Boris should use the present ‘enormous goodwill’ from UEFA/FIFA to England, for saving football (see The Times, today) to unite the structures of English and Scottish league football, so the Old Firm can play in the British Prem, and Scotland League 1 feeds in like the English Championship.
This saves Scottish fitba, produces some cracking matches - Celtic-Liverpool!! - reinforces Britishness and UEFA/FIFA are, right now, so grateful to English football they would agree to keeping the four home nations as is. All playing and voting individually
Go for it, Boris.
The issue with that, is by uniting the leagues of England and Scotland, one diminishes their status as separate nations under UEFA and FIFA. There's a lot of grandfather rights that currently allows the UK to enter four teams in international competitions.
Cardiff and Swansea play in the English league system. They used to enter the Welsh Cup as a way to qualify for the Cup Winners’ Cup (European police forces loved that!).
That’s the big downside for the old firm. Europe only on merit.
The other thing is sporting merit, having made a big hoo ha about how sporting merit needs to be honoured there's no way the PL would let the Old Firm straight into the PL and there's a couple of PL clubs and a few Championship clubs who would have strenuous objections to that.
If Celtic and Rangers want to join the English football system let them apply for membership of the National League.
EPL teams would brick it , they would be scared of a good thrashing from Old Firm. Unfortunately we see their boring matches up here, most would struggle against the Old Firm.
Yeah right.
When was the last time a non Old Firm side won the title or when was the last time a Scottish side won a European trophy? I'm guessing the 80s with Aberdeen?
Compare and contrast with England, we've had 5 different winners in the last decade and two different clubs to have won the Champions league in the last decade, and three Europa League winners.
The SPL is a pub league in comparison, you'd lose to Sheffield United.
Last Scottish champions not Rangers nor Celtic, was Ferguson's Aberdeen in 1985.
Boris should use the present ‘enormous goodwill’ from UEFA/FIFA to England, for saving football (see The Times, today) to unite the structures of English and Scottish league football, so the Old Firm can play in the British Prem, and Scotland League 1 feeds in like the English Championship.
This saves Scottish fitba, produces some cracking matches - Celtic-Liverpool!! - reinforces Britishness and UEFA/FIFA are, right now, so grateful to English football they would agree to keeping the four home nations as is. All playing and voting individually
Go for it, Boris.
The issue with that, is by uniting the leagues of England and Scotland, one diminishes their status as separate nations under UEFA and FIFA. There's a lot of grandfather rights that currently allows the UK to enter four teams in international competitions.
Cardiff and Swansea play in the English league system. They used to enter the Welsh Cup as a way to qualify for the Cup Winners’ Cup (European police forces loved that!).
That’s the big downside for the old firm. Europe only on merit.
The other thing is sporting merit, having made a big hoo ha about how sporting merit needs to be honoured there's no way the PL would let the Old Firm straight into the PL and there's a couple of PL clubs and a few Championship clubs who would have strenuous objections to that.
If Celtic and Rangers want to join the English football system let them apply for membership of the National League.
EPL teams would brick it , they would be scared of a good thrashing from Old Firm. Unfortunately we see their boring matches up here, most would struggle against the Old Firm.
The harsh light of day for football is that there are too many professional clubs competing for too few fans. If teams were happy playing in the Vanarama league then that wouldn't be a problem. But money corrupts and they all want to be MASSIVE.
Growing up in Rochdale we had a team. As did Oldham. Bury. Bolton. Wigan. And every other small town in Lancashire. Small teams dream big - which is great! Its when they think they actually are big that we have a problem. My brother is an Oldham fan, and a few seasons in the top flight started a "lets spend" trend which after a succession of crap owners now has the brink of folding like Bury did. Blackburn built a massive stadium that they could only fill if the whole town paid to watch. Its genuinely absurd - so I can understand why owners looked at somewhere like Milton Keynes and said "lets move" even though it was a disaster from a fans perspective.
Add in big teams from Scotland and all that will happen is that teams on both sides of the border will fold. Doesn't bother me, but would the fans who think that every club has the right to exist regardless of finance or sanity. They don't.
I used to watch Rochdale quite regularly at one time. My late (and then prospective) father-in-law was a regular, so going with him was means of currying favour. Also I quite enjoyed it.
My first ever football match was Rochdale beating Wolves in the 4th Division. Which perfectly demonstrates why the league system works.
The point though is that a club like Rochdale can only expect to gain fans in Rochdale, as all the neighbouring towns also have professional clubs never mind the two Manchester sides. Providing that a club is run on that financial basis - and Dale are - then all is well. If they get carried away - Oldham - or bought by a lunatic - Oldham and Bury - they are in trouble.
Quite right. The Dale have had reasonably sensible financial management ever since I started taking notice of them over 60 years ago, but as you say no-one ever travelled from Bury or Oldham to watch them, unless the latter teams were playing. I do remember though, in 1962 watching Rochdale, then of the Fourth Division, play and beat Blackburn Rovers, then of the top division and with at least one international in the side, in the League Cup semi final. Biggest crowd I ever saw at Spotland.
Boris should use the present ‘enormous goodwill’ from UEFA/FIFA to England, for saving football (see The Times, today) to unite the structures of English and Scottish league football, so the Old Firm can play in the British Prem, and Scotland League 1 feeds in like the English Championship.
