With 7 weeks to go before Scotland votes the latest three polls find voters opposed to another IndyR
Comments
-
Head of State vs. Head of Government. There are many countries where the role isn't merged into one person.Endillion said:
I always find it bizarre that UK dignitaries are formally greeted by an elected President, actively serving as head of the executive branch of government, when travelling to the US. I think that Americans find it similarly weird that their dignitaries are still met by the Queen, rather than the Prime Minister.alex_ said:
I think a lot of American commentary genuinely doesn't understand that the Royal Family is a fundamental part of the British state. They don't get the distinction between the "family" and the institution.rcs1000 said:I just read that H&M's interview was "devastating" for the reputation of the British Monarchy.
I'm guessing the journalist didn't actually watch the interview, then.
It's not something that can just be easily disposed of on a whim, even if such a change was desired. Something has to take its place. Before pronouncing on its terminal decline, you would think a few of the commentators might stop to consider how come it is that the monarchy still exists in Australia and Canada.0 -
Which places 4 fences in the way of independence for a bit:NickPalmer said:To be pedantic, the actual question is whether Scotland should be independent rather than whether there should be another indyref. As a non-Scot I'm mildly in favour of allowing it in the coming decade - I don't think it can be put off indefinitely. But I'd hope the result will be "No". There will no doubt be others like me (and maybe some the reverse, who don't want a divisive new Indyref but would vote Yes if there is). So all one can really say is that opinion on independence itself is now narrowly against.
1 The generation argument and Boris's veto
2 Getting a majority at Holyrood
3 Getting sufficient support for it to be sane for the SNP to go for it
4 Actually winning the referendum if held.
Together that makes independence an unlikely outcome.1 -
Just my quick two minutes on today's Covid numbers, whilst I'm thinking about it. The rolling death rate is still on the way down, as is the case rate - for the time being... The hospital stats have finally caught up with themselves and the total number of patients is now down below 10,000. Home's no longer blank on the case map, but only because one half of the town has gone up from two cases in the last seven days to three. The vax numbers are still a bit pedestrian but since my understanding is that the supply is scheduled to ramp up considerably next week I'm not too bothered about that. It's all still quite positive.2
-
That's sad news.TheScreamingEagles said:Bugger, one of my favourite one cap wonder has died, he played in the test where Devon Malcolm took 9-57.
https://twitter.com/TheCricketerMag/status/1369347408254091272
Joey gave us a coaching session at my junior school c.1996. He was a really nice guy.1 -
Boris will be delighted with the EU for once.MaxPB said:
That seems like a real retrograde decision but I'm not sure it will change things particular for Scotland given we're out. It may make Scotland's accession impossible if they go down the UDI route though.williamglenn said:
The EU waiving the immunity of the Catalan separatists who are being prosecuted by Madrid won't help the momentum of the pro-EU independence case.MaxPB said:That latest comres poll on independence is about where I expect the final result to come out but I'm not sure that the SNP will get a majority now. Unionists seem galvanised by Sturgeon abusing the power of the state. I think there was a state of relaxation and complacency around independence because of the 80 seat majority in Westminster denying any future referendums for a few years that has blown away over this. Suddenly who rules in Holyrood matters again of the FM has the ability to politically target enemies.
https://twitter.com/France24_en/status/1369275527828226049
UDI is not a runner.1 -
Top trolling with the call for unity....which every EU statement must by law contain.CarlottaVance said:5 -
Here's a thought.
The increase in support for the Union is another vaccine bounce rather than the contretemps between Salmond and Sturgeon.2 -
That's why we need constant vaccination programmes from now on, starting with booster shots in the autu....wait.TheScreamingEagles said:Here's a thought.
The increase in support for the Union is another vaccine bounce rather than the contretemps between Salmond and Sturgeon.0 -
Well, there is text, there is context, and there is subtext. If the two premier lefties on the site are getting this upset about some fairly obvious implications, I rather suspect our dim crew may be on to something after all...kinabalu said:
On the contrary. His analysis is not skewed by the desperate need to see a "Fuck You Meghan" and is for this reason vastly superior to yours and your dim and tawdry crew.BluestBlue said:
Yes, @Northern_Al seems to require open vituperation of the sort so masterfully demonstrated in the 16th-century correspondence between Tsar Ivan IV and his self-exiled courtier Prince Kurbsky. But there's no need for that kind of unsubtle display here: we're British.TimT said:FPT TimT Posts: 2,683
1:40PM
Northern_Al said:
» show previous quotes
That's utter nonsense. He just wants the (culture) 'war' to continue for clicks, as do some on here. I've just read the statement - in case anybody hasn't, here it is:
"The whole family is saddened to learn the full extent of how challenging the last few years have been for Harry and Meghan.
"The issues raised, particularly that of race, are concerning. Whilst some recollections may vary, they are taken very seriously and will be addressed by the family privately.
"Harry, Meghan and Archie will always be much loved family members."
I just don't get how anybody could interpret that as a "fuck you" statement unless they were positively malign.
PS. I'm really not at all interested in this, but felt provoked enough to comment.
I'll translate:
"The family does not understand what Meghan and Harry have to complain about.
"The racism card is over-played and the comment made was not as reported.
"We have already looked into this to the extent we intend to and will say nothing further.
"Meghan and Harry are acting like little shits"0 -
I blame auto-erect...Anabobazina said:FPT
We are in serious danger of Susanna Reid becoming the next Sir Keir.
She is Susanna. She is not Susannah.0 -
Mike, you better exclude discussion of the Sevanta ConRes Scotsman poll before you lose years of credibility.
From Business for Scotland:
“Savanta ComRes, who carried out the poll for the Scotsman organisation, excluded a weighting mechanism that changed a previous poll last month from a Yes minority to a majority of 53%.
We spoke exclusively to Savanta ComRes who explained that the question of voting likelihood ”wasn’t asked purely because we knew we wouldn’t end up using it for weighting.”
To be clear, a unionist newspaper commissioned a poll and agreed that it would not be carried out with the normal weighting procedure.”
The raw figures are the same as the Feb poll by them which resulted in the 53% Yes vote after the standard weighting was applied.0 -
Vaccine boost combined with the EU embarrassing itself.TheScreamingEagles said:Here's a thought.
The increase in support for the Union is another vaccine bounce rather than the contretemps between Salmond and Sturgeon.1 -
Given the context (NHS is a devolved matter and Sturgeon appears to have done very well reputationally out of locking down five minutes earlier than Johnson has,) how much extra credit are the Evil Tories going to get for the jabs? I'm not convinced.TheScreamingEagles said:Here's a thought.
The increase in support for the Union is another vaccine bounce rather than the contretemps between Salmond and Sturgeon.0 -
Its perfect for him...he gets to claim he has been cancelled by the woke brigade, despite having a hugely popular show and all the wokerati loved it when he stuck it to the government...and now I am here on GB News (or UK News) every night to tell it straight.RochdalePioneers said:Piers Morgan off to join Andrew Neil's right whinge TV?
He will try to turn it into a UK version of Tucker Carlson (and with a massive pay cheque).
There has been plenty of talk that is what he has wanted to do, the cynic in my might think this is very convenient.2 -
Did Johnson come to a special deal with Microsoft for bespoke programming?TheScreamingEagles said:Here's a thought.
The increase in support for the Union is another vaccine bounce rather than the contretemps between Salmond and Sturgeon.0 -
-
The Tories don't have to get any credit for it to knock the shine off the idea that joining the EU would be a safer bet.Black_Rook said:
Given the context (NHS is a devolved matter and Sturgeon appears to have done very well reputationally out of locking down five minutes earlier than Johnson has,) how much extra credit are the Evil Tories going to get for the jabs? I'm not convinced.TheScreamingEagles said:Here's a thought.
