that a majority are not in favour of retention, including Don't Knows?
Andrew RT Davies unanimously elected leader of the Welsh Tories in the Senedd after Paul Davies' resignation.
RT is a firm Unionist and will have no time for any deals with Plaid and is ideally placed to win back votes for the Tories lost to Abolish the Assembly
RT is an idiot of Paul Davies proportions. Infact, Paul was something of a wallflower that nobody noticed. RT is very noticeable, and not popular outside the confines of the wilder fringes of Welsh Conservativism.
Good news for Labour and PC.
RT is a hard hitter and firm Unionist and Brexiteer, he will unite the Welsh right behind the Tories and give Drakeford no respite.
It is bad news for Labour and also ensures no deals of any form between Plaid and the Tories after the election, RT will have no truck with that.
So in the most likely scenario after the election you would be happy to see RT leading the opposition to a Plaid/Labour coalition, rather than showing what the Welsh Tories could do as part of a Government?
Yes, we should never do any deals with Nationalists.
I would prefer a Drakeford led government than the Tories doing any deals with Plaid
Anecdata on why people refuse vaccinations (source: council colleagues): Primarily, they are confused by media messaging and it's really that which needs addressing with public information broadcasts. Commandeer the BBC for 10 minutes a day, throw money at Facebook and Twitter and Snapchat and YouTube, just get the message out, use diverse multi-ethnic multi-party messengers (here we really do need community leaders) and keep it honest.
1. Are there serious side-effects? (Virtually never.) 2. Might they get the bug anyway? (Yes, but much less likely, and stay sensibly distanced for now anyway.) 3. Is the 12(+?)-week gap scientifically based? (Not really, but it's still much better than nothing.) 4. Is vaccine X better than vaccine Y? (Yes, but they're all much better than nothing.) 5. Should we trust Boris Johnson? (Not relevant.)
On the upside, someone who runs a chain of care homes says that reports of resistance there seem overblown - in her homes, 99% are taking the jab with more or less enthusiasm.
Have there been any numbers published on this?
I think it is likely to be far lower than suggested.
The only refuseniks who would concern me much will be amongst hospital and care staff.
The Quebec precedent is often brought up - of support for independence ebbing away/collapsing following a second referendum defeat.
Does anyone have an explanation for why this happened? I can think of a few possibilities, but I have no knowledge.
Was there infighting in the independence movement?
Was the next generation of independence politicians relatively less impressive?
Was it simply a loss of confidence among supporters following two defeats?
We're there constitutional changes that satisfied some independence voters?
Economic changes?
The precedent is brought up so often that someone must have at least a good idea why it happened.
In any case the Canadian situation is truly a federal one, so not a useful comparison for the UK esp. under Mr Johnson.
We could become truly federal.
Indeed. In fact thje UK has gone in the other direction. As someone pointed out on PB a factor must be that sometimes the Canadian Premiers are Quebecois. The equivalent, of having a PM who is a MP for a Scottish seat, is now pretty much impossible under Mr Cameron's EVEL.
No it isn't, a Quebecois Canadian PM does not get to decide legislation determined by the Ontario government or the Alberta government. We just need an English Parliament or regional assemblies
What do you think Westminster is de facto? Of course it's already an English Parliament - which EVEL made it - as well as a UK one.
Worth noting that even Arlene Foster know's that Northern Ireland reunion with the South is now a matter of when not if - a Border poll would be 'absolutely reckless'
We're running at over a thousand deaths per day and the twats are talking about easing lockdown. FFS.
Do they have any concept of how fucked we currently are?
At a guess, I'd say some of the opponents have a libertarian monomania around tearing down all the restrictions, others are worried merely that the Government will swing into overcautious territory and we'll all be locked down tighter and for longer than is actually necessary. Personally, I suspect that easing will be very tentative indeed and that substantial chunks of the economy (notably hotels, pubs and restaurants) will be kept firmly closed until the entire adult population has been lanced. This is probably the sort of thing that the latter group of opponents is afraid of as well: first jabs for all the young and fit might very well not be completed before August or September.
Because Captain Cautious keeps merrily voting with the Govt, or decisively abstaining, the only opposition to Govt is coming from the backbenches.
We cannot stay locked down for longer than the spring when at the same time lots of people will have acquired protection from vaccines.
Even if we continue to do well and get to the end of phase one at some point in April, the script for extreme caution has already been written. It is likely to include the following themes:
1. The vaccines are not 100% effective for the old and vulnerable, and Covid remains a threat to the young more generally as well. If we open too much up we still run the risk of overwhelming the hospitals 2. If there is widespread transmission of Covid amongst the young then the risk of a disastrous new variant emerging increases. It also leaves a lot more people potentially vulnerable to Long Covid, the evidence of the seriousness of which continues to increase 3. The NHS is knackered, the staff are exhausted and the routine treatment backlogs are enormous. We need to keep the pressure firmly off them, to allow them to recover and start to catch up
Conclusion: we've already been going through this for over a year now. An extra few months isn't going to make that much of a difference, and at the end of it everyone will have been jabbed and we can all be let out to play a lot more safely.
I reckon primary schools, gyms and hairdressers upon completion of phase one; shops about a month later, if there's no sign of a major disease spike; but pubs, restaurants and holidays are off until everyone's been lanced at least once, at a guess by the end of July or possibly a bit later.
There will be no hospitality sector to reopen without proper support. Which there isn't now.
Daughter has received £4000 since being closed again, for the third time. That's it. She cannot even sell alcohol on a takeaway basis, unlike before.
How is her business supposed to survive until May let alone July on that? It can't.
I am not arguing for early lifting of restrictions. I have 2 sons and a husband laid low with it.
I am arguing that there needs to be:-
1. A proper generous support package to the affected sectors to cover the next 6 months, to be renewed if the epidemic is not over by then. 2. Continuing focus on improving vaccination rates - the one thing the government is doing well on. 3. Clear communication about the need to comply with social distancing / hygiene etc even after vaccination until there is better evidence about vaccination's effect on transmission. 4. No travel abroad without vaccination. 5. No inbound travel without vaccination and effective quarantine in hotels, properly enforced at the border.
Sorry to hear that the illness has visited your family. We've dodged the bullets so far but this remains a constant source of anxiety in my life. As for your suggestions, and based on past experience...
1. Not happening. Probably. The Government has prioritised whacking hospitality to suppress the disease for most of the pandemic, there have been no serious initiatives to help it since EOTHO last Summer, and you just know that the scientists will do their pieces at the first hint of reopening. And restaurants have neither the extent of public sympathy nor a popular Rashfordesque figurehead to baseball bat the Treasury into submission on their behalf 2. Looks like we can at least rely on this if there are no disastrous setbacks 3. Clear communication from this lot? We'll get a display of humility and sensitivity from Donald Trump before that happens 4. and 5. I'm cautiously optimistic that the Government will at least budge on the borders, but again (a) they've not done so yet, and the flow of vast numbers of people into the country continues unchecked for now, and (b) they have previous for being inexplicably mad keen on getting folk to go on sunshine holidays, so it's not in the bag
I've enormous sympathy for the owners of many, many viable businesses that are at threat of going under because of the restrictions, but which the Government appears to have lumped in with failing retail chains as part of the inevitable Schumpeterian cycle of creative economic destruction. I strongly suspect that they've had enough of spraying around money, concluded that big chains like JD Wetherspoon and Greene King, and smaller concerns with deep pockets or generous bankers, can get through without any further help, and that consequently they're going to abandon the others to sink or swim on their own.