This saves Scottish fitba, produces some cracking matches - Celtic-Liverpool!! - reinforces Britishness and UEFA/FIFA are, right now, so grateful to English football they would agree to keeping the four home nations as is. All playing and voting individually
Go for it, Boris.
The issue with that, is by uniting the leagues of England and Scotland, one diminishes their status as separate nations under UEFA and FIFA. There's a lot of grandfather rights that currently allows the UK to enter four teams in international competitions.
How come Cardiff, Swansea and Wrexham play in English leagues, then? Or is it a question of 'custom and practice"? Which suggests an interesting problem if Wrexham become entitled to promotion back into the Football League, as they may well do. Especially as they've a lot of money coming their way!
They are "English clubs" that play in Wales.
Just as the most successful "Welsh club" -- 19 times winner of the Welsh Premier League -- actually plays in England.
The New Saints are the successor to Oswestry Town and they play in Croesoswallt in Shropshire.
I thought The New Siants were a renamed Llansantffraid. Wikipedia says that they subsequently merged with Oswestry Town to get a more suitable ground.
They call themselves TNS....The New Saints(of Oswestry Town) They were originally based in Llansantffraid, about 8 miles over the border from Oswestry, where they subsequently moved. I have reservations as to them still being allowed to play in the LOW, but as a lifelong Cardiff city supporter, playing in the English pyramid, I can hardly complain.
Look, we Tories won a majority of 80 in the UK in the Commons in 2019 and under our constitution what a UK government with a majority in the Commons wants goes until the next general election.
It does not matter what happens at Holyrood next month
Snipped right there. We English are in power. It doesn't matter what you Scotch want to do, we rule you.
This is literally why independence is sadly inevitable. Dripping English arrogance and ignorance and disregard for basic principles of democracy.
Wrong, England does not always get its own way. In 1950, 1964 and February 1974 England voted Tory but got a UK Labour government thanks to Scottish and Welsh Labour MPs.
On current polling the only way Starmer becomes UK PM in 2024 is with the support of Scottish SNP MPs and Welsh Labour MPs, England will almost certainly have a Tory majority still.
So it is not the case England always gets its own way in the UK (England does not even have its own Parliament unlike every other Home Nation), it is the case however that the UK government with a majority in the Commons always gets its own way.
Until 2024 that UK government with a majority in the Commons is a Tory one and it will decide until then and has made clear 2014 was a once in a generation vote when 55% of Scots voted to stay in the UK then
Boris should use the present ‘enormous goodwill’ from UEFA/FIFA to England, for saving football (see The Times, today) to unite the structures of English and Scottish league football, so the Old Firm can play in the British Prem, and Scotland League 1 feeds in like the English Championship.
This saves Scottish fitba, produces some cracking matches - Celtic-Liverpool!! - reinforces Britishness and UEFA/FIFA are, right now, so grateful to English football they would agree to keeping the four home nations as is. All playing and voting individually
Go for it, Boris.
The issue with that, is by uniting the leagues of England and Scotland, one diminishes their status as separate nations under UEFA and FIFA. There's a lot of grandfather rights that currently allows the UK to enter four teams in international competitions.
Cardiff and Swansea play in the English league system. They used to enter the Welsh Cup as a way to qualify for the Cup Winners’ Cup (European police forces loved that!).
That’s the big downside for the old firm. Europe only on merit.
The other thing is sporting merit, having made a big hoo ha about how sporting merit needs to be honoured there's no way the PL would let the Old Firm straight into the PL and there's a couple of PL clubs and a few Championship clubs who would have strenuous objections to that.
If Celtic and Rangers want to join the English football system let them apply for membership of the National League.
There is a simple reason why this isn't going to happen. If we turn the English leagues into British leagues then we give up our arguments for being separate nations deserving of separate national teams. Frankly a British team would have a far better prospect for chances of footballing success, but would remove the real purposes of international football. Getting drunk and smashing up foreign cities whilst chanting ENG-ER-LUND.
A British team would NOT have a far better chance of success - this is a complete myth. And it’s not going to happen, and nor should it happen. GB/Britain is not a country as such and for that reason the home nations field their own teams in every major team sport - this is not unique to football.
Good article by TSE, and good on Johnny Mercer for underlining what is wrong with the Johnsonite Conservatives (although he may not be forgiven for providing a stick for Labour).
An organisation, whether a company, a charity or a political movement is only as strong or as good as it's values. Johnson and his cronies have debased the Conservative Party, and his apologists simply say "ooh, look at the polls, haha, ya boo sucks". What goes around comes around. The fat little egotist populist will eventually get his comeuppance. It may take a while, but it will happen. I only hope Mercer does not leave the party.
I have met Alex on a few occasions and he is remarkable
My nephew was seriously injured in an accident and was paralysed (sadly he has since died) but the family followed Aberdeen but also Man Utd when Alex went to the club
I wrote to Alex explaining about how seriously ill my nephew was and I received a personal letter from Alex to him, lots of autographs of the players and club souvenirs
When my brother in law read the letter to him he asked his son what he thought about the letter and who was his favourite player
A smile came across his face and he said 'Eric Cantona'
This was his first emotional expression and words he had spoken following his dreadful accident a couple of years previously
Truly a highly emotional moment and confirmation of just how Alex won the hearts and minds of so many
Compare and contrast with England, we've had 5 different winners in the last decade and two different clubs to have won the Champions league in the last decade, and three Europa League winners.