The increase in support for the Union is another vaccine bounce rather than the contretemps between Salmond and Sturgeon.0 -
-
They are elected MEPs who are now subject to arrest by the Government of their own country should they seek to talk to their constituents. Pretty incendiary I would think.ydoethur said:
Does that have any practical effect as long as the three of them stay away from Spain?williamglenn said:
The EU waiving the immunity of the Catalan separatists who are being prosecuted by Madrid won't help the momentum of the pro-EU independence case.MaxPB said:That latest comres poll on independence is about where I expect the final result to come out but I'm not sure that the SNP will get a majority now. Unionists seem galvanised by Sturgeon abusing the power of the state. I think there was a state of relaxation and complacency around independence because of the 80 seat majority in Westminster denying any future referendums for a few years that has blown away over this. Suddenly who rules in Holyrood matters again of the FM has the ability to politically target enemies.
https://twitter.com/France24_en/status/1369275527828226049
The EU position has changed from non-intervention to backing the Spanish Government.
I can't call all the implications for Scottish Politics and the SNP/EU relationship, but the SNP position has backed the Catalan right to 'self-determination'. Input needed from one of our Scottish Nationalist peeps.
https://www.snp.org/policies/pb-what-is-the-snp-position-on-catalonia/
In my conversations over the years Plaid have seemed to be more interested in Catalonia. But that may not be representative.
There's a thread here:
https://twitter.com/AdamHolesch/status/13692374487782809630 -
Someone here posted a video today - quite a long one of the army helping with the Scottish vaccination programme. It occurred to me that as well as the publicity involved in the help given by the army seeming like a positive 'optic' for the Union, and therefore an undesirable one for the SNP, there is also the individual impact of those who are personally 'jabbed' by a member of the armed services. I'd imagine it makes a very positive impression.TheScreamingEagles said:Here's a thought.
The increase in support for the Union is another vaccine bounce rather than the contretemps between Salmond and Sturgeon.0 -
Wrong. They tried and then only backed down because of the uproar over the NI border.noneoftheabove said:
Neither did the EU, but it didnt stop 99% of this board stating they had a few weeks ago.RobD said:
So they don't have an export ban. Glad we cleared that up.CarlottaVance said:
And now that they don't have to worry about such nicities they are quite happy to impose an export ban on Australia. You are trying to defend the indefensible.5 -
Very likely.TheScreamingEagles said:Here's a thought.
The increase in support for the Union is another vaccine bounce rather than the contretemps between Salmond and Sturgeon.0 -
That is the EP not the EU.MarqueeMark said:
Boris will be delighted with the EU for once.MaxPB said:
That seems like a real retrograde decision but I'm not sure it will change things particular for Scotland given we're out. It may make Scotland's accession impossible if they go down the UDI route though.williamglenn said:
The EU waiving the immunity of the Catalan separatists who are being prosecuted by Madrid won't help the momentum of the pro-EU independence case.MaxPB said:That latest comres poll on independence is about where I expect the final result to come out but I'm not sure that the SNP will get a majority now. Unionists seem galvanised by Sturgeon abusing the power of the state. I think there was a state of relaxation and complacency around independence because of the 80 seat majority in Westminster denying any future referendums for a few years that has blown away over this. Suddenly who rules in Holyrood matters again of the FM has the ability to politically target enemies.
https://twitter.com/France24_en/status/1369275527828226049
UDI is not a runner.0 -
I am not defending the EU, their actions were silly, unhelpful, and purely theatre for a domestic audience. I said so at the time, whilst also making it clear they would not block exports.Richard_Tyndall said:
Wrong. They tried and then only backed down because of the uproar over the NI border.noneoftheabove said:
Neither did the EU, but it didnt stop 99% of this board stating they had a few weeks ago.RobD said:
So they don't have an export ban. Glad we cleared that up.CarlottaVance said:
And now that they don't have to worry about such nicities they are quite happy to impose an export ban on Australia. You are trying to defend the indefensible.
I am pointing out the hypocrisy of criticising misleading commentary from the EU when many Brits are happy to dish such misinformation out freely if it suits their agenda.0 -
The EP is not a part of the EU? 😕MattW said:
That is the EP not the EU.MarqueeMark said:
Boris will be delighted with the EU for once.MaxPB said:
That seems like a real retrograde decision but I'm not sure it will change things particular for Scotland given we're out. It may make Scotland's accession impossible if they go down the UDI route though.williamglenn said:
The EU waiving the immunity of the Catalan separatists who are being prosecuted by Madrid won't help the momentum of the pro-EU independence case.MaxPB said:That latest comres poll on independence is about where I expect the final result to come out but I'm not sure that the SNP will get a majority now. Unionists seem galvanised by Sturgeon abusing the power of the state. I think there was a state of relaxation and complacency around independence because of the 80 seat majority in Westminster denying any future referendums for a few years that has blown away over this. Suddenly who rules in Holyrood matters again of the FM has the ability to politically target enemies.
https://twitter.com/France24_en/status/1369275527828226049
UDI is not a runner.0 -
I'm not sure why a question "Should Scotland be an independent country?" needs to be turnout weighted. And if it is, what turnout do you use? UK elections? Scottish elections? The last Indyref?sarissa said:Mike, you better exclude discussion of the Sevanta ConRes Scotsman poll before you lose years of credibility.
From Business for Scotland:
“Savanta ComRes, who carried out the poll for the Scotsman organisation, excluded a weighting mechanism that changed a previous poll last month from a Yes minority to a majority of 53%.
We spoke exclusively to Savanta ComRes who explained that the question of voting likelihood ”wasn’t asked purely because we knew we wouldn’t end up using it for weighting.”
To be clear, a unionist newspaper commissioned a poll and agreed that it would not be carried out with the normal weighting procedure.”
The raw figures are the same as the Feb poll by them which resulted in the 53% Yes vote after the standard weighting was applied.0 -
It's (once more!) meta. I'm fine with the palace statement. It's a skillful curtain draw. And for me the interview was a bit of a non-event, if you really want to know the truth. Non shockerooni. No, the problem is you guys - or let's just say you since it's you I'm talking to - hanging bumptious bow tie groupthink onto it to suit your preconceptions. You needed a pigeon to shit in your coffee again, is what I mean, and I was happy to be that bird.BluestBlue said:
Well, there is text, there is context, and there is subtext. If the two premier lefties on the site are getting this upset about some fairly obvious implications, I rather suspect our dim crew may be on to something after all...kinabalu said:
On the contrary. His analysis is not skewed by the desperate need to see a "Fuck You Meghan" and is for this reason vastly superior to yours and your dim and tawdry crew.BluestBlue said:
Yes, @Northern_Al seems to require open vituperation of the sort so masterfully demonstrated in the 16th-century correspondence between Tsar Ivan IV and his self-exiled courtier Prince Kurbsky. But there's no need for that kind of unsubtle display here: we're British.TimT said:FPT TimT Posts: 2,683
1:40PM
Northern_Al said:
» show previous quotes
That's utter nonsense. He just wants the (culture) 'war' to continue for clicks, as do some on here. I've just read the statement - in case anybody hasn't, here it is:
"The whole family is saddened to learn the full extent of how challenging the last few years have been for Harry and Meghan.
"The issues raised, particularly that of race, are concerning. Whilst some recollections may vary, they are taken very seriously and will be addressed by the family privately.
"Harry, Meghan and Archie will always be much loved family members."
I just don't get how anybody could interpret that as a "fuck you" statement unless they were positively malign.
PS. I'm really not at all interested in this, but felt provoked enough to comment.
I'll translate:
"The family does not understand what Meghan and Harry have to complain about.
"The racism card is over-played and the comment made was not as reported.
"We have already looked into this to the extent we intend to and will say nothing further.