But maybe I'm being excessively pessimistic and cynical? We'll know more when the Budget comes around.
I think they are a truly "fuck business" government. It explains their stupid Brexit deal. I'd like to hear someone who thinks this deal is wonderful explain why it is a good thing for a government department to advise British companies to set up operations in the EU in order to get round the problems caused by the government's own policy.
As for hospitality, they probably care only about big brewers and developer friends who can buy up a lot of properties on the cheap.
They have not had enough of spraying money around. They are more than happy doing so when it comes to spraying money at friends of theirs and Tory donors. The rest of us can get stuffed as far as they're concerned.
What most struck me about the Sunday Times piece is that only 50% of Scots want a referendum in the next 5 years and that support for independence was only 52-48. These are not the sort of figures to inspire confidence that Scotland will go down the independence route.
Ireland will be united sooner or later. It was the inevitable consequence of planting a border in the Irish sea, though in truth it has been headed that way for some time. Alastair's quite wrong to pin this on the DUP. The ethnic outlook of N Ireland has been changing and support for the union receding.
Good morning everybody. I seem to recall that, in other circumstances, 52-48 was held to be enough for some pretty significant changes.
The point that @Mysticrose was making is, of course, that it doesn't exactly look like a done deal. Using round numbers, if we assume an 85% turnout in the next independence referendum then 2% of participating voters equals about 75,000 people. If 52:48 is in any way an accurate reflection of sentiment and a net 75,000 pro-independence electors can be convinced to switch horses during the campaign then that narrow majority is erased.
It's why there was some suggestion in the past of attaining a consistent 60:40 gap before pressing for an actual vote, so as to avoid the prospect of a narrow defeat at the ballot box. The 1995 Quebec referendum was lost by a wafer thin majority and twenty-five years later there's no prospect of a third tilt on the horizon. Though that said, I think that Scotland's a different case and if there is a second defeat the campaign for a third vote begins the following morning. Stability cannot be achieved within the existing settlement, which is one more good reason for wanting to see the back of the Union.
In 1995 Yes to independence from Canada got 49% in Quebec but 26 years later there has been no indyref3.
Devomax for Quebec resolved the matter as would devomax for Scotland
Because throwing them more powers has always worked for Unionists before.
And Devomax does nothing at all to address the dreaded West Lothian Question. Au contraire: the issue of the 59 Scottish squatters in the House of Commons only becomes more acute.
Again, there is no problem in the constitutional mess that is the United Kingdom that is not resolved by getting rid of the United Kingdom.
Devomax for Holyrood plus an English Parliament would be my preferred option, though I would accept regional Assemblies within England.
Most large nations in the world now are Federal and we should become more Federal too
I suspect that England is simply too big to work well as a devolved unit alongside the other nations.
I also suspect that part of the trouble is that word "regions"- it sounds beige, bureaucratic and British Rail knocking down Euston Arch. Ugh.
We need a better name for them.
If Starmer becomes PM in 2024 expect Lord Gordon Brown to be appointed Grand High Minister for the Union and indeed to give Scotland devomax and break England up into regions and regional assemblies, or provinces if you prefer.
England in effect at the moment only exists on the rugby and football pitch (even the cricket team is actually England and Wales), otherwise it is a non existent merely ceremonial nation so it would not make that much difference
Cricket won't be a problem. The West Indies operate as a collective. You are scraping the bottom of the barrel using national sporting teams as justification for the continuation of the Union.
The Union is over. Scotland has already packed it's bags. A United Ireland will follow on shortly, by which time the demand for an independent Wales will peak over 50% shortly thereafter. You can quote me figures that Wales voted Brexit, but the demand will be one of "if they are having some of that I want some too", and the argument will again be over sovereignty rather than economics.
Boris unleashing the monster that is "sovereignty" might work against his planned legacy.
Just 49% of Scots backing independence including undecideds, only 42% of Northern Irish voters backing a United Ireland and a mere 23% of Welsh voters backing independence, little different to the 15% of English voters who currently want independence on today's ST poll does not suggest that.
Indeed the UK is more likely to rejoin the EU than Wales is to ever be independent
At least Scotland and Northern Ireland are viewed as problems which is better than the contemptuous disregard the Welsh seem to get.
The contemptuous disregard we Welsh voters receive comes from only one source, and that is Drakeford in charge of his failing labour Assembly
Which the Welsh voted for. They voted for Drakesford too.
No we did not vote for Drakeford
Carwyn Jones was Labour leader elected at the last Assembly election and Drakeford took over from him when he resigned in 2018
So he is unelected by the people of Wales to his position
Anecdata on why people refuse vaccinations (source: council colleagues): Primarily, they are confused by media messaging and it's really that which needs addressing with public information broadcasts. Commandeer the BBC for 10 minutes a day, throw money at Facebook and Twitter and Snapchat and YouTube, just get the message out, use diverse multi-ethnic multi-party messengers (here we really do need community leaders) and keep it honest.
1. Are there serious side-effects? (Virtually never.) 2. Might they get the bug anyway? (Yes, but much less likely, and stay sensibly distanced for now anyway.) 3. Is the 12(+?)-week gap scientifically based? (Not really, but it's still much better than nothing.) 4. Is vaccine X better than vaccine Y? (Yes, but they're all much better than nothing.) 5. Should we trust Boris Johnson? (Not relevant.)
On the upside, someone who runs a chain of care homes says that reports of resistance there seem overblown - in her homes, 99% are taking the jab with more or less enthusiasm.
Good post, an important point on 2 is not just that it is much less likely, but that if they do catch it the severe versions are extremely rare to the point of being non existent or close to in the trials.
TV and social media dream team to do the messaging:
HMQ Prince William David Attenborough Marcus Rashford Martin Lewis Helen Mirren Deborah Meeden Mo Farah Chris Whitty Ranvir Singh
good list, plus people who sensible people dislike but who influence someone - George Galloway, Melanie Phillips, Nigel Farage, Anjem Choudhary... - just give the impression that EVERYONE is saying the same thing.
Might even do something for social harmony.
Toby Young to reach the real hardcore?
Nick's point 3:
"3. Is the 12(+?)-week gap scientifically based? (Not really, but it's still much better than nothing.)"
Not sure that's right. As I understand it all that has happened is the trial data has been looked at another way by JVCI. Not sure that counts as not being scientific.
The Quebec precedent is often brought up - of support for independence ebbing away/collapsing following a second referendum defeat.
Does anyone have an explanation for why this happened? I can think of a few possibilities, but I have no knowledge.
Was there infighting in the independence movement?
Was the next generation of independence politicians relatively less impressive?
Was it simply a loss of confidence among supporters following two defeats?
We're there constitutional changes that satisfied some independence voters?
Economic changes?
The precedent is brought up so often that someone must have at least a good idea why it happened.
In any case the Canadian situation is truly a federal one, so not a useful comparison for the UK esp. under Mr Johnson.
We could become truly federal.
No we could not, Westminster will never ever cede any powers that cede one iota of control. They retain all powers that are of any purpose and will fight tooth and nail to keep them. They have no intention of ever allowing devolution to work properly.