The SPL is a pub league in comparison, you'd lose to Sheffield United.
Celtic and Rangers are about 50ish in the UEFA 5 year ranking so probably mid table EPL which feels about right.
Boris should use the present ‘enormous goodwill’ from UEFA/FIFA to England, for saving football (see The Times, today) to unite the structures of English and Scottish league football, so the Old Firm can play in the British Prem, and Scotland League 1 feeds in like the English Championship.
This saves Scottish fitba, produces some cracking matches - Celtic-Liverpool!! - reinforces Britishness and UEFA/FIFA are, right now, so grateful to English football they would agree to keeping the four home nations as is. All playing and voting individually
Go for it, Boris.
The issue with that, is by uniting the leagues of England and Scotland, one diminishes their status as separate nations under UEFA and FIFA. There's a lot of grandfather rights that currently allows the UK to enter four teams in international competitions.
Cardiff and Swansea play in the English league system. They used to enter the Welsh Cup as a way to qualify for the Cup Winners’ Cup (European police forces loved that!).
That’s the big downside for the old firm. Europe only on merit.
The other thing is sporting merit, having made a big hoo ha about how sporting merit needs to be honoured there's no way the PL would let the Old Firm straight into the PL and there's a couple of PL clubs and a few Championship clubs who would have strenuous objections to that.
If Celtic and Rangers want to join the English football system let them apply for membership of the National League.
There is a simple reason why this isn't going to happen. If we turn the English leagues into British leagues then we give up our arguments for being separate nations deserving of separate national teams. Frankly a British team would have a far better prospect for chances of footballing success, but would remove the real purposes of international football. Getting drunk and smashing up foreign cities whilst chanting ENG-ER-LUND.
A British team would NOT have a far better chance of success - this is a complete myth. And it’s not going to happen, and nor should it happen. GB/Britain is not a country as such and for that reason the home nations field their own teams in every major team sport - this is not unique to football.
Football and Rugby Union are the only two team sports I can think of where that applies. Hockey has GB teams.
Boris should use the present ‘enormous goodwill’ from UEFA/FIFA to England, for saving football (see The Times, today) to unite the structures of English and Scottish league football, so the Old Firm can play in the British Prem, and Scotland League 1 feeds in like the English Championship.
This saves Scottish fitba, produces some cracking matches - Celtic-Liverpool!! - reinforces Britishness and UEFA/FIFA are, right now, so grateful to English football they would agree to keeping the four home nations as is. All playing and voting individually
Go for it, Boris.
The issue with that, is by uniting the leagues of England and Scotland, one diminishes their status as separate nations under UEFA and FIFA. There's a lot of grandfather rights that currently allows the UK to enter four teams in international competitions.
Cardiff and Swansea play in the English league system. They used to enter the Welsh Cup as a way to qualify for the Cup Winners’ Cup (European police forces loved that!).
That’s the big downside for the old firm. Europe only on merit.
The other thing is sporting merit, having made a big hoo ha about how sporting merit needs to be honoured there's no way the PL would let the Old Firm straight into the PL and there's a couple of PL clubs and a few Championship clubs who would have strenuous objections to that.
If Celtic and Rangers want to join the English football system let them apply for membership of the National League.
There is a simple reason why this isn't going to happen. If we turn the English leagues into British leagues then we give up our arguments for being separate nations deserving of separate national teams. Frankly a British team would have a far better prospect for chances of footballing success, but would remove the real purposes of international football. Getting drunk and smashing up foreign cities whilst chanting ENG-ER-LUND.
A British team would NOT have a far better chance of success - this is a complete myth. And it’s not going to happen, and nor should it happen. GB/Britain is not a country as such and for that reason the home nations field their own teams in every major team sport - this is not unique to football.
There is, on the other hand, the counterexample of "Team GB" [sic] in the Olympics, whcih rather did away with NI at least overtly (which is however also covered by Ireland ...). Not trying to contradict you, just commenting that there is a prior model!
Boris should use the present ‘enormous goodwill’ from UEFA/FIFA to England, for saving football (see The Times, today) to unite the structures of English and Scottish league football, so the Old Firm can play in the British Prem, and Scotland League 1 feeds in like the English Championship.
This saves Scottish fitba, produces some cracking matches - Celtic-Liverpool!! - reinforces Britishness and UEFA/FIFA are, right now, so grateful to English football they would agree to keeping the four home nations as is. All playing and voting individually
Go for it, Boris.
You really don't know anything about football.
No way anyone in the EPL or English football wants Rangers and Celtic in the PL
Which two clubs are going to make way for them, as the PL doesn't have the scope in the calendar for a 22 club PL.
Surely it would be a sacrifice worth making to see the Rangers support doing a tour of English football grounds and cities?
Plus Glasgow would get to play host to a different firm of English casuals every weekend. A great boost for the city.
Sturgeon's comments on bars and pubs are ridiculous. The populated parts of Scotland and England are a long way from each other.
What did she say?