"Meghan and Harry are acting like little shits"0 -
I didn’t realise they were MEPs.MattW said:
They are elected MEPs who are now subject to arrest by the Government of their own country should they seek to talk to their constituents. Pretty incendiary I would think.ydoethur said:
Does that have any practical effect as long as the three of them stay away from Spain?williamglenn said:
The EU waiving the immunity of the Catalan separatists who are being prosecuted by Madrid won't help the momentum of the pro-EU independence case.MaxPB said:That latest comres poll on independence is about where I expect the final result to come out but I'm not sure that the SNP will get a majority now. Unionists seem galvanised by Sturgeon abusing the power of the state. I think there was a state of relaxation and complacency around independence because of the 80 seat majority in Westminster denying any future referendums for a few years that has blown away over this. Suddenly who rules in Holyrood matters again of the FM has the ability to politically target enemies.
https://twitter.com/France24_en/status/1369275527828226049
The EU position has changed from non-intervention to backing the Spanish Government.
I can't call all the implications for Scottish Politics and the SNP/EU relationship, but the SNP position has backed the Catalan right to 'self-determination'. Input needed from one of our Scottish Nationalist peeps.
https://www.snp.org/policies/pb-what-is-the-snp-position-on-catalonia/
In my conversations over the years Plaid have seemed to be more interested in Catalonia. But that may not be representative.
There's a thread here:
https://twitter.com/AdamHolesch/status/1369237448778280963
That’s pretty outrageous to be honest. Members of Parliament shouldn’t be subject to arrest or even the threat of arrest for espousing the view that their country is entitled to self-determination. Certainly in such circumstances their fellow parliamentarians shouldn’t be siding with their persecutors.2 -
You're behaving like one of those ultra-woke lefties who doesn't take stuff at face value but looks for a 'subtext' where the real meaning of the author can be seen, even if it was said/written in all innocence. So in this context 'saddened' becomes 'couldn't care less', 'concerned' becomes 'couldn't give a fuck', and 'much-loved family members' becomes 'we hate your guts'. It's really weird. Before you know it, you'll be deconstructing the sayings of B. Johnson to reveal the hidden offensiveness behind his liberal platitudes.BluestBlue said:
Well, there is text, there is context, and there is subtext. If the two premier lefties on the site are getting this upset about some fairly obvious implications, I rather suspect our dim crew may be on to something after all...kinabalu said:
On the contrary. His analysis is not skewed by the desperate need to see a "Fuck You Meghan" and is for this reason vastly superior to yours and your dim and tawdry crew.BluestBlue said:
Yes, @Northern_Al seems to require open vituperation of the sort so masterfully demonstrated in the 16th-century correspondence between Tsar Ivan IV and his self-exiled courtier Prince Kurbsky. But there's no need for that kind of unsubtle display here: we're British.TimT said:FPT TimT Posts: 2,683
1:40PM
Northern_Al said:
» show previous quotes
That's utter nonsense. He just wants the (culture) 'war' to continue for clicks, as do some on here. I've just read the statement - in case anybody hasn't, here it is:
"The whole family is saddened to learn the full extent of how challenging the last few years have been for Harry and Meghan.
"The issues raised, particularly that of race, are concerning. Whilst some recollections may vary, they are taken very seriously and will be addressed by the family privately.
"Harry, Meghan and Archie will always be much loved family members."
I just don't get how anybody could interpret that as a "fuck you" statement unless they were positively malign.
PS. I'm really not at all interested in this, but felt provoked enough to comment.
I'll translate:
"The family does not understand what Meghan and Harry have to complain about.
"The racism card is over-played and the comment made was not as reported.
"We have already looked into this to the extent we intend to and will say nothing further.
"Meghan and Harry are acting like little shits"
Oh and by the way, in reference to an earlier post of yours, I don't take you personally at all. Really not bothered - I enjoy the cut and thrust. I merely replied to a response that you'd made to me, er, personally.0 -
There's an argument that this polling is good for the SNP.
It means that SNP voters who dislike Sturgeon may reluctantly vote for them anyway if they think there's a danger of losing the majority.
If you establish the narrative that the SNP wont win a majority, and then they do, you risk more momentum towards independence.0 -
They put in the legislation for it and a lot of us said it would be used.....are you claiming it hasn't been used? Australia might differnoneoftheabove said:
Neither did the EU, but it didnt stop 99% of this board stating they had a few weeks ago.RobD said:
So they don't have an export ban. Glad we cleared that up.CarlottaVance said:0 -
I think an unwinding of brexit being the main thing on the news everyday, the success of the vaccine programme vs the failure of the EU programme is behind this. I think the Sturgeon vs Salmond stuff will be a much slower burn that and leech support away from them over a longer period of time as the two major Indy personalities continue to chuck buckets of horse shit over each other.TheScreamingEagles said:Here's a thought.
The increase in support for the Union is another vaccine bounce rather than the contretemps between Salmond and Sturgeon.0 -
Tommy Sheridan may be recommending his (former) supporters to vote for AFI, but only as a tactic. They and the ISP are markedly less radical than the SNP.Black_Rook said:
So SNP+ Green doesn't equal a majority but SNP + Green + radical independence people does? I suppose that could be a thing...malcolmg said:
Depends on how list goes, if the new independence parties do well, voting SNP on list is almost a wasted vote, then it could well be a majority for sure. Lots of pissed of independence supporters and given 750K wasted 2nd votes last time it could make a huge impact.Black_Rook said:
Under those circumstances, an SNP minority administration under a new leader. But there's no realistic prospect of a Unionist majority so the question is moot.ydoethur said:Let us assume, hypothetically, that the SNP and Greens fall short of a majority.
Let us also assume - and I think this is a very safe assumption - that the SNP remain the largest party.
What sort of government could be formed?
In Wales, I’m confident it will be Labour/Plaid because anything else is mathematically out of the question. But would Labour agree to a coalition with the SNP if (a) the referendum request was ditched and (b) Sturgeon quit to be replaced by somebody else?
0 -
Also how obsessed they are with the UK monarchy. Periodwilliamglenn said:
It's been fascinating to see how many Americans are invested in an anti-British monarchy position as part of their political identity.rcs1000 said:I just read that H&M's interview was "devastating" for the reputation of the British Monarchy.
I'm guessing the journalist didn't actually watch the interview, then.1 -
Two key reasons I said they wouldnt block exports to the UK were the importance of the relationship and that the UK will be a net vaccine exporting country this year. Neither apply to Australia.Pagan2 said:
They put in the legislation for it and a lot of us said it would be used.....are you claiming it hasn't been used? Australia might differnoneoftheabove said:
Neither did the EU, but it didnt stop 99% of this board stating they had a few weeks ago.RobD said:
So they don't have an export ban. Glad we cleared that up.CarlottaVance said:0 -
-
Likelihood to vote for starters.JohnLilburne said:
I'm not sure why a question "Should Scotland be an independent country?" needs to be turnout weighted. And if it is, what turnout do you use? UK elections? Scottish elections? The last Indyref?sarissa said:Mike, you better exclude discussion of the Sevanta ConRes Scotsman poll before you lose years of credibility.
From Business for Scotland:
“Savanta ComRes, who carried out the poll for the Scotsman organisation, excluded a weighting mechanism that changed a previous poll last month from a Yes minority to a majority of 53%.
We spoke exclusively to Savanta ComRes who explained that the question of voting likelihood ”wasn’t asked purely because we knew we wouldn’t end up using it for weighting.”
To be clear, a unionist newspaper commissioned a poll and agreed that it would not be carried out with the normal weighting procedure.”
The raw figures are the same as the Feb poll by them which resulted in the 53% Yes vote after the standard weighting was applied.1 -
They really couldn't organise a pregnancy on a council estate.williamglenn said:1 -
Although they seem very good at organising a cockup in a boardroom.TheScreamingEagles said:
They really couldn't organise a pregnancy on a council estate.williamglenn said:0 -
Evening all
To change the mood a little (and in lieu of posing down the pub which is several weeks away).
I'm having a regular project call with a client from a county council who is in the office and is surrounded by boxes.
I asked him about the boxes.