They already did it Malc...
Matt, control of road signs and a few other piddling things that they cannot influence as they get fixed pocket money is not proper devolution.
Diagreeing here
Education, healthcare, policing ... all utterly irrelevant.
Worth noting that even Arlene Foster know's that Northern Ireland reunion with the South is now a matter of when not if - a Border poll would be 'absolutely reckless'
The polling was carried out by Lucidtalk in Northern Ireland, with similar polling in England, Scotland and Wales to gauge attitudes towards the union.
It found that in Northern Ireland, 47% still want to remain in the UK, with 42% in favour of a united Ireland
We're running at over a thousand deaths per day and the twats are talking about easing lockdown. FFS.
Do they have any concept of how fucked we currently are?
At a guess, I'd say some of the opponents have a libertarian monomania around tearing down all the restrictions, others are worried merely that the Government will swing into overcautious territory and we'll all be locked down tighter and for longer than is actually necessary. Personally, I suspect that easing will be very tentative indeed and that substantial chunks of the economy (notably hotels, pubs and restaurants) will be kept firmly closed until the entire adult population has been lanced. This is probably the sort of thing that the latter group of opponents is afraid of as well: first jabs for all the young and fit might very well not be completed before August or September.
Because Captain Cautious keeps merrily voting with the Govt, or decisively abstaining, the only opposition to Govt is coming from the backbenches.
We cannot stay locked down for longer than the spring when at the same time lots of people will have acquired protection from vaccines.
Even if we continue to do well and get to the end of phase one at some point in April, the script for extreme caution has already been written. It is likely to include the following themes:
1. The vaccines are not 100% effective for the old and vulnerable, and Covid remains a threat to the young more generally as well. If we open too much up we still run the risk of overwhelming the hospitals 2. If there is widespread transmission of Covid amongst the young then the risk of a disastrous new variant emerging increases. It also leaves a lot more people potentially vulnerable to Long Covid, the evidence of the seriousness of which continues to increase 3. The NHS is knackered, the staff are exhausted and the routine treatment backlogs are enormous. We need to keep the pressure firmly off them, to allow them to recover and start to catch up
Conclusion: we've already been going through this for over a year now. An extra few months isn't going to make that much of a difference, and at the end of it everyone will have been jabbed and we can all be let out to play a lot more safely.
I reckon primary schools, gyms and hairdressers upon completion of phase one; shops about a month later, if there's no sign of a major disease spike; but pubs, restaurants and holidays are off until everyone's been lanced at least once, at a guess by the end of July or possibly a bit later.
There will be no hospitality sector to reopen without proper support. Which there isn't now.
Daughter has received £4000 since being closed again, for the third time. That's it. She cannot even sell alcohol on a takeaway basis, unlike before.
How is her business supposed to survive until May let alone July on that? It can't.
I am not arguing for early lifting of restrictions. I have 2 sons and a husband laid low with it.
I am arguing that there needs to be:-
1. A proper generous support package to the affected sectors to cover the next 6 months, to be renewed if the epidemic is not over by then. 2. Continuing focus on improving vaccination rates - the one thing the government is doing well on. 3. Clear communication about the need to comply with social distancing / hygiene etc even after vaccination until there is better evidence about vaccination's effect on transmission. 4. No travel abroad without vaccination. 5. No inbound travel without vaccination and effective quarantine in hotels, properly enforced at the border.
Sorry to hear that the illness has visited your family. We've dodged the bullets so far but this remains a constant source of anxiety in my life. As for your suggestions, and based on past experience...
1. Not happening. Probably. The Government has prioritised whacking hospitality to suppress the disease for most of the pandemic, there have been no serious initiatives to help it since EOTHO last Summer, and you just know that the scientists will do their pieces at the first hint of reopening. And restaurants have neither the extent of public sympathy nor a popular Rashfordesque figurehead to baseball bat the Treasury into submission on their behalf 2. Looks like we can at least rely on this if there are no disastrous setbacks 3. Clear communication from this lot? We'll get a display of humility and sensitivity from Donald Trump before that happens 4. and 5. I'm cautiously optimistic that the Government will at least budge on the borders, but again (a) they've not done so yet, and the flow of vast numbers of people into the country continues unchecked for now, and (b) they have previous for being inexplicably mad keen on getting folk to go on sunshine holidays, so it's not in the bag
I've enormous sympathy for the owners of many, many viable businesses that are at threat of going under because of the restrictions, but which the Government appears to have lumped in with failing retail chains as part of the inevitable Schumpeterian cycle of creative economic destruction. I strongly suspect that they've had enough of spraying around money, concluded that big chains like JD Wetherspoon and Greene King, and smaller concerns with deep pockets or generous bankers, can get through without any further help, and that consequently they're going to abandon the others to sink or swim on their own.
But maybe I'm being excessively pessimistic and cynical? We'll know more when the Budget comes around.
I think they are a truly "fuck business" government. It explains their stupid Brexit deal. I'd like to hear someone who thinks this deal is wonderful explain why it is a good thing for a government department to advise British companies to set up operations in the EU in order to get round the problems caused by the government's own policy.
As for hospitality, they probably care only about big brewers and developer friends who can buy up a lot of properties on the cheap.
They have not had enough of spraying money around. They are more than happy doing so when it comes to spraying money at friends of theirs and Tory donors. The rest of us can get stuffed as far as they're concerned.
They are, without a shadow of a doubt, the fuck small business government. And extraordinary thing for a party which claims to revere Thatcher.
The Quebec precedent is often brought up - of support for independence ebbing away/collapsing following a second referendum defeat.
Does anyone have an explanation for why this happened? I can think of a few possibilities, but I have no knowledge.
Was there infighting in the independence movement?
Was the next generation of independence politicians relatively less impressive?
Was it simply a loss of confidence among supporters following two defeats?
We're there constitutional changes that satisfied some independence voters?
Economic changes?
The precedent is brought up so often that someone must have at least a good idea why it happened.
In any case the Canadian situation is truly a federal one, so not a useful comparison for the UK esp. under Mr Johnson.
We could become truly federal.
Indeed. In fact thje UK has gone in the other direction. As someone pointed out on PB a factor must be that sometimes the Canadian Premiers are Quebecois. The equivalent, of having a PM who is a MP for a Scottish seat, is now pretty much impossible under Mr Cameron's EVEL.
No it isn't, a Quebecois Canadian PM does not get to decide legislation determined by the Ontario government or the Alberta government. We just need an English Parliament or regional assemblies
What do you think Westminster is de facto? Of course it's already an English Parliament - which EVEL made it - as well as a UK one.
Wrong, on current polls Starmer could become PM with SNP confidence and supply at Westminster despite the Tories winning most votes in England.
England would not even have its own Parliament to compensate for being ignored at Westminster which still does not satisfy you whinging nats!
Andrew RT Davies unanimously elected leader of the Welsh Tories in the Senedd after Paul Davies' resignation.
RT is a firm Unionist and will have no time for any deals with Plaid and is ideally placed to win back votes for the Tories lost to Abolish the Assembly
RT is an idiot of Paul Davies proportions. Infact, Paul was something of a wallflower that nobody noticed. RT is very noticeable, and not popular outside the confines of the wilder fringes of Welsh Conservativism.