Speaking at the Covid briefing, Ms Sturgeon said: “From Monday for a period until the middle of May actually there will be more hospitality open in Scotland than in England because there will be some indoor opening — albeit very restricted — that’s not the case yet in England.
“So again if people are coming north across the border, you know, don’t sort of crowd into places — you shouldn’t be allowed to crowd into places indoors — but don’t come specifically to sort of escape the rules in your own area.”
How many people are going to head north JUST to go into a Scottish boozer ? It's preposterous.
Not at all. Think A1 and A7 crossings, Carlisle and Berwick, and rainy weather. Not to mention Coldstream/Cornhill.
Cornhill ! It's barely bigger than a hamlet.
Lots of effort to make pensioners of Cornhill think twice before heading to the Newcastle arms for an orange juice in Coldstream
On Scots Independence, when I was a young teenager I canoed from Pebbles to Berwick over several days camping on route, and as the middle of the Tweed is the border up to Chainbridge, I assume I would need a passport to get out on the Coldstream side to get a coffee, as that would be over the border from my home in Berwick
You’ll be lucky to get out on the water, what with HYUFD’s gunboats patrolling the Tweed 24/7.
Boris should use the present ‘enormous goodwill’ from UEFA/FIFA to England, for saving football (see The Times, today) to unite the structures of English and Scottish league football, so the Old Firm can play in the British Prem, and Scotland League 1 feeds in like the English Championship.
This saves Scottish fitba, produces some cracking matches - Celtic-Liverpool!! - reinforces Britishness and UEFA/FIFA are, right now, so grateful to English football they would agree to keeping the four home nations as is. All playing and voting individually
Go for it, Boris.
The issue with that, is by uniting the leagues of England and Scotland, one diminishes their status as separate nations under UEFA and FIFA. There's a lot of grandfather rights that currently allows the UK to enter four teams in international competitions.
Cardiff and Swansea play in the English league system. They used to enter the Welsh Cup as a way to qualify for the Cup Winners’ Cup (European police forces loved that!).
That’s the big downside for the old firm. Europe only on merit.
The other thing is sporting merit, having made a big hoo ha about how sporting merit needs to be honoured there's no way the PL would let the Old Firm straight into the PL and there's a couple of PL clubs and a few Championship clubs who would have strenuous objections to that.
If Celtic and Rangers want to join the English football system let them apply for membership of the National League.
EPL teams would brick it , they would be scared of a good thrashing from Old Firm. Unfortunately we see their boring matches up here, most would struggle against the Old Firm.
Yeah right.
When was the last time a non Old Firm side won the title or when was the last time a Scottish side won a European trophy? I'm guessing the 80s with Aberdeen?
Compare and contrast with England, we've had 5 different winners in the last decade and two different clubs to have won the Champions league in the last decade, and three Europa League winners.
The SPL is a pub league in comparison, you'd lose to Sheffield United.
Last Scottish champions not Rangers nor Celtic, was Ferguson's Aberdeen in 1985.
I see zero point adding Ranger and Celtic into the Premiership - but it's worth looking at Scottish football as it shows the problem across Europe
Because of the way TV money is split the Premiership is remarkably even - all teams receive enough money to field a half decent team that has a chance of beating the other sides.
It's hard to see any other leagues in Europe that have anything like the same depth.
Boris should use the present ‘enormous goodwill’ from UEFA/FIFA to England, for saving football (see The Times, today) to unite the structures of English and Scottish league football, so the Old Firm can play in the British Prem, and Scotland League 1 feeds in like the English Championship.
This saves Scottish fitba, produces some cracking matches - Celtic-Liverpool!! - reinforces Britishness and UEFA/FIFA are, right now, so grateful to English football they would agree to keeping the four home nations as is. All playing and voting individually
Go for it, Boris.
The issue with that, is by uniting the leagues of England and Scotland, one diminishes their status as separate nations under UEFA and FIFA. There's a lot of grandfather rights that currently allows the UK to enter four teams in international competitions.
Cardiff and Swansea play in the English league system. They used to enter the Welsh Cup as a way to qualify for the Cup Winners’ Cup (European police forces loved that!).
That’s the big downside for the old firm. Europe only on merit.
The other thing is sporting merit, having made a big hoo ha about how sporting merit needs to be honoured there's no way the PL would let the Old Firm straight into the PL and there's a couple of PL clubs and a few Championship clubs who would have strenuous objections to that.
If Celtic and Rangers want to join the English football system let them apply for membership of the National League.
There is a simple reason why this isn't going to happen. If we turn the English leagues into British leagues then we give up our arguments for being separate nations deserving of separate national teams. Frankly a British team would have a far better prospect for chances of footballing success, but would remove the real purposes of international football. Getting drunk and smashing up foreign cities whilst chanting ENG-ER-LUND.
A British team would NOT have a far better chance of success - this is a complete myth. And it’s not going to happen, and nor should it happen. GB/Britain is not a country as such and for that reason the home nations field their own teams in every major team sport - this is not unique to football.
Football and Rugby Union are the only two team sports I can think of where that applies. Hockey has GB teams.
Sturgeon's comments on bars and pubs are ridiculous. The populated parts of Scotland and England are a long way from each other.
What did she say?