It seems the County Council he works for has ordered 4 pallets of skipping ropes, 5 pallets of chalk sticks and 18 cartons of balloons with further provision for 15,000 kit bags. This is apparently part of something called the Activity & Food Programme (a Government initiative but like most initiatives it will be local Councils who have to do the hard work) and the aim is to provide free activity bags for those children who have free school meals and these activity bags are for the forthcoming Easter holiday.
On the day when an All-Party Parliamentary Group has been widely complimentary of the response of local Councils to the pandemic:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56324395
I'm just asking the question - why should local councils have to waste so much of their time and effort responding not to what their residents might want but to what central Government dictates we apparently want or need? While it's good news for companies who make skipping ropes, chalk sticks and balloons, is this really what we should be providing to children in 2021? Is it a realistic vision of what children or their parents do or some romanticised throwback to what children might have done in the 60s and 70s (presumably when the senior civil servants involved were children themselves)?
Is this the sort of thing on which Government and Councils should be spending your money and my money? Is the provision of activity bags for children a national priority? I don't know - I struggle with the time and effort this forces Councils to divert from other things at a time when many are dealing with the consequences of Covid in terms of domestic abuse, issues with vulnerable children and adults and housing problems?
Just a change for those who aren't bothered with other issues.3 -
But they have blocked exports you silly sausage....you were wrong admit it. It doesn't hurt that muchnoneoftheabove said:
I am not defending the EU, their actions were silly, unhelpful, and purely theatre for a domestic audience. I said so at the time, whilst also making it clear they would not block exports.Richard_Tyndall said:
Wrong. They tried and then only backed down because of the uproar over the NI border.noneoftheabove said:
Neither did the EU, but it didnt stop 99% of this board stating they had a few weeks ago.RobD said:
So they don't have an export ban. Glad we cleared that up.CarlottaVance said:
And now that they don't have to worry about such nicities they are quite happy to impose an export ban on Australia. You are trying to defend the indefensible.
I am pointing out the hypocrisy of criticising misleading commentary from the EU when many Brits are happy to dish such misinformation out freely if it suits their agenda.2 -
They havent to the UK which is what the discussion and fearmongering was all about.Pagan2 said:
But they have blocked exports you silly sausage....you were wrong admit it. It doesn't hurt that muchnoneoftheabove said:
I am not defending the EU, their actions were silly, unhelpful, and purely theatre for a domestic audience. I said so at the time, whilst also making it clear they would not block exports.Richard_Tyndall said:
Wrong. They tried and then only backed down because of the uproar over the NI border.noneoftheabove said:
Neither did the EU, but it didnt stop 99% of this board stating they had a few weeks ago.RobD said:
So they don't have an export ban. Glad we cleared that up.CarlottaVance said:
And now that they don't have to worry about such nicities they are quite happy to impose an export ban on Australia. You are trying to defend the indefensible.
I am pointing out the hypocrisy of criticising misleading commentary from the EU when many Brits are happy to dish such misinformation out freely if it suits their agenda.0 -
The European Union is a moral crusade, or it is nothing.kle4 said:
Except the drawing attention to it doesn't seem to have hurt them any, they seem as confident as ever that they've done nothing wrong other than be misled by AZ (and only AZ apparently).ydoethur said:
You know, I would like to think that at some point one of the brighter national leaders will tell the Commission to SHUT THE FUCK UP rather than keep drawing attention to their ineptitude in negotiating contracts and the abject failure of their vaccination strategy.CarlottaVance said:
It's the laziness that gets me - we know what someone picking a fight with the EU looks like, we've seen it enough, so we can easily spot how they have been trying to pick fights with the UK, which genuinely doesn't seem to be involved at all.1 -
They've turned into the UK government in about 2017-18, continuously humiliating itself over Brexit. Except this is waaaaay more importantwilliamglenn said:3 -
No it was they put in rules that allowed them to block exports...people like you said it was only for monitoring purposes and wouldn't be used to block exports. The only time individual countries were mentioned was commenting on why places like australia and the uk were not on the exemption list. You were wrong no point shifting those goalposts nownoneoftheabove said:
They havent to the UK which is what the discussion and fearmongering was all about.Pagan2 said:
But they have blocked exports you silly sausage....you were wrong admit it. It doesn't hurt that muchnoneoftheabove said:
I am not defending the EU, their actions were silly, unhelpful, and purely theatre for a domestic audience. I said so at the time, whilst also making it clear they would not block exports.Richard_Tyndall said:
Wrong. They tried and then only backed down because of the uproar over the NI border.noneoftheabove said:
Neither did the EU, but it didnt stop 99% of this board stating they had a few weeks ago.RobD said:
So they don't have an export ban. Glad we cleared that up.CarlottaVance said:
And now that they don't have to worry about such nicities they are quite happy to impose an export ban on Australia. You are trying to defend the indefensible.
I am pointing out the hypocrisy of criticising misleading commentary from the EU when many Brits are happy to dish such misinformation out freely if it suits their agenda.0 -
I'm still of the view that despite the cabaret of the competing testimonies last week that this isn't bad for the SNP.Gallowgate said:There's an argument that this polling is good for the SNP.
It means that SNP voters who dislike Sturgeon may reluctantly vote for them anyway if they think there's a danger of losing the majority.
If you establish the narrative that the SNP wont win a majority, and then they do, you risk more momentum towards independence.
The people who despise her/them say "told you so". The people who like her/them think its a fuss about nothing. The people who don't pay much attention to politics? Isn't Nicola standing up to the age old problem of powerful men with grabby hands?
Remember that in the current polity, even being proven to be a devious liar isn't necessarily a negative - seems to be a positive for Boris Johnson...0 -
But they do have an export ban.noneoftheabove said:
They havent to the UK which is what the discussion and fearmongering was all about.Pagan2 said:
But they have blocked exports you silly sausage....you were wrong admit it. It doesn't hurt that muchnoneoftheabove said:
I am not defending the EU, their actions were silly, unhelpful, and purely theatre for a domestic audience. I said so at the time, whilst also making it clear they would not block exports.Richard_Tyndall said:
Wrong. They tried and then only backed down because of the uproar over the NI border.noneoftheabove said:
Neither did the EU, but it didnt stop 99% of this board stating they had a few weeks ago.RobD said:
So they don't have an export ban. Glad we cleared that up.CarlottaVance said:
And now that they don't have to worry about such nicities they are quite happy to impose an export ban on Australia. You are trying to defend the indefensible.
I am pointing out the hypocrisy of criticising misleading commentary from the EU when many Brits are happy to dish such misinformation out freely if it suits their agenda.2 -
0
-
Sure, but Americans tend to do exceptionally badly with understanding that not every country operates like theirs does.RobD said:
Head of State vs. Head of Government. There are many countries where the role isn't merged into one person.Endillion said:
I always find it bizarre that UK dignitaries are formally greeted by an elected President, actively serving as head of the executive branch of government, when travelling to the US. I think that Americans find it similarly weird that their dignitaries are still met by the Queen, rather than the Prime Minister.alex_ said:
I think a lot of American commentary genuinely doesn't understand that the Royal Family is a fundamental part of the British state. They don't get the distinction between the "family" and the institution.rcs1000 said:I just read that H&M's interview was "devastating" for the reputation of the British Monarchy.
I'm guessing the journalist didn't actually watch the interview, then.
It's not something that can just be easily disposed of on a whim, even if such a change was desired. Something has to take its place. Before pronouncing on its terminal decline, you would think a few of the commentators might stop to consider how come it is that the monarchy still exists in Australia and Canada.0 -
And one suspects the only reason they havent blocked exports to us is because they know we will just turn around and say then no chemicals to make vaccines for you. Plus we have our own manufacturing facilities in any caseRobD said:
But they do have an export ban.noneoftheabove said:
They havent to the UK which is what the discussion and fearmongering was all about.Pagan2 said:
But they have blocked exports you silly sausage....you were wrong admit it. It doesn't hurt that muchnoneoftheabove said:
I am not defending the EU, their actions were silly, unhelpful, and purely theatre for a domestic audience. I said so at the time, whilst also making it clear they would not block exports.Richard_Tyndall said:
Wrong. They tried and then only backed down because of the uproar over the NI border.noneoftheabove said:
Neither did the EU, but it didnt stop 99% of this board stating they had a few weeks ago.RobD said:
So they don't have an export ban. Glad we cleared that up.CarlottaVance said:
And now that they don't have to worry about such nicities they are quite happy to impose an export ban on Australia. You are trying to defend the indefensible.