Good news for Labour and PC.
RT is a hard hitter and firm Unionist and Brexiteer, he will unite the Welsh right behind the Tories and give Drakeford no respite.
It is bad news for Labour and also ensures no deals of any form between Plaid and the Tories after the election, RT will have no truck with that.
So in the most likely scenario after the election you would be happy to see RT leading the opposition to a Plaid/Labour coalition, rather than showing what the Welsh Tories could do as part of a Government?
Yes, we should never do any deals with Nationalists.
I would prefer a Drakeford led government than the Tories doing any deals with Plaid
Speak for yourself
As someone living in Wales I am content for a Plaid Conservative deal if it rids us of labour
The Quebec precedent is often brought up - of support for independence ebbing away/collapsing following a second referendum defeat.
Does anyone have an explanation for why this happened? I can think of a few possibilities, but I have no knowledge.
Was there infighting in the independence movement?
Was the next generation of independence politicians relatively less impressive?
Was it simply a loss of confidence among supporters following two defeats?
We're there constitutional changes that satisfied some independence voters?
Economic changes?
The precedent is brought up so often that someone must have at least a good idea why it happened.
In any case the Canadian situation is truly a federal one, so not a useful comparison for the UK esp. under Mr Johnson.
We could become truly federal.
Indeed. In fact thje UK has gone in the other direction. As someone pointed out on PB a factor must be that sometimes the Canadian Premiers are Quebecois. The equivalent, of having a PM who is a MP for a Scottish seat, is now pretty much impossible under Mr Cameron's EVEL.
No it isn't, a Quebecois Canadian PM does not get to decide legislation determined by the Ontario government or the Alberta government. We just need an English Parliament or regional assemblies
What do you think Westminster is de facto? Of course it's already an English Parliament - which EVEL made it - as well as a UK one.
Wrong, on current polls Starmer could become PM with SNP confidence and supply at Westminster despite the Tories winning most votes in England.
England would not even have its own Parliament to compensate for being ignored at Westminster which still does not satisfy you whinging nats!
But under EVEL Westminster also functions as an English parliament. As it would in those c ircumstances for English matters. It's not being ignored at all.
We're running at over a thousand deaths per day and the twats are talking about easing lockdown. FFS.
Do they have any concept of how fucked we currently are?
At a guess, I'd say some of the opponents have a libertarian monomania around tearing down all the restrictions, others are worried merely that the Government will swing into overcautious territory and we'll all be locked down tighter and for longer than is actually necessary. Personally, I suspect that easing will be very tentative indeed and that substantial chunks of the economy (notably hotels, pubs and restaurants) will be kept firmly closed until the entire adult population has been lanced. This is probably the sort of thing that the latter group of opponents is afraid of as well: first jabs for all the young and fit might very well not be completed before August or September.
Because Captain Cautious keeps merrily voting with the Govt, or decisively abstaining, the only opposition to Govt is coming from the backbenches.
We cannot stay locked down for longer than the spring when at the same time lots of people will have acquired protection from vaccines.
Even if we continue to do well and get to the end of phase one at some point in April, the script for extreme caution has already been written. It is likely to include the following themes:
1. The vaccines are not 100% effective for the old and vulnerable, and Covid remains a threat to the young more generally as well. If we open too much up we still run the risk of overwhelming the hospitals 2. If there is widespread transmission of Covid amongst the young then the risk of a disastrous new variant emerging increases. It also leaves a lot more people potentially vulnerable to Long Covid, the evidence of the seriousness of which continues to increase 3. The NHS is knackered, the staff are exhausted and the routine treatment backlogs are enormous. We need to keep the pressure firmly off them, to allow them to recover and start to catch up
Conclusion: we've already been going through this for over a year now. An extra few months isn't going to make that much of a difference, and at the end of it everyone will have been jabbed and we can all be let out to play a lot more safely.
I reckon primary schools, gyms and hairdressers upon completion of phase one; shops about a month later, if there's no sign of a major disease spike; but pubs, restaurants and holidays are off until everyone's been lanced at least once, at a guess by the end of July or possibly a bit later.
There will be no hospitality sector to reopen without proper support. Which there isn't now.
Daughter has received £4000 since being closed again, for the third time. That's it. She cannot even sell alcohol on a takeaway basis, unlike before.
How is her business supposed to survive until May let alone July on that? It can't.
I am not arguing for early lifting of restrictions. I have 2 sons and a husband laid low with it.
I am arguing that there needs to be:-
1. A proper generous support package to the affected sectors to cover the next 6 months, to be renewed if the epidemic is not over by then. 2. Continuing focus on improving vaccination rates - the one thing the government is doing well on. 3. Clear communication about the need to comply with social distancing / hygiene etc even after vaccination until there is better evidence about vaccination's effect on transmission. 4. No travel abroad without vaccination. 5. No inbound travel without vaccination and effective quarantine in hotels, properly enforced at the border.
Sorry to hear that the illness has visited your family. We've dodged the bullets so far but this remains a constant source of anxiety in my life. As for your suggestions, and based on past experience...
1. Not happening. Probably. The Government has prioritised whacking hospitality to suppress the disease for most of the pandemic, there have been no serious initiatives to help it since EOTHO last Summer, and you just know that the scientists will do their pieces at the first hint of reopening. And restaurants have neither the extent of public sympathy nor a popular Rashfordesque figurehead to baseball bat the Treasury into submission on their behalf 2. Looks like we can at least rely on this if there are no disastrous setbacks 3. Clear communication from this lot? We'll get a display of humility and sensitivity from Donald Trump before that happens 4. and 5. I'm cautiously optimistic that the Government will at least budge on the borders, but again (a) they've not done so yet, and the flow of vast numbers of people into the country continues unchecked for now, and (b) they have previous for being inexplicably mad keen on getting folk to go on sunshine holidays, so it's not in the bag
I've enormous sympathy for the owners of many, many viable businesses that are at threat of going under because of the restrictions, but which the Government appears to have lumped in with failing retail chains as part of the inevitable Schumpeterian cycle of creative economic destruction. I strongly suspect that they've had enough of spraying around money, concluded that big chains like JD Wetherspoon and Greene King, and smaller concerns with deep pockets or generous bankers, can get through without any further help, and that consequently they're going to abandon the others to sink or swim on their own.
But maybe I'm being excessively pessimistic and cynical? We'll know more when the Budget comes around.
I think they are a truly "fuck business" government. It explains their stupid Brexit deal. I'd like to hear someone who thinks this deal is wonderful explain why it is a good thing for a government department to advise British companies to set up operations in the EU in order to get round the problems caused by the government's own policy.
As for hospitality, they probably care only about big brewers and developer friends who can buy up a lot of properties on the cheap.
They have not had enough of spraying money around. They are more than happy doing so when it comes to spraying money at friends of theirs and Tory donors. The rest of us can get stuffed as far as they're concerned.
They are, without a shadow of a doubt, the fuck small business government. And extraordinary thing for a party which claims to revere Thatcher.
And the Brexiters saying that most traffic is flowing well fail to admit that the traffic that isnt' flowing (either because of Brsexit problems or because it is paused) disproportionately hits small and medium enterprises as far as I can see - for instance in their reliance on small consignments meaning that certtain businesses are being refused by hauliers/couriers to stop problems with mixed loads.