Speaking at the Covid briefing, Ms Sturgeon said: “From Monday for a period until the middle of May actually there will be more hospitality open in Scotland than in England because there will be some indoor opening — albeit very restricted — that’s not the case yet in England.
“So again if people are coming north across the border, you know, don’t sort of crowd into places — you shouldn’t be allowed to crowd into places indoors — but don’t come specifically to sort of escape the rules in your own area.”
How many people are going to head north JUST to go into a Scottish boozer ? It's preposterous.
Not at all. Think A1 and A7 crossings, Carlisle and Berwick, and rainy weather. Not to mention Coldstream/Cornhill.
Cornhill ! It's barely bigger than a hamlet.
Lots of effort to make pensioners of Cornhill think twice before heading to the Newcastle arms for an orange juice in Coldstream
On Scots Independence, when I was a young teenager I canoed from Pebbles to Berwick over several days camping on route, and as the middle of the Tweed is the border up to Chainbridge, I assume I would need a passport to get out on the Coldstream side to get a coffee, as that would be over the border from my home in Berwick
You’ll be lucky to get out on the water, what with HYUFD’s gunboats patrolling the Tweed 25/7.
Standard subsample warnings, but Street apparently leads every borough bar Birmingham.
Street's net approval at +31 (15% strongly approve, against 4% strongly disproving).
They key thing that I think may punters have overlooked are the other elections on the same day - every district of West Midlands County *bar* the City of Birmingham also have Metro borough elections happening. So turnout in the most strongly Labour area is likely to be lower, whereas no such effect should be present in the Tory boroughs. In 2017 no metro boroughs had elections.
Street at 4/11 at WH looks to be strong value to me.
Makes you think how on earth can he not win? On pretty much every measure he is highly thought of and respected across the political spectrum.
Boris should use the present ‘enormous goodwill’ from UEFA/FIFA to England, for saving football (see The Times, today) to unite the structures of English and Scottish league football, so the Old Firm can play in the British Prem, and Scotland League 1 feeds in like the English Championship.
This saves Scottish fitba, produces some cracking matches - Celtic-Liverpool!! - reinforces Britishness and UEFA/FIFA are, right now, so grateful to English football they would agree to keeping the four home nations as is. All playing and voting individually
Go for it, Boris.
The issue with that, is by uniting the leagues of England and Scotland, one diminishes their status as separate nations under UEFA and FIFA. There's a lot of grandfather rights that currently allows the UK to enter four teams in international competitions.
How come Cardiff, Swansea and Wrexham play in English leagues, then? Or is it a question of 'custom and practice"? Which suggests an interesting problem if Wrexham become entitled to promotion back into the Football League, as they may well do. Especially as they've a lot of money coming their way!
They are "English clubs" that play in Wales.
Just as the most successful "Welsh club" -- 19 times winner of the Welsh Premier League -- actually plays in England.
The New Saints are the successor to Oswestry Town and they play in Croesoswallt in Shropshire.
I thought The New Siants were a renamed Llansantffraid. Wikipedia says that they subsequently merged with Oswestry Town to get a more suitable ground.
They call themselves TNS....The New Saints(of Oswestry Town) They were originally based in Llansantffraid, about 8 miles over the border from Oswestry, where they subsequently moved. I have reservations as to them still being allowed to play in the LOW, but as a lifelong Cardiff city supporter, playing in the English pyramid, I can hardly complain.
Only British club ever to change their actual name to that of a sponsor?
Boris should use the present ‘enormous goodwill’ from UEFA/FIFA to England, for saving football (see The Times, today) to unite the structures of English and Scottish league football, so the Old Firm can play in the British Prem, and Scotland League 1 feeds in like the English Championship.
This saves Scottish fitba, produces some cracking matches - Celtic-Liverpool!! - reinforces Britishness and UEFA/FIFA are, right now, so grateful to English football they would agree to keeping the four home nations as is. All playing and voting individually
Go for it, Boris.
The issue with that, is by uniting the leagues of England and Scotland, one diminishes their status as separate nations under UEFA and FIFA. There's a lot of grandfather rights that currently allows the UK to enter four teams in international competitions.
Cardiff and Swansea play in the English league system. They used to enter the Welsh Cup as a way to qualify for the Cup Winners’ Cup (European police forces loved that!).
That’s the big downside for the old firm. Europe only on merit.
The other thing is sporting merit, having made a big hoo ha about how sporting merit needs to be honoured there's no way the PL would let the Old Firm straight into the PL and there's a couple of PL clubs and a few Championship clubs who would have strenuous objections to that.
If Celtic and Rangers want to join the English football system let them apply for membership of the National League.
There is a simple reason why this isn't going to happen. If we turn the English leagues into British leagues then we give up our arguments for being separate nations deserving of separate national teams. Frankly a British team would have a far better prospect for chances of footballing success, but would remove the real purposes of international football. Getting drunk and smashing up foreign cities whilst chanting ENG-ER-LUND.
A British team would NOT have a far better chance of success - this is a complete myth. And it’s not going to happen, and nor should it happen. GB/Britain is not a country as such and for that reason the home nations field their own teams in every major team sport - this is not unique to football.
Football and Rugby Union are the only two team sports I can think of where that applies. Hockey has GB teams.
Curling surely.