I am pointing out the hypocrisy of criticising misleading commentary from the EU when many Brits are happy to dish such misinformation out freely if it suits their agenda.1 -
That's a highly specific reading to hang your hat on. HYUFD-esque. The odds that everyone involved was so highly specific that there would be no blocks to the UK but that blocks to other people was totally fine, strikes me as improbable compared to the proportion who likely said things like 'there won't be export bans/there will be a ban'. Given the improbability that everyone was commenting in such a specific and limited way as you set out, it seems bold to define the entire rambling discourse as only being on the specific point you want it to be.noneoftheabove said:
They havent to the UK which is what the discussion and fearmongering was all about.Pagan2 said:
But they have blocked exports you silly sausage....you were wrong admit it. It doesn't hurt that muchnoneoftheabove said:
I am not defending the EU, their actions were silly, unhelpful, and purely theatre for a domestic audience. I said so at the time, whilst also making it clear they would not block exports.Richard_Tyndall said:
Wrong. They tried and then only backed down because of the uproar over the NI border.noneoftheabove said:
Neither did the EU, but it didnt stop 99% of this board stating they had a few weeks ago.RobD said:
So they don't have an export ban. Glad we cleared that up.CarlottaVance said:
And now that they don't have to worry about such nicities they are quite happy to impose an export ban on Australia. You are trying to defend the indefensible.
I am pointing out the hypocrisy of criticising misleading commentary from the EU when many Brits are happy to dish such misinformation out freely if it suits their agenda.0 -
I think it's clear that Gavin Williamson is behind this DfE instruction. He likes playing with skipping ropes, chalk sticks and balloons, and assumes other children will as well.stodge said:Evening all
To change the mood a little (and in lieu of posing down the pub which is several weeks away).
I'm having a regular project call with a client from a county council who is in the office and is surrounded by boxes.
I asked him about the boxes.
It seems the County Council he works for has ordered 4 pallets of skipping ropes, 5 pallets of chalk sticks and 18 cartons of balloons with further provision for 15,000 kit bags. This is apparently part of something called the Activity & Food Programme (a Government initiative but like most initiatives it will be local Councils who have to do the hard work) and the aim is to provide free activity bags for those children who have free school meals and these activity bags are for the forthcoming Easter holiday.
On the day when an All-Party Parliamentary Group has been widely complimentary of the response of local Councils to the pandemic:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56324395
I'm just asking the question - why should local councils have to waste so much of their time and effort responding not to what their residents might want but to what central Government dictates we apparently want or need? While it's good news for companies who make skipping ropes, chalk sticks and balloons, is this really what we should be providing to children in 2021? Is it a realistic vision of what children or their parents do or some romanticised throwback to what children might have done in the 60s and 70s (presumably when the senior civil servants involved were children themselves)?
Is this the sort of thing on which Government and Councils should be spending your money and my money? Is the provision of activity bags for children a national priority? I don't know - I struggle with the time and effort this forces Councils to divert from other things at a time when many are dealing with the consequences of Covid in terms of domestic abuse, issues with vulnerable children and adults and housing problems?
Just a change for those who aren't bothered with other issues.
On the point - I agree with you, councils have better things to do and to spend on.0 -
-
It is Italy that have banned an export shipment to Australia, not the EU, but details dont matter. EU bad, UK good, I get it.RobD said:
But they do have an export ban.noneoftheabove said:
They havent to the UK which is what the discussion and fearmongering was all about.Pagan2 said:
But they have blocked exports you silly sausage....you were wrong admit it. It doesn't hurt that muchnoneoftheabove said:
I am not defending the EU, their actions were silly, unhelpful, and purely theatre for a domestic audience. I said so at the time, whilst also making it clear they would not block exports.Richard_Tyndall said:
Wrong. They tried and then only backed down because of the uproar over the NI border.noneoftheabove said:
Neither did the EU, but it didnt stop 99% of this board stating they had a few weeks ago.RobD said:
So they don't have an export ban. Glad we cleared that up.CarlottaVance said:
And now that they don't have to worry about such nicities they are quite happy to impose an export ban on Australia. You are trying to defend the indefensible.
I am pointing out the hypocrisy of criticising misleading commentary from the EU when many Brits are happy to dish such misinformation out freely if it suits their agenda.0 -
It really is amazing how a supposedly rational body has behaved so irrationally in recent weeks. I can't explain it.Leon said:
They've turned into the UK government in about 2017-18, continuously humiliating itself over Brexit. Except this is waaaaay more importantwilliamglenn said:1 -
Well checked up a little here and not sure its the government mandating what they buyNorthern_Al said:
I think it's clear that Gavin Williamson is behind this DfE instruction. He likes playing with skipping ropes, chalk sticks and balloons, and assumes other children will as well.stodge said:Evening all
To change the mood a little (and in lieu of posing down the pub which is several weeks away).
I'm having a regular project call with a client from a county council who is in the office and is surrounded by boxes.
I asked him about the boxes.
It seems the County Council he works for has ordered 4 pallets of skipping ropes, 5 pallets of chalk sticks and 18 cartons of balloons with further provision for 15,000 kit bags. This is apparently part of something called the Activity & Food Programme (a Government initiative but like most initiatives it will be local Councils who have to do the hard work) and the aim is to provide free activity bags for those children who have free school meals and these activity bags are for the forthcoming Easter holiday.
On the day when an All-Party Parliamentary Group has been widely complimentary of the response of local Councils to the pandemic:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56324395
I'm just asking the question - why should local councils have to waste so much of their time and effort responding not to what their residents might want but to what central Government dictates we apparently want or need? While it's good news for companies who make skipping ropes, chalk sticks and balloons, is this really what we should be providing to children in 2021? Is it a realistic vision of what children or their parents do or some romanticised throwback to what children might have done in the 60s and 70s (presumably when the senior civil servants involved were children themselves)?
Is this the sort of thing on which Government and Councils should be spending your money and my money? Is the provision of activity bags for children a national priority? I don't know - I struggle with the time and effort this forces Councils to divert from other things at a time when many are dealing with the consequences of Covid in terms of domestic abuse, issues with vulnerable children and adults and housing problems?
Just a change for those who aren't bothered with other issues.
On the point - I agree with you, councils have better things to do and to spend on.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/holiday-activities-and-food-programme/holiday-activities-and-food-programme-2021
looks to me like they provide some funding and the council within limits chooses how to spend it0 -
Using an EU law. To argue that the EU has nothing to do with it is totally absurd.noneoftheabove said:
It is Italy that have banned an export shipment to Australia, not the EU, but details dont matter. EU bad, UK good, I get it.RobD said:
But they do have an export ban.noneoftheabove said:
They havent to the UK which is what the discussion and fearmongering was all about.Pagan2 said:
But they have blocked exports you silly sausage....you were wrong admit it. It doesn't hurt that muchnoneoftheabove said:
I am not defending the EU, their actions were silly, unhelpful, and purely theatre for a domestic audience. I said so at the time, whilst also making it clear they would not block exports.Richard_Tyndall said:
Wrong. They tried and then only backed down because of the uproar over the NI border.noneoftheabove said:
Neither did the EU, but it didnt stop 99% of this board stating they had a few weeks ago.RobD said:
So they don't have an export ban. Glad we cleared that up.CarlottaVance said:
And now that they don't have to worry about such nicities they are quite happy to impose an export ban on Australia. You are trying to defend the indefensible.