Andrew RT Davies unanimously elected leader of the Welsh Tories in the Senedd after Paul Davies' resignation.
RT is a firm Unionist and will have no time for any deals with Plaid and is ideally placed to win back votes for the Tories lost to Abolish the Assembly
RT is an idiot of Paul Davies proportions. Infact, Paul was something of a wallflower that nobody noticed. RT is very noticeable, and not popular outside the confines of the wilder fringes of Welsh Conservativism.
Good news for Labour and PC.
RT is a hard hitter and firm Unionist and Brexiteer, he will unite the Welsh right behind the Tories and give Drakeford no respite.
It is bad news for Labour and also ensures no deals of any form between Plaid and the Tories after the election, RT will have no truck with that.
So in the most likely scenario after the election you would be happy to see RT leading the opposition to a Plaid/Labour coalition, rather than showing what the Welsh Tories could do as part of a Government?
Yes, we should never do any deals with Nationalists.
I would prefer a Drakeford led government than the Tories doing any deals with Plaid
Speak for yourself
As someone living in Wales I am content for a Plaid Conservative deal if it rids us of labour
No, that opens the door to the Nationalists as in Scotland in 2007 when the Tories propped up the SNP.
RT should stay in opposition unless he has the numbers for a deal with Abolish and be a hard hitting Opposition Leader to another Labour minority government or a Labour and Plaid government
We're running at over a thousand deaths per day and the twats are talking about easing lockdown. FFS.
Do they have any concept of how fucked we currently are?
At a guess, I'd say some of the opponents have a libertarian monomania around tearing down all the restrictions, others are worried merely that the Government will swing into overcautious territory and we'll all be locked down tighter and for longer than is actually necessary. Personally, I suspect that easing will be very tentative indeed and that substantial chunks of the economy (notably hotels, pubs and restaurants) will be kept firmly closed until the entire adult population has been lanced. This is probably the sort of thing that the latter group of opponents is afraid of as well: first jabs for all the young and fit might very well not be completed before August or September.
Because Captain Cautious keeps merrily voting with the Govt, or decisively abstaining, the only opposition to Govt is coming from the backbenches.
We cannot stay locked down for longer than the spring when at the same time lots of people will have acquired protection from vaccines.
Even if we continue to do well and get to the end of phase one at some point in April, the script for extreme caution has already been written. It is likely to include the following themes:
1. The vaccines are not 100% effective for the old and vulnerable, and Covid remains a threat to the young more generally as well. If we open too much up we still run the risk of overwhelming the hospitals 2. If there is widespread transmission of Covid amongst the young then the risk of a disastrous new variant emerging increases. It also leaves a lot more people potentially vulnerable to Long Covid, the evidence of the seriousness of which continues to increase 3. The NHS is knackered, the staff are exhausted and the routine treatment backlogs are enormous. We need to keep the pressure firmly off them, to allow them to recover and start to catch up
Conclusion: we've already been going through this for over a year now. An extra few months isn't going to make that much of a difference, and at the end of it everyone will have been jabbed and we can all be let out to play a lot more safely.
I reckon primary schools, gyms and hairdressers upon completion of phase one; shops about a month later, if there's no sign of a major disease spike; but pubs, restaurants and holidays are off until everyone's been lanced at least once, at a guess by the end of July or possibly a bit later.
There will be no hospitality sector to reopen without proper support. Which there isn't now.
Daughter has received £4000 since being closed again, for the third time. That's it. She cannot even sell alcohol on a takeaway basis, unlike before.
How is her business supposed to survive until May let alone July on that? It can't.
I am not arguing for early lifting of restrictions. I have 2 sons and a husband laid low with it.
I am arguing that there needs to be:-
1. A proper generous support package to the affected sectors to cover the next 6 months, to be renewed if the epidemic is not over by then. 2. Continuing focus on improving vaccination rates - the one thing the government is doing well on. 3. Clear communication about the need to comply with social distancing / hygiene etc even after vaccination until there is better evidence about vaccination's effect on transmission. 4. No travel abroad without vaccination. 5. No inbound travel without vaccination and effective quarantine in hotels, properly enforced at the border.
Sorry to hear that the illness has visited your family. We've dodged the bullets so far but this remains a constant source of anxiety in my life. As for your suggestions, and based on past experience...
1. Not happening. Probably. The Government has prioritised whacking hospitality to suppress the disease for most of the pandemic, there have been no serious initiatives to help it since EOTHO last Summer, and you just know that the scientists will do their pieces at the first hint of reopening. And restaurants have neither the extent of public sympathy nor a popular Rashfordesque figurehead to baseball bat the Treasury into submission on their behalf 2. Looks like we can at least rely on this if there are no disastrous setbacks 3. Clear communication from this lot? We'll get a display of humility and sensitivity from Donald Trump before that happens 4. and 5. I'm cautiously optimistic that the Government will at least budge on the borders, but again (a) they've not done so yet, and the flow of vast numbers of people into the country continues unchecked for now, and (b) they have previous for being inexplicably mad keen on getting folk to go on sunshine holidays, so it's not in the bag
I've enormous sympathy for the owners of many, many viable businesses that are at threat of going under because of the restrictions, but which the Government appears to have lumped in with failing retail chains as part of the inevitable Schumpeterian cycle of creative economic destruction. I strongly suspect that they've had enough of spraying around money, concluded that big chains like JD Wetherspoon and Greene King, and smaller concerns with deep pockets or generous bankers, can get through without any further help, and that consequently they're going to abandon the others to sink or swim on their own.
But maybe I'm being excessively pessimistic and cynical? We'll know more when the Budget comes around.
I think they are a truly "fuck business" government. It explains their stupid Brexit deal. I'd like to hear someone who thinks this deal is wonderful explain why it is a good thing for a government department to advise British companies to set up operations in the EU in order to get round the problems caused by the government's own policy.
As for hospitality, they probably care only about big brewers and developer friends who can buy up a lot of properties on the cheap.
They have not had enough of spraying money around. They are more than happy doing so when it comes to spraying money at friends of theirs and Tory donors. The rest of us can get stuffed as far as they're concerned.
You're not wrong there. The bricks and mortar will still be there. So who will have the ability to acquire the premises and reopen them post-Covid? Big PubCos, not independents.
Worth noting that even Arlene Foster know's that Northern Ireland reunion with the South is now a matter of when not if - a Border poll would be 'absolutely reckless'
The polling was carried out by Lucidtalk in Northern Ireland, with similar polling in England, Scotland and Wales to gauge attitudes towards the union.
It found that in Northern Ireland, 47% still want to remain in the UK, with 42% in favour of a united Ireland
The Quebec precedent is often brought up - of support for independence ebbing away/collapsing following a second referendum defeat.
Does anyone have an explanation for why this happened? I can think of a few possibilities, but I have no knowledge.
Was there infighting in the independence movement?
Was the next generation of independence politicians relatively less impressive?
Was it simply a loss of confidence among supporters following two defeats?
We're there constitutional changes that satisfied some independence voters?
Economic changes?
The precedent is brought up so often that someone must have at least a good idea why it happened.
In any case the Canadian situation is truly a federal one, so not a useful comparison for the UK esp. under Mr Johnson.
We could become truly federal.