Are there effective curling teams in GB other than Scotland? I would have thought curling would be like Rugby League; there really aren't any effective National teams in the UK other than England I realise that's not quite the question but without bringing in Wales and possibly Scotland a Rugby League World Championship is akin to World Series Baseball; no-one outside the US can win.
Edited; second thoughts France & Aus/NZ in Rugby League.
I have met Alex on a few occasions and he is remarkable
My nephew was seriously injured in an accident and was paralysed (sadly he has since died) but the family followed Aberdeen but also Man Utd when Alex went to the club
I wrote to Alex explaining about how seriously ill my nephew was and I received a personal letter from Alex to him, lots of autographs of the players and club souvenirs
When my brother in law read the letter to him he asked his son what he thought about the letter and who was his favourite player
A smile came across his face and he said 'Eric Cantona'
This was his first emotional expression and words he had spoken following his dreadful accident a couple of years previously
Truly a highly emotional moment and confirmation of just how Alex won the hearts and minds of so many
Interesting. I know of a similar story where Fergie wrote to a (then) young lad I know who had injured himself and was unable to play football again. It was a very touching letter and caused the lad (who was about 12) to burst into to tears with joy. Clearly a good man under the harsh exterior.
Sturgeon's comments on bars and pubs are ridiculous. The populated parts of Scotland and England are a long way from each other.
What did she say?
Speaking at the Covid briefing, Ms Sturgeon said: “From Monday for a period until the middle of May actually there will be more hospitality open in Scotland than in England because there will be some indoor opening — albeit very restricted — that’s not the case yet in England.
“So again if people are coming north across the border, you know, don’t sort of crowd into places — you shouldn’t be allowed to crowd into places indoors — but don’t come specifically to sort of escape the rules in your own area.”
How many people are going to head north JUST to go into a Scottish boozer ? It's preposterous.
Not at all. Think A1 and A7 crossings, Carlisle and Berwick, and rainy weather. Not to mention Coldstream/Cornhill.
Cornhill ! It's barely bigger than a hamlet.
Lots of effort to make pensioners of Cornhill think twice before heading to the Newcastle arms for an orange juice in Coldstream
On Scots Independence, when I was a young teenager I canoed from Pebbles to Berwick over several days camping on route, and as the middle of the Tweed is the border up to Chainbridge, I assume I would need a passport to get out on the Coldstream side to get a coffee, as that would be over the border from my home in Berwick
You’ll be lucky to get out on the water, what with HYUFD’s gunboats patrolling the Tweed 24/7.
A really genuinely funny comment - made my morning
Boris should use the present ‘enormous goodwill’ from UEFA/FIFA to England, for saving football (see The Times, today) to unite the structures of English and Scottish league football, so the Old Firm can play in the British Prem, and Scotland League 1 feeds in like the English Championship.
This saves Scottish fitba, produces some cracking matches - Celtic-Liverpool!! - reinforces Britishness and UEFA/FIFA are, right now, so grateful to English football they would agree to keeping the four home nations as is. All playing and voting individually
Go for it, Boris.
The issue with that, is by uniting the leagues of England and Scotland, one diminishes their status as separate nations under UEFA and FIFA. There's a lot of grandfather rights that currently allows the UK to enter four teams in international competitions.
Cardiff and Swansea play in the English league system. They used to enter the Welsh Cup as a way to qualify for the Cup Winners’ Cup (European police forces loved that!).
That’s the big downside for the old firm. Europe only on merit.
The other thing is sporting merit, having made a big hoo ha about how sporting merit needs to be honoured there's no way the PL would let the Old Firm straight into the PL and there's a couple of PL clubs and a few Championship clubs who would have strenuous objections to that.
If Celtic and Rangers want to join the English football system let them apply for membership of the National League.
There is a simple reason why this isn't going to happen. If we turn the English leagues into British leagues then we give up our arguments for being separate nations deserving of separate national teams. Frankly a British team would have a far better prospect for chances of footballing success, but would remove the real purposes of international football. Getting drunk and smashing up foreign cities whilst chanting ENG-ER-LUND.
A British team would NOT have a far better chance of success - this is a complete myth. And it’s not going to happen, and nor should it happen. GB/Britain is not a country as such and for that reason the home nations field their own teams in every major team sport - this is not unique to football.
Football and Rugby Union are the only two team sports I can think of where that applies. Hockey has GB teams.
Curling surely.
Cricket? Technically England is England and Wales is it not?
Look, we Tories won a majority of 80 in the UK in the Commons in 2019 and under our constitution what a UK government with a majority in the Commons wants goes until the next general election.
It does not matter what happens at Holyrood next month
Snipped right there. We English are in power. It doesn't matter what you Scotch want to do, we rule you.
This is literally why independence is sadly inevitable. Dripping English arrogance and ignorance and disregard for basic principles of democracy.
Wrong, England does not always get its own way. In 1950, 1964 and February 1974 England voted Tory but got a UK Labour government thanks to Scottish and Welsh Labour MPs.
On current polling the only way Starmer becomes UK PM in 2024 is with the support of Scottish SNP MPs and Welsh Labour MPs, England will almost certainly have a Tory majority still.