I am pointing out the hypocrisy of criticising misleading commentary from the EU when many Brits are happy to dish such misinformation out freely if it suits their agenda.2 -
Last year my daughter, then in Year One, was given a bag from the County Council containing similar items. She absolutely loved it and was playing outside through the Easter holidays with the stuff, drawing hopscotch and other activities on the paving stones in our garden and jumping around lots.stodge said:Evening all
To change the mood a little (and in lieu of posing down the pub which is several weeks away).
I'm having a regular project call with a client from a county council who is in the office and is surrounded by boxes.
I asked him about the boxes.
It seems the County Council he works for has ordered 4 pallets of skipping ropes, 5 pallets of chalk sticks and 18 cartons of balloons with further provision for 15,000 kit bags. This is apparently part of something called the Activity & Food Programme (a Government initiative but like most initiatives it will be local Councils who have to do the hard work) and the aim is to provide free activity bags for those children who have free school meals and these activity bags are for the forthcoming Easter holiday.
On the day when an All-Party Parliamentary Group has been widely complimentary of the response of local Councils to the pandemic:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56324395
I'm just asking the question - why should local councils have to waste so much of their time and effort responding not to what their residents might want but to what central Government dictates we apparently want or need? While it's good news for companies who make skipping ropes, chalk sticks and balloons, is this really what we should be providing to children in 2021? Is it a realistic vision of what children or their parents do or some romanticised throwback to what children might have done in the 60s and 70s (presumably when the senior civil servants involved were children themselves)?
Is this the sort of thing on which Government and Councils should be spending your money and my money? Is the provision of activity bags for children a national priority? I don't know - I struggle with the time and effort this forces Councils to divert from other things at a time when many are dealing with the consequences of Covid in terms of domestic abuse, issues with vulnerable children and adults and housing problems?
Just a change for those who aren't bothered with other issues.
She loved it so much that afterwards we bought a big tub of chalk sticks for her to use going forwards. Whenever the weather gets nice she loves to do it.0 -
John Oliver is very very funny, I watch his show every week, but on some issues he doesn't like, like the royal family, he does have a tendency to get lazy and take easy cheap shots which the american audience are less likely toc are about (I recall one example where the Queen was caught complaining about the Chinese ambassador being rude, and his take, and presumably reason to even bring it up, was to whinge about British imperialism in the past as a reason for why she shouldn't have said it, as if that had anything to do with whether said ambassadors were rude). Not that he was wrong about what marrying into the royal family could end up being like.Philip_Thompson said:This is amusing from the 4:40 mark, from 2018.
https://youtu.be/Huab6p5HW0E1 -
If you are a member of the EU you are a slave to Brussels apparently.noneoftheabove said:
It is Italy that have banned an export shipment to Australia, not the EU, but details dont matter. EU bad, UK good, I get it.RobD said:
But they do have an export ban.noneoftheabove said:
They havent to the UK which is what the discussion and fearmongering was all about.Pagan2 said:
But they have blocked exports you silly sausage....you were wrong admit it. It doesn't hurt that muchnoneoftheabove said:
I am not defending the EU, their actions were silly, unhelpful, and purely theatre for a domestic audience. I said so at the time, whilst also making it clear they would not block exports.Richard_Tyndall said:
Wrong. They tried and then only backed down because of the uproar over the NI border.noneoftheabove said:
Neither did the EU, but it didnt stop 99% of this board stating they had a few weeks ago.RobD said:
So they don't have an export ban. Glad we cleared that up.CarlottaVance said:
And now that they don't have to worry about such nicities they are quite happy to impose an export ban on Australia. You are trying to defend the indefensible.
I am pointing out the hypocrisy of criticising misleading commentary from the EU when many Brits are happy to dish such misinformation out freely if it suits their agenda.0 -
Pity the poor sods who have to sort all of that lot into individual bags and distribute them - and to what effect? Some kids do still like to chalk walls and pavements so I guess that'll be mildly diverting for them, but the balloons will last about ten seconds before turning into yet more litter and skipping ropes had already gone out with the Ark when I was a kiddie in the 1980s.stodge said:Evening all
To change the mood a little (and in lieu of posing down the pub which is several weeks away).
I'm having a regular project call with a client from a county council who is in the office and is surrounded by boxes.
I asked him about the boxes.
It seems the County Council he works for has ordered 4 pallets of skipping ropes, 5 pallets of chalk sticks and 18 cartons of balloons with further provision for 15,000 kit bags. This is apparently part of something called the Activity & Food Programme (a Government initiative but like most initiatives it will be local Councils who have to do the hard work) and the aim is to provide free activity bags for those children who have free school meals and these activity bags are for the forthcoming Easter holiday.
On the day when an All-Party Parliamentary Group has been widely complimentary of the response of local Councils to the pandemic:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56324395
I'm just asking the question - why should local councils have to waste so much of their time and effort responding not to what their residents might want but to what central Government dictates we apparently want or need? While it's good news for companies who make skipping ropes, chalk sticks and balloons, is this really what we should be providing to children in 2021? Is it a realistic vision of what children or their parents do or some romanticised throwback to what children might have done in the 60s and 70s (presumably when the senior civil servants involved were children themselves)?
Is this the sort of thing on which Government and Councils should be spending your money and my money? Is the provision of activity bags for children a national priority? I don't know - I struggle with the time and effort this forces Councils to divert from other things at a time when many are dealing with the consequences of Covid in terms of domestic abuse, issues with vulnerable children and adults and housing problems?
Just a change for those who aren't bothered with other issues.
If the Government's that concerned about plummeting physical activity levels then it'd be better off doling out grants to sports clubs, a substantial fraction of which fear that they will be wiped out by the effects of Plague.1 -
The OECD has revised up its forecast for global growth and is predicting that the UK will grow faster than the Eurozone in 2021 and 2022.
https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/economics/oecd-economic-outlook/volume-2020/issue-2_34bfd999-en2 -
Because the EU was months later than the UK at ordering. They only have themselves to blame.TheScreamingEagles said:Don't worry Comical Dave is on the story.
https://twitter.com/DaveKeating/status/1369351351063506952
3 -
When even williamglenn is saying the eu done bad it makes you wonder just how blinkered this poster is and what the eu would have to do to make them say "Oh I say thats a bit much...".RobD said:
Using an EU law. To argue that the EU has nothing to do with it is totally absurd.noneoftheabove said:
It is Italy that have banned an export shipment to Australia, not the EU, but details dont matter. EU bad, UK good, I get it.RobD said:
But they do have an export ban.noneoftheabove said:
They havent to the UK which is what the discussion and fearmongering was all about.Pagan2 said:
But they have blocked exports you silly sausage....you were wrong admit it. It doesn't hurt that muchnoneoftheabove said:
I am not defending the EU, their actions were silly, unhelpful, and purely theatre for a domestic audience. I said so at the time, whilst also making it clear they would not block exports.Richard_Tyndall said:
Wrong. They tried and then only backed down because of the uproar over the NI border.noneoftheabove said:
Neither did the EU, but it didnt stop 99% of this board stating they had a few weeks ago.RobD said:
So they don't have an export ban. Glad we cleared that up.CarlottaVance said:
And now that they don't have to worry about such nicities they are quite happy to impose an export ban on Australia. You are trying to defend the indefensible.
I am pointing out the hypocrisy of criticising misleading commentary from the EU when many Brits are happy to dish such misinformation out freely if it suits their agenda.1 -
I was thinking it had been a while since Moron was sacked. Don't know why some people are getting excited. He always comes back stronger.0
-
That's not the case at all, you are setting up a defence which enables you to disregard any critique before it is even made, and no matter whether the critique is nuanced or not.noneoftheabove said:
It is Italy that have banned an export shipment to Australia, not the EU, but details dont matter. EU bad, UK good, I get it.RobD said:
But they do have an export ban.noneoftheabove said:
They havent to the UK which is what the discussion and fearmongering was all about.Pagan2 said:
But they have blocked exports you silly sausage....you were wrong admit it. It doesn't hurt that muchnoneoftheabove said:
I am not defending the EU, their actions were silly, unhelpful, and purely theatre for a domestic audience. I said so at the time, whilst also making it clear they would not block exports.Richard_Tyndall said:
Wrong. They tried and then only backed down because of the uproar over the NI border.noneoftheabove said:
Neither did the EU, but it didnt stop 99% of this board stating they had a few weeks ago.RobD said:
So they don't have an export ban. Glad we cleared that up.CarlottaVance said:
And now that they don't have to worry about such nicities they are quite happy to impose an export ban on Australia. You are trying to defend the indefensible.