Indeed. In fact thje UK has gone in the other direction. As someone pointed out on PB a factor must be that sometimes the Canadian Premiers are Quebecois. The equivalent, of having a PM who is a MP for a Scottish seat, is now pretty much impossible under Mr Cameron's EVEL.
No it isn't, a Quebecois Canadian PM does not get to decide legislation determined by the Ontario government or the Alberta government. We just need an English Parliament or regional assemblies
What do you think Westminster is de facto? Of course it's already an English Parliament - which EVEL made it - as well as a UK one.
Wrong, on current polls Starmer could become PM with SNP confidence and supply at Westminster despite the Tories winning most votes in England.
England would not even have its own Parliament to compensate for being ignored at Westminster which still does not satisfy you whinging nats!
But under EVEL Westminster also functions as an English parliament. As it would in those c ircumstances for English matters. It's not being ignored at all.
It doesn't on most tax, foreign affairs, defence, Home Affairs and immigration etc which are not within the remit of the devolved Parliaments but reserved to Westminster.
The Quebec precedent is often brought up - of support for independence ebbing away/collapsing following a second referendum defeat.
Does anyone have an explanation for why this happened? I can think of a few possibilities, but I have no knowledge.
Was there infighting in the independence movement?
Was the next generation of independence politicians relatively less impressive?
Was it simply a loss of confidence among supporters following two defeats?
We're there constitutional changes that satisfied some independence voters?
Economic changes?
The precedent is brought up so often that someone must have at least a good idea why it happened.
In any case the Canadian situation is truly a federal one, so not a useful comparison for the UK esp. under Mr Johnson.
We could become truly federal.
Indeed. In fact thje UK has gone in the other direction. As someone pointed out on PB a factor must be that sometimes the Canadian Premiers are Quebecois. The equivalent, of having a PM who is a MP for a Scottish seat, is now pretty much impossible under Mr Cameron's EVEL.
No it isn't, a Quebecois Canadian PM does not get to decide legislation determined by the Ontario government or the Alberta government. We just need an English Parliament or regional assemblies
What do you think Westminster is de facto? Of course it's already an English Parliament - which EVEL made it - as well as a UK one.
Wrong, on current polls Starmer could become PM with SNP confidence and supply at Westminster despite the Tories winning most votes in England.
England would not even have its own Parliament to compensate for being ignored at Westminster which still does not satisfy you whinging nats!
But under EVEL Westminster also functions as an English parliament. As it would in those c ircumstances for English matters. It's not being ignored at all.
It doesn't, not on tax, foreign affairs etc which are not within the remit of the devolved Parliaments
That is when Westminster functions as the UK Parliament. .
The Quebec precedent is often brought up - of support for independence ebbing away/collapsing following a second referendum defeat.
Does anyone have an explanation for why this happened? I can think of a few possibilities, but I have no knowledge.
Was there infighting in the independence movement?
Was the next generation of independence politicians relatively less impressive?
Was it simply a loss of confidence among supporters following two defeats?
We're there constitutional changes that satisfied some independence voters?
Economic changes?
The precedent is brought up so often that someone must have at least a good idea why it happened.
In any case the Canadian situation is truly a federal one, so not a useful comparison for the UK esp. under Mr Johnson.
We could become truly federal.
No we could not, Westminster will never ever cede any powers that cede one iota of control. They retain all powers that are of any purpose and will fight tooth and nail to keep them. They have no intention of ever allowing devolution to work properly.
They already did it Malc...
Matt, control of road signs and a few other piddling things that they cannot influence as they get fixed pocket money is not proper devolution.
Diagreeing here
Education, healthcare, policing ... all utterly irrelevant.
All under fixed budgets and dependent on what Westminster do, they can have rug pulled from under them at any time, Westminster can slash their budgets at will so impossible to plan or cover any issues that arise. We saw that perfectly with furlough, Scotland asked to extend to help Scottish businesses and was told to F off , later when it suits they extend for England no problem.
Andrew RT Davies unanimously elected leader of the Welsh Tories in the Senedd after Paul Davies' resignation.
RT is a firm Unionist and will have no time for any deals with Plaid and is ideally placed to win back votes for the Tories lost to Abolish the Assembly
RT is an idiot of Paul Davies proportions. Infact, Paul was something of a wallflower that nobody noticed. RT is very noticeable, and not popular outside the confines of the wilder fringes of Welsh Conservativism.
Good news for Labour and PC.
RT is a hard hitter and firm Unionist and Brexiteer, he will unite the Welsh right behind the Tories and give Drakeford no respite.
It is bad news for Labour and also ensures no deals of any form between Plaid and the Tories after the election, RT will have no truck with that.
So in the most likely scenario after the election you would be happy to see RT leading the opposition to a Plaid/Labour coalition, rather than showing what the Welsh Tories could do as part of a Government?
Yes, we should never do any deals with Nationalists.
I would prefer a Drakeford led government than the Tories doing any deals with Plaid
Speak for yourself
As someone living in Wales I am content for a Plaid Conservative deal if it rids us of labour
No, that opens the door to the Nationalists as in Scotland in 2007 when the Tories propped up the SNP.
RT should stay in opposition unless he has the numbers for a deal with Abolish and be a hard hitting Opposition Leader to another Labour minority government or a Labour and Plaid government
Why not just confine yourself to speaking for England as you know nothing about those of us living in Wales and experiencing over years the failure in health, education and now covid by Labour
You come over too much as 'a know all ' and spout a lot of nonsense on a regular basis
We're running at over a thousand deaths per day and the twats are talking about easing lockdown. FFS.
Do they have any concept of how fucked we currently are?
At a guess, I'd say some of the opponents have a libertarian monomania around tearing down all the restrictions, others are worried merely that the Government will swing into overcautious territory and we'll all be locked down tighter and for longer than is actually necessary. Personally, I suspect that easing will be very tentative indeed and that substantial chunks of the economy (notably hotels, pubs and restaurants) will be kept firmly closed until the entire adult population has been lanced. This is probably the sort of thing that the latter group of opponents is afraid of as well: first jabs for all the young and fit might very well not be completed before August or September.
Because Captain Cautious keeps merrily voting with the Govt, or decisively abstaining, the only opposition to Govt is coming from the backbenches.
We cannot stay locked down for longer than the spring when at the same time lots of people will have acquired protection from vaccines.
Even if we continue to do well and get to the end of phase one at some point in April, the script for extreme caution has already been written. It is likely to include the following themes:
1. The vaccines are not 100% effective for the old and vulnerable, and Covid remains a threat to the young more generally as well. If we open too much up we still run the risk of overwhelming the hospitals 2. If there is widespread transmission of Covid amongst the young then the risk of a disastrous new variant emerging increases. It also leaves a lot more people potentially vulnerable to Long Covid, the evidence of the seriousness of which continues to increase 3. The NHS is knackered, the staff are exhausted and the routine treatment backlogs are enormous. We need to keep the pressure firmly off them, to allow them to recover and start to catch up
Conclusion: we've already been going through this for over a year now. An extra few months isn't going to make that much of a difference, and at the end of it everyone will have been jabbed and we can all be let out to play a lot more safely.
I reckon primary schools, gyms and hairdressers upon completion of phase one; shops about a month later, if there's no sign of a major disease spike; but pubs, restaurants and holidays are off until everyone's been lanced at least once, at a guess by the end of July or possibly a bit later.