So it is not the case England always gets its own way in the UK (England does not even have its own Parliament unlike every other Home Nation), it is the case however that the UK government with a majority in the Commons always gets its own way.
Until 2024 that UK government with a majority in the Commons is a Tory one and it will decide until then and has made clear 2014 was a once in a generation vote when 55% of Scots voted to stay in the UK then
This isn't about governance. This is about the union. If Scotland cannot vote to challenge its place in the union without the agreement of England then the union is no longer based on consent. It becomes impossible for Scotland to leave or renegotiate the terms of union - it is beholden to England. Instead of a mutual union it is annexation.
Scotland voted to stay in the UK in 2014 in a once in a generation referendum (more than the Spanish government ever gave Catalonia).
Plus 2 polls today have No still ahead of Yes anyway, what you actually mean is that Scottish Nationalists must be appeased at every opportunity until they get the result they want, completely disrespecting the once in a generation 2014 result.
Boris should use the present ‘enormous goodwill’ from UEFA/FIFA to England, for saving football (see The Times, today) to unite the structures of English and Scottish league football, so the Old Firm can play in the British Prem, and Scotland League 1 feeds in like the English Championship.
This saves Scottish fitba, produces some cracking matches - Celtic-Liverpool!! - reinforces Britishness and UEFA/FIFA are, right now, so grateful to English football they would agree to keeping the four home nations as is. All playing and voting individually
Go for it, Boris.
The issue with that, is by uniting the leagues of England and Scotland, one diminishes their status as separate nations under UEFA and FIFA. There's a lot of grandfather rights that currently allows the UK to enter four teams in international competitions.
Cardiff and Swansea play in the English league system. They used to enter the Welsh Cup as a way to qualify for the Cup Winners’ Cup (European police forces loved that!).
That’s the big downside for the old firm. Europe only on merit.
The other thing is sporting merit, having made a big hoo ha about how sporting merit needs to be honoured there's no way the PL would let the Old Firm straight into the PL and there's a couple of PL clubs and a few Championship clubs who would have strenuous objections to that.
If Celtic and Rangers want to join the English football system let them apply for membership of the National League.
There is a simple reason why this isn't going to happen. If we turn the English leagues into British leagues then we give up our arguments for being separate nations deserving of separate national teams. Frankly a British team would have a far better prospect for chances of footballing success, but would remove the real purposes of international football. Getting drunk and smashing up foreign cities whilst chanting ENG-ER-LUND.
A British team would NOT have a far better chance of success - this is a complete myth. And it’s not going to happen, and nor should it happen. GB/Britain is not a country as such and for that reason the home nations field their own teams in every major team sport - this is not unique to football.
Football and Rugby Union are the only two team sports I can think of where that applies. Hockey has GB teams.
Cricket is a hybrid mixture - England+Wales / Scotland / All-Ireland
Boris should use the present ‘enormous goodwill’ from UEFA/FIFA to England, for saving football (see The Times, today) to unite the structures of English and Scottish league football, so the Old Firm can play in the British Prem, and Scotland League 1 feeds in like the English Championship.
This saves Scottish fitba, produces some cracking matches - Celtic-Liverpool!! - reinforces Britishness and UEFA/FIFA are, right now, so grateful to English football they would agree to keeping the four home nations as is. All playing and voting individually
Go for it, Boris.
The issue with that, is by uniting the leagues of England and Scotland, one diminishes their status as separate nations under UEFA and FIFA. There's a lot of grandfather rights that currently allows the UK to enter four teams in international competitions.
Cardiff and Swansea play in the English league system. They used to enter the Welsh Cup as a way to qualify for the Cup Winners’ Cup (European police forces loved that!).
That’s the big downside for the old firm. Europe only on merit.
The other thing is sporting merit, having made a big hoo ha about how sporting merit needs to be honoured there's no way the PL would let the Old Firm straight into the PL and there's a couple of PL clubs and a few Championship clubs who would have strenuous objections to that.
If Celtic and Rangers want to join the English football system let them apply for membership of the National League.
There is a simple reason why this isn't going to happen. If we turn the English leagues into British leagues then we give up our arguments for being separate nations deserving of separate national teams. Frankly a British team would have a far better prospect for chances of footballing success, but would remove the real purposes of international football. Getting drunk and smashing up foreign cities whilst chanting ENG-ER-LUND.
A British team would NOT have a far better chance of success - this is a complete myth. And it’s not going to happen, and nor should it happen. GB/Britain is not a country as such and for that reason the home nations field their own teams in every major team sport - this is not unique to football.
Football and Rugby Union are the only two team sports I can think of where that applies. Hockey has GB teams.
Curling surely.
Are there effective curling teams in GB other than Scotland? I would have though curling would be like Rugby League; there really aren't any effective National teams in the UK other than England I realise that's not quite the question but without brining in Wales and possible;y Scotland a Rugby League World Championship is akin to World Series Baseball; no-one outside the US can win.
*quick check* England's about 1/3 of the way down the offocial world rankings, but admittedly Wales is at the bottom (must be all the hills). Oddly though the rankings table treats Scotland and GB as effectively the same so you are in that sense right!
Look, we Tories won a majority of 80 in the UK in the Commons in 2019 and under our constitution what a UK government with a majority in the Commons wants goes until the next general election.