I am pointing out the hypocrisy of criticising misleading commentary from the EU when many Brits are happy to dish such misinformation out freely if it suits their agenda.
As has been repeatedly demonstrated on this particular issue it is perfectly possible to think that, overall, the EU is good, but that there have been issues on this issue, and that their statements and behaviour have not been very good either. That doesn't require some childish EU bad, UK good, analysis. If you aren't defending the EU, as you state, for their silly and unhelpful actions, I don't know why you object to people objecting to when they make misleading statements.
Unless we're all whiter than white there's bound to be some past comment from the EU/UK which should have been criticised but wasn't, does that mean no one can ever criticise things happening now?
If there's an assessment overall over time, perhaps the UK comes out worse, but commenting on a current news story where the press statements have been knowingly false - as shown by roll back to tantamount to and de facto - it hardly seems unfair, in this moment, to focus on the misleading stuff being said at this moment.
That's like a minister caught in a lie pointing to an old lie by an opponent. Sure, that's important, but is it the most important lie right now?1 -
If this sort of shit gets translated into proper English it could be important.RobD said:
Because the EU was months later than the UK at ordering. They only have themselves to blame.TheScreamingEagles said:Don't worry Comical Dave is on the story.
https://twitter.com/DaveKeating/status/13693513510635069520 -
Latest bit of Brexit fun: a shortage of pet food https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/19146785.supermarkets-warn-national-shortages-pet-food/0
-
Except the opening paragraph states it is primarily because of demand.RochdalePioneers said:Latest bit of Brexit fun: a shortage of pet food https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/19146785.supermarkets-warn-national-shortages-pet-food/
2 -
I still cannot comprehend that the EU prioritised price over speed when it came to the vaccine.RobD said:
Because the EU was months later than the UK at ordering. They only have themselves to blame.TheScreamingEagles said:Don't worry Comical Dave is on the story.
https://twitter.com/DaveKeating/status/13693513510635069521 -
It's almost like the UK know what they had to do and did it both well and quickly (albeit by paying the asking price).TheScreamingEagles said:
The EU argued over price and last months while they did so and now can't quite grasp that difficult processes take time to get right before you can maximise production.2 -
It's made up of people, who are under pressure, and people act irrationally under pressure. In a few weeks/months when supplies are plentiful equanimity will return. But the moral high ground has been lost - push come to shove, they've acted in a manner you'd expect of Boris.Andy_JS said:
It really is amazing how a supposedly rational body has behaved so irrationally in recent weeks. I can't explain it.Leon said:
They've turned into the UK government in about 2017-18, continuously humiliating itself over Brexit. Except this is waaaaay more importantwilliamglenn said:0 -
Personally I'd say one in 10 years, but there's clearly room for argument. Every 5 years feels a bit frequent, given the agonising that accompanies them. The Yes side only has to win once, and they might strike a patch of temporary fedupness. But perhaps combine the option of frequent polls with a requirement for a 60% majority, so that it would never happen on a 52% whim like Bre...er, I forget what I was going to say...Omnium said:
Would you put a limit on the frequency of such polls?NickPalmer said:To be pedantic, the actual question is whether Scotland should be independent rather than whether there should be another indyref. As a non-Scot I'm mildly in favour of allowing it in the coming decade - I don't think it can be put off indefinitely. But I'd hope the result will be "No". There will no doubt be others like me (and maybe some the reverse, who don't want a divisive new Indyref but would vote Yes if there is). So all one can really say is that opinion on independence itself is now narrowly against.
Personally I'd have it as just one per parliament. Clearly a very low threshold, but one that I think is fair.0 -
The OECD economics dept was known as the Treasury in exile when I was there - donkeys years ago, admittedly.williamglenn said:The OECD has revised up its forecast for global growth and is predicting that the UK will grow faster than the Eurozone in 2021 and 2022.
https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/economics/oecd-economic-outlook/volume-2020/issue-2_34bfd999-en
0 -
OK Remainers, you have permission to cringe.williamglenn said:
Yes, you put all that faith in these EU people. You really did.
To be fair to you, the alternative was Nigel Farage. But still - bloody embarrassing isn't it?
3 -
Read the article... More people own pets so demand is up. The problem is that the industry cannot increase supply - at least thats what the Pet Food Manufacturers Association say:RobD said:
Except the opening paragraph states it is primarily because of demand.RochdalePioneers said:Latest bit of Brexit fun: a shortage of pet food https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/19146785.supermarkets-warn-national-shortages-pet-food/
"The PFMA also warned that the impact of Brexit on supplies had been "more challenging that we thought" with shipments delayed at borders due to paperwork not being in order.
Michael Bellingham, Chief Executive, said: "It turns out that, in the main, this is not due to lack of preparation by exporters, but faulty guidance by government to the vets who sign off the certificates.
"This will hopefully be sorted out over time, but time is not what companies have right now as the cost of having product stuck at the border is very high.
"It will be some time before the dust settles.""
We've still had enough of experts apparently.0 -
'Statement lacking nuance' is a great euphemism for being wrong, I may use that.TheScreamingEagles said:1 -
Because the only thing they could offer their members was lower prices after waiting so long to get startedTheScreamingEagles said:
I still cannot comprehend that the EU prioritised price over speed when it came to the vaccine.RobD said:
Because the EU was months later than the UK at ordering. They only have themselves to blame.TheScreamingEagles said:Don't worry Comical Dave is on the story.
https://twitter.com/DaveKeating/status/13693513510635069520 -
They didn't. They found themselves last and firmly so, they then decided to save face by going hard on price.TheScreamingEagles said:
I still cannot comprehend that the EU prioritised price over speed when it came to the vaccine.RobD said:
Because the EU was months later than the UK at ordering. They only have themselves to blame.TheScreamingEagles said:Don't worry Comical Dave is on the story.
https://twitter.com/DaveKeating/status/13693513510635069520 -
We should offer to boost their growth by giving them access to our Single Market.williamglenn said:The OECD has revised up its forecast for global growth and is predicting that the UK will grow faster than the Eurozone in 2021 and 2022.
https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/economics/oecd-economic-outlook/volume-2020/issue-2_34bfd999-en0 -
It’s a while since I saw it, but as I recall that is absolutely not what the EU contract says. It says that they would merely treat U.K. plants as EU ones for the purposes of export licenses, to avoid border checks and certification.TheScreamingEagles said:Don't worry Comical Dave is on the story.
https://twitter.com/DaveKeating/status/1369351349683556357
Has Keating just crossed the line from ridiculously partisan spin to actual dishonesty there?3 -
Because it was negotiated within parameters set by Ursula von der Leyen and all she cares about is the headline price.TheScreamingEagles said:
I still cannot comprehend that the EU prioritised price over speed when it came to the vaccine.RobD said:
Because the EU was months later than the UK at ordering. They only have themselves to blame.TheScreamingEagles said:Don't worry Comical Dave is on the story.
https://twitter.com/DaveKeating/status/13693513510635069521 -
Although within the last few days they banned the export label of vaccines to Australianoneoftheabove said:
Neither did the EU, but it didnt stop 99% of this board stating they had a few weeks ago.RobD said:
So they don't have an export ban. Glad we cleared that up.CarlottaVance said:
... move along... nothing to see1 -
They thought being able to negotiate a discount would show the value of the EU. They didn't place an order with Pfizer until November 2020 and were boasting about paying less than the Americans.TheScreamingEagles said:
I still cannot comprehend that the EU prioritised price over speed when it came to the vaccine.RobD said:
Because the EU was months later than the UK at ordering. They only have themselves to blame.TheScreamingEagles said:Don't worry Comical Dave is on the story.