There will be no hospitality sector to reopen without proper support. Which there isn't now.
Daughter has received £4000 since being closed again, for the third time. That's it. She cannot even sell alcohol on a takeaway basis, unlike before.
How is her business supposed to survive until May let alone July on that? It can't.
I am not arguing for early lifting of restrictions. I have 2 sons and a husband laid low with it.
I am arguing that there needs to be:-
1. A proper generous support package to the affected sectors to cover the next 6 months, to be renewed if the epidemic is not over by then. 2. Continuing focus on improving vaccination rates - the one thing the government is doing well on. 3. Clear communication about the need to comply with social distancing / hygiene etc even after vaccination until there is better evidence about vaccination's effect on transmission. 4. No travel abroad without vaccination. 5. No inbound travel without vaccination and effective quarantine in hotels, properly enforced at the border.
Sorry to hear that the illness has visited your family. We've dodged the bullets so far but this remains a constant source of anxiety in my life. As for your suggestions, and based on past experience...
1. Not happening. Probably. The Government has prioritised whacking hospitality to suppress the disease for most of the pandemic, there have been no serious initiatives to help it since EOTHO last Summer, and you just know that the scientists will do their pieces at the first hint of reopening. And restaurants have neither the extent of public sympathy nor a popular Rashfordesque figurehead to baseball bat the Treasury into submission on their behalf 2. Looks like we can at least rely on this if there are no disastrous setbacks 3. Clear communication from this lot? We'll get a display of humility and sensitivity from Donald Trump before that happens 4. and 5. I'm cautiously optimistic that the Government will at least budge on the borders, but again (a) they've not done so yet, and the flow of vast numbers of people into the country continues unchecked for now, and (b) they have previous for being inexplicably mad keen on getting folk to go on sunshine holidays, so it's not in the bag
I've enormous sympathy for the owners of many, many viable businesses that are at threat of going under because of the restrictions, but which the Government appears to have lumped in with failing retail chains as part of the inevitable Schumpeterian cycle of creative economic destruction. I strongly suspect that they've had enough of spraying around money, concluded that big chains like JD Wetherspoon and Greene King, and smaller concerns with deep pockets or generous bankers, can get through without any further help, and that consequently they're going to abandon the others to sink or swim on their own.
But maybe I'm being excessively pessimistic and cynical? We'll know more when the Budget comes around.
I think they are a truly "fuck business" government. It explains their stupid Brexit deal. I'd like to hear someone who thinks this deal is wonderful explain why it is a good thing for a government department to advise British companies to set up operations in the EU in order to get round the problems caused by the government's own policy.
As for hospitality, they probably care only about big brewers and developer friends who can buy up a lot of properties on the cheap.
They have not had enough of spraying money around. They are more than happy doing so when it comes to spraying money at friends of theirs and Tory donors. The rest of us can get stuffed as far as they're concerned.
They are, without a shadow of a doubt, the fuck small business government. And extraordinary thing for a party which claims to revere Thatcher.
And the Brexiters saying that most traffic is flowing well fail to admit that the traffic that isnt' flowing (either because of Brsexit problems or because it is paused) disproportionately hits small and medium enterprises as far as I can see - for instance in their reliance on small consignments meaning that certtain businesses are being refused by hauliers/couriers to stop problems with mixed loads.
And some trade isn't flowing at all and never will because it no longer makes economic sense to to sell to the EU or to buy from businesses there.
The Quebec precedent is often brought up - of support for independence ebbing away/collapsing following a second referendum defeat.
Does anyone have an explanation for why this happened? I can think of a few possibilities, but I have no knowledge.
Was there infighting in the independence movement?
Was the next generation of independence politicians relatively less impressive?
Was it simply a loss of confidence among supporters following two defeats?
We're there constitutional changes that satisfied some independence voters?
Economic changes?
The precedent is brought up so often that someone must have at least a good idea why it happened.
In any case the Canadian situation is truly a federal one, so not a useful comparison for the UK esp. under Mr Johnson.
We could become truly federal.
No we could not, Westminster will never ever cede any powers that cede one iota of control. They retain all powers that are of any purpose and will fight tooth and nail to keep them. They have no intention of ever allowing devolution to work properly.
They already did it Malc...
Matt, control of road signs and a few other piddling things that they cannot influence as they get fixed pocket money is not proper devolution.
Diagreeing here
Education, healthcare, policing ... all utterly irrelevant.
All under fixed budgets and dependent on what Westminster do, they can have rug pulled from under them at any time, Westminster can slash their budgets at will so impossible to plan or cover any issues that arise. We saw that perfectly with furlough, Scotland asked to extend to help Scottish businesses and was told to F off , later when it suits they extend for England no problem.
In fairness rthe North English got the same treatment, but the problem there was somewhat different in terms of the underlying fiscal functioning, and you're right the devolution system didn't work properly.
Makes perfect sense - hold this lockdown as long as necessary to vaccinate enough people so that we never have to go through it again. Repeated stop-starts are more corrosive to the country than just knocking it on the head once and for all, if we can.
The Quebec precedent is often brought up - of support for independence ebbing away/collapsing following a second referendum defeat.
Does anyone have an explanation for why this happened? I can think of a few possibilities, but I have no knowledge.
Was there infighting in the independence movement?
Was the next generation of independence politicians relatively less impressive?
Was it simply a loss of confidence among supporters following two defeats?
We're there constitutional changes that satisfied some independence voters?
Economic changes?
The precedent is brought up so often that someone must have at least a good idea why it happened.
In any case the Canadian situation is truly a federal one, so not a useful comparison for the UK esp. under Mr Johnson.
We could become truly federal.
Indeed. In fact thje UK has gone in the other direction. As someone pointed out on PB a factor must be that sometimes the Canadian Premiers are Quebecois. The equivalent, of having a PM who is a MP for a Scottish seat, is now pretty much impossible under Mr Cameron's EVEL.
No it isn't, a Quebecois Canadian PM does not get to decide legislation determined by the Ontario government or the Alberta government. We just need an English Parliament or regional assemblies
What do you think Westminster is de facto? Of course it's already an English Parliament - which EVEL made it - as well as a UK one.
Wrong, on current polls Starmer could become PM with SNP confidence and supply at Westminster despite the Tories winning most votes in England.
England would not even have its own Parliament to compensate for being ignored at Westminster which still does not satisfy you whinging nats!
But under EVEL Westminster also functions as an English parliament. As it would in those c ircumstances for English matters. It's not being ignored at all.
It doesn't, not on tax, foreign affairs etc which are not within the remit of the devolved Parliaments
That is when Westminster functions as the UK Parliament. .
Comments
The DUP are so thick that if Irish jokes were not a throwback to the sort of bigoted, reactionary attitudes we must never revisit, I'd tell one right now. As it is, best if I find a different way to put it.
When it comes to the most pig-headed, self-harming party political decision of recent times, there are imo only 2 in the conversation. It's as much of a straight run off, and as excitingly in the balance, as that original series of Pop Idol which gripped the nation in the first weeks of 2002. In this case the contenders are -
(i) The LDs in Coalition tripling tuition fees when they had taken an oath in blood to abolish them and attracted a big chunk of votes on that basis.
(ii) The DUP, with the balance of power, not backing Theresa May when she had fought for and achieved a Brexit deal which safeguarded the position of NI in the UK.