https://twitter.com/DaveKeating/status/1369351351063506952
https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-eu-pfizer-idUSKBN27R1IF
The European Union has struck a deal to initially pay less for Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine candidate than the United States, an EU official told Reuters as the bloc announced on Wednesday1 -
If the people of scotland give a 50%+ vote to parties which have a referendum as part of their manifesto then in my view they have grounds for having one. If the scots don't want a referendum every five years they just dont vote for parties that have that.NickPalmer said:
Personally I'd say one in 10 years, but there's clearly toom for argument. Every 5 years feels a bit frequent, given the agonising that accompanies them. The Yes side only has to win once, and they might strike a patch of temporary fedupness. But perhaps combine the option of frequent polls with a requirement for a 60% majority, so that it would never happen on a 52% whim like Bre...er, I forget what I was going to say...Omnium said:
Would you put a limit on the frequency of such polls?NickPalmer said:To be pedantic, the actual question is whether Scotland should be independent rather than whether there should be another indyref. As a non-Scot I'm mildly in favour of allowing it in the coming decade - I don't think it can be put off indefinitely. But I'd hope the result will be "No". There will no doubt be others like me (and maybe some the reverse, who don't want a divisive new Indyref but would vote Yes if there is). So all one can really say is that opinion on independence itself is now narrowly against.
Personally I'd have it as just one per parliament. Clearly a very low threshold, but one that I think is fair.
Alternatively have an extra box on the holyrood voting slip which you can tick for a referendum this parliament. Then you can still vote snp or green and just not tick the box1 -
I thought combining the Chairman and Chief Executive roles was largely frowned upon in business these days? The US lumbered with an 18th century system ironically more monarchical than the UK has today.RobD said:
Head of State vs. Head of Government. There are many countries where the role isn't merged into one person.Endillion said:
I always find it bizarre that UK dignitaries are formally greeted by an elected President, actively serving as head of the executive branch of government, when travelling to the US. I think that Americans find it similarly weird that their dignitaries are still met by the Queen, rather than the Prime Minister.alex_ said:
I think a lot of American commentary genuinely doesn't understand that the Royal Family is a fundamental part of the British state. They don't get the distinction between the "family" and the institution.rcs1000 said:I just read that H&M's interview was "devastating" for the reputation of the British Monarchy.
I'm guessing the journalist didn't actually watch the interview, then.
It's not something that can just be easily disposed of on a whim, even if such a change was desired. Something has to take its place. Before pronouncing on its terminal decline, you would think a few of the commentators might stop to consider how come it is that the monarchy still exists in Australia and Canada.0 -
They were even boasting widely that they had got it for cheaper than the UK.ydoethur said:
Because it was negotiated within parameters set by Ursula von der Leyen and all she cares about is the headline price.TheScreamingEagles said:
I still cannot comprehend that the EU prioritised price over speed when it came to the vaccine.RobD said:
Because the EU was months later than the UK at ordering. They only have themselves to blame.TheScreamingEagles said:Don't worry Comical Dave is on the story.
https://twitter.com/DaveKeating/status/1369351351063506952
Until the UK started rolling out.
Oops.1 -
I don't think that is a very interesting metric on its own. Only in relation to the fall in output from before covid. The thing I would be looking for is when output recovers to pre-covid.williamglenn said:The OECD has revised up its forecast for global growth and is predicting that the UK will grow faster than the Eurozone in 2021 and 2022.
https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/economics/oecd-economic-outlook/volume-2020/issue-2_34bfd999-en
Of course if we are able to get back on our feet earlier due to vaccines etc that will help0 -
They struck a bargain to pay cheap and will pay far more than twice in consequence.williamglenn said:
They thought being able to negotiate a discount would show the value of the EU. They didn't place an order with Pfizer until November 2020 and were boasting about paying less than the Americans.TheScreamingEagles said:
I still cannot comprehend that the EU prioritised price over speed when it came to the vaccine.RobD said:
Because the EU was months later than the UK at ordering. They only have themselves to blame.TheScreamingEagles said:Don't worry Comical Dave is on the story.
https://twitter.com/DaveKeating/status/1369351351063506952
https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-eu-pfizer-idUSKBN27R1IF
The European Union has struck a deal to initially pay less for Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine candidate than the United States, an EU official told Reuters as the bloc announced on Wednesday3 -
We know Italy banned the export - but was it as the EUs behest.Charles said:
Although within the last few days they banned the export label of vaccines to Australianoneoftheabove said:
Neither did the EU, but it didnt stop 99% of this board stating they had a few weeks ago.RobD said:
So they don't have an export ban. Glad we cleared that up.CarlottaVance said:
... move along... nothing to see
And what will the consequences of it be? I can see other companies being very tentative about accepting orders from the EU let alone manufacturing within it.1 -
I dont watch daytime so it makes no difference who ever is presenting. GMB is designed for the feeble minded.Sunil_Prasannan said:
I blame auto-erect...Anabobazina said:FPT
We are in serious danger of Susanna Reid becoming the next Sir Keir.
She is Susanna. She is not Susannah.
The only think worth daytime attention is at 10.30 on RADIO 2.0 -
I would be staggered if we didn't grow a lot quicker than them (at least 3 percentage points) this year, as we (a) are leaving this faster, and (b) had a bigger dip last year.williamglenn said:The OECD has revised up its forecast for global growth and is predicting that the UK will grow faster than the Eurozone in 2021 and 2022.
https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/economics/oecd-economic-outlook/volume-2020/issue-2_34bfd999-en
By contrast, because the EU is going to have a terrible Q1 and Q2 of this year, it would be extremely surprising if they didn't manage a faster number for next year.
Imagine if normal quarterly output is 100.
We might have:
90, 100, 102, 102 - this year
and
103, 103, 103, 103 - next year
For the Eurozone, they would likely have something like
90, 90, 100, 101 - this year
and even if they barely reached normal output next year, i.e. something like
101, 101, 101, 101 - next year
They would still (mathematically) have faster growth than us, because they have one more period from this year with is CV19 riven than us.0 -
On the rare, usually once a decade, occasion I am wrong the euphemism I go for iskle4 said:
'Statement lacking nuance' is a great euphemism for being wrong, I may use that.TheScreamingEagles said:
'Whilst my logic was unimpeachable, I was misinformed by the interpretation of the events/data by other parties.'
Or I might use a variation of this from Four Lions.
'The report makes crystal clear that the police shot the right man, but as far as I'm aware, the wrong man exploded. Is that clear?'
0 -
I just wish @malcolmg had drafted the the Buckingham Palace statement.3
-
0
-
That would have been a turnip for the books.Casino_Royale said:I just wish @malcolmg had drafted the the Buckingham Palace statement.
Good night.2 -
French GP doing 30 a week, on a good week....compare to the scenes here.MarqueeMark said:
https://youtu.be/_kfC6EbWxRc0 -
Just had 3 Apache Gunships fly overhead.0
-
Didn’t stop Sarah Smith having multiple orgasms about it.sarissa said:Mike, you better exclude discussion of the Sevanta ConRes Scotsman poll before you lose years of credibility.
From Business for Scotland:
“Savanta ComRes, who carried out the poll for the Scotsman organisation, excluded a weighting mechanism that changed a previous poll last month from a Yes minority to a majority of 53%.
We spoke exclusively to Savanta ComRes who explained that the question of voting likelihood ”wasn’t asked purely because we knew we wouldn’t end up using it for weighting.”
To be clear, a unionist newspaper commissioned a poll and agreed that it would not be carried out with the normal weighting procedure.”
The raw figures are the same as the Feb poll by them which resulted in the 53% Yes vote after the standard weighting was applied.0