Only question is, which is the Will Young and which the Gareth Gates?
Does anyone have an explanation for why this happened? I can think of a few possibilities, but I have no knowledge.
Was there infighting in the independence movement?
Was the next generation of independence politicians relatively less impressive?
Was it simply a loss of confidence among supporters following two defeats?
Were there constitutional changes that satisfied some independence voters?
Economic changes?
The precedent is brought up so often that someone must have at least a good idea why it happened.
People often talk about Blake's Seven as though it were just a bit of space opera, depicting a simplistic battle between good and evil.
In fact it was much more nuanced than that. The viewer was cleverly led to appreciate the positive virtues of the Federation, such as efficiency, decisiveness and a brand of conviction politics quite close to that of Margaret Thatcher. I'm sure many found themselves rooting for the Federation against the leftie subversives in the Liberator, just as many rooted for the Nazis while watching Secret Army, also in the late 1970s.
The UK, to put it bluntly, consists of one medium sized country, and three small ones that despise absolutely everything about it except for its money. It's worthless. That's all there is to it.
Daughter has received £4000 since being closed again, for the third time. That's it. She cannot even sell alcohol on a takeaway basis, unlike before.
How is her business supposed to survive until May let alone July on that? It can't.
I am not arguing for early lifting of restrictions. I have 2 sons and a husband laid low with it.
I am arguing that there needs to be:-
1. A proper generous support package to the affected sectors to cover the next 6 months, to be renewed if the epidemic is not over by then.
2. Continuing focus on improving vaccination rates - the one thing the government is doing well on.
3. Clear communication about the need to comply with social distancing / hygiene etc even after vaccination until there is better evidence about vaccination's effect on transmission.
4. No travel abroad without vaccination.
5. No inbound travel without vaccination and effective quarantine in hotels, properly enforced at the border.
Bullshit.....even a few weeks ago, Brittas when asked to give an example.of tougher restrictions didn't say close the borders, he said close the zoos.
We are now sending each other pictures of the snow outside our windows.
https://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/records/batting/most_runs_career.html?class=1;id=1;type=team
Start point: Boris not fit to be PM, should go asap.
Ultimate destination: Boris best PM ever and long may he reign!
State of completion: 72%.
England still has a lot to give, albeit perhaps as a medium power as described. Other UK countries can determine their own affairs. The best position is independent countries in the British isles cooperating peacefully.
No idea what will happen though.
Might even do something for social harmony.
It strikes me as one of the more perverse decisions made.
I know a couple of letters have been sent in but there is a life to be lived outside 24/7 crusade of anyone Brexit anti Boris rhetoric
And if Boris was replaced then I have no problem with that either
Aloph, Benito Slobodan perhaps.
But the Sots leaving the UK will be fine. Because it is SCOTTISH shit.
Lol.
Drakeford will be responsible for Drakeford doing poorly in May, not RT Davies
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jvPgs9iaHs
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1352620446051655682?s=20
RT is probably better placed to tap into that market than Paul Davies and win back votes from Abolish at least on the constituency vote. Remember 21% of Welsh voters voted Tory in 2016 and 13% voted UKIP so RT should increase the Tory voteshare and gain seats in May.
Millions or hundreds of millions spent on substandard product at an apparent overprice from a Tory donor without competition? Who could have guessed?
https://goodlawproject.org/update/computacenter-laptops/?utm_source=Twitter&utm_campaign=laptops tw 2401&utm_medium=social media
1. Not happening. Probably. The Government has prioritised whacking hospitality to suppress the disease for most of the pandemic, there have been no serious initiatives to help it since EOTHO last Summer, and you just know that the scientists will do their pieces at the first hint of reopening. And restaurants have neither the extent of public sympathy nor a popular Rashfordesque figurehead to baseball bat the Treasury into submission on their behalf
2. Looks like we can at least rely on this if there are no disastrous setbacks
3. Clear communication from this lot? We'll get a display of humility and sensitivity from Donald Trump before that happens
4. and 5. I'm cautiously optimistic that the Government will at least budge on the borders, but again (a) they've not done so yet, and the flow of vast numbers of people into the country continues unchecked for now, and (b) they have previous for being inexplicably mad keen on getting folk to go on sunshine holidays, so it's not in the bag
I've enormous sympathy for the owners of many, many viable businesses that are at threat of going under because of the restrictions, but which the Government appears to have lumped in with failing retail chains as part of the inevitable Schumpeterian cycle of creative economic destruction. I strongly suspect that they've had enough of spraying around money, concluded that big chains like JD Wetherspoon and Greene King, and smaller concerns with deep pockets or generous bankers, can get through without any further help, and that consequently they're going to abandon the others to sink or swim on their own.
But maybe I'm being excessively pessimistic and cynical? We'll know more when the Budget comes around.
Just being a bit naughty in winding up Scott
I am quite content for Boris to leave the stage, but in truth I do not see it happening this year with June G7 (10 with Australia, India and South Korea invited to attend by Boris) and certainly not before the November climate change conference in Glasgow
Fall in the 7 day infection rate per 100k from peak to 10 days afterwards:
East 37%
London 34%
South East 33%
North East 31%
North West 27%
Yorkshire 25%
South West 24%
East Midlands 18%
West Midlands 14%
To me that suggests the new variant is not as contagious as first feared but that it is slowly moving northwards.
And those rapid increases and falls in infection rates in south-eastern England do seem rather similar to what happened in various European countries during the autumn.
I would prefer a Drakeford led government than the Tories doing any deals with Plaid
https://order-order.com/2021/01/24/watch-video-proof-nandy-did-welcome-report-calling-for-peace-force-to-replace-army/
I think it is likely to be far lower than suggested.
The only refuseniks who would concern me much will be amongst hospital and care staff.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-55783805
As for hospitality, they probably care only about big brewers and developer friends who can buy up a lot of properties on the cheap.
They have not had enough of spraying money around. They are more than happy doing so when it comes to spraying money at friends of theirs and Tory donors. The rest of us can get stuffed as far as they're concerned.
Carwyn Jones was Labour leader elected at the last Assembly election and Drakeford took over from him when he resigned in 2018
So he is unelected by the people of Wales to his position
"3. Is the 12(+?)-week gap scientifically based? (Not really, but it's still much better than nothing.)"
Not sure that's right. As I understand it all that has happened is the trial data has been looked at another way by JVCI. Not sure that counts as not being scientific.
Education, healthcare, policing ... all utterly irrelevant.
It found that in Northern Ireland, 47% still want to remain in the UK, with 42% in favour of a united Ireland
And extraordinary thing for a party which claims to revere Thatcher.
England would not even have its own Parliament to compensate for being ignored at Westminster which still does not satisfy you whinging nats!
Get a grip Lisa.
As someone living in Wales I am content for a Plaid Conservative deal if it rids us of labour
https://twitter.com/SkyCricket/status/1353312635513688067
RT should stay in opposition unless he has the numbers for a deal with Abolish and be a hard hitting Opposition Leader to another Labour minority government or a Labour and Plaid government
Which means no foreign holidays this year.
And no pretendy business trips to Barbados etc.
Edit: Like when she got herself in a mess over trans athletes.
You come over too much as 'a know all ' and spout a lot of nonsense on a regular basis