It does not matter what happens at Holyrood next month
Snipped right there. We English are in power. It doesn't matter what you Scotch want to do, we rule you.
This is literally why independence is sadly inevitable. Dripping English arrogance and ignorance and disregard for basic principles of democracy.
Wrong, England does not always get its own way. In 1950, 1964 and February 1974 England voted Tory but got a UK Labour government thanks to Scottish and Welsh Labour MPs.
On current polling the only way Starmer becomes UK PM in 2024 is with the support of Scottish SNP MPs and Welsh Labour MPs, England will almost certainly have a Tory majority still.
So it is not the case England always gets its own way in the UK (England does not even have its own Parliament unlike every other Home Nation), it is the case however that the UK government with a majority in the Commons always gets its own way.
Until 2024 that UK government with a majority in the Commons is a Tory one and it will decide until then and has made clear 2014 was a once in a generation vote when 55% of Scots voted to stay in the UK then
1974 = 47 years ago. Half a lifetime.
Actually technically in 2010 and 2017 England elected a majority of Tory MPs too but got a hung Parliament across the UK thanks to Scottish and Welsh MPs.
So actually only 4 and 11 years ago did England not get the Tory majority it voted for
Look, we Tories won a majority of 80 in the UK in the Commons in 2019 and under our constitution what a UK government with a majority in the Commons wants goes until the next general election.
It does not matter what happens at Holyrood next month
Snipped right there. We English are in power. It doesn't matter what you Scotch want to do, we rule you.
This is literally why independence is sadly inevitable. Dripping English arrogance and ignorance and disregard for basic principles of democracy.
Wrong, England does not always get its own way. In 1950, 1964 and February 1974 England voted Tory but got a UK Labour government thanks to Scottish and Welsh Labour MPs.
On current polling the only way Starmer becomes UK PM in 2024 is with the support of Scottish SNP MPs and Welsh Labour MPs, England will almost certainly have a Tory majority still.
So it is not the case England always gets its own way in the UK (England does not even have its own Parliament unlike every other Home Nation), it is the case however that the UK government with a majority in the Commons always gets its own way.
Until 2024 that UK government with a majority in the Commons is a Tory one and it will decide until then and has made clear 2014 was a once in a generation vote when 55% of Scots voted to stay in the UK then
1974 = 47 years ago. Half a lifetime.
Actually technically in 2010 and 2017 England elected a majority of Tory MPs too but got a hung Parliament across the UK thanks to Scottish and Welsh MPs.
So actually only 4 and 11 years ago did England not get the Tory majority it voted for
Doesn'rt count, as the Scots and Welsh didn't get what they voted for either.
Boris should use the present ‘enormous goodwill’ from UEFA/FIFA to England, for saving football (see The Times, today) to unite the structures of English and Scottish league football, so the Old Firm can play in the British Prem, and Scotland League 1 feeds in like the English Championship.
This saves Scottish fitba, produces some cracking matches - Celtic-Liverpool!! - reinforces Britishness and UEFA/FIFA are, right now, so grateful to English football they would agree to keeping the four home nations as is. All playing and voting individually
Go for it, Boris.
The issue with that, is by uniting the leagues of England and Scotland, one diminishes their status as separate nations under UEFA and FIFA. There's a lot of grandfather rights that currently allows the UK to enter four teams in international competitions.
Cardiff and Swansea play in the English league system. They used to enter the Welsh Cup as a way to qualify for the Cup Winners’ Cup (European police forces loved that!).
That’s the big downside for the old firm. Europe only on merit.
The other thing is sporting merit, having made a big hoo ha about how sporting merit needs to be honoured there's no way the PL would let the Old Firm straight into the PL and there's a couple of PL clubs and a few Championship clubs who would have strenuous objections to that.
If Celtic and Rangers want to join the English football system let them apply for membership of the National League.
There is a simple reason why this isn't going to happen. If we turn the English leagues into British leagues then we give up our arguments for being separate nations deserving of separate national teams. Frankly a British team would have a far better prospect for chances of footballing success, but would remove the real purposes of international football. Getting drunk and smashing up foreign cities whilst chanting ENG-ER-LUND.
A British team would NOT have a far better chance of success - this is a complete myth. And it’s not going to happen, and nor should it happen. GB/Britain is not a country as such and for that reason the home nations field their own teams in every major team sport - this is not unique to football.
Football and Rugby Union are the only two team sports I can think of where that applies. Hockey has GB teams.
Curling surely.
Are there effective curling teams in GB other than Scotland? I would have though curling would be like Rugby League; there really aren't any effective National teams in the UK other than England I realise that's not quite the question but without brining in Wales and possible;y Scotland a Rugby League World Championship is akin to World Series Baseball; no-one outside the US can win.
*quick check* England's about 1/3 of the way down the offocial world rankings, but admittedly Wales is at the bottom (must be all the hills). Oddly though the rankings table treats Scotland and GB as effectively the same so you are in that sense right!
Hmm. Think I'd better either pay attention to what I'm typing or what the chap repairing my fence is doing. Not both simultaneously and badly.
Look, we Tories won a majority of 80 in the UK in the Commons in 2019 and under our constitution what a UK government with a majority in the Commons wants goes until the next general election.
It does not matter what happens at Holyrood next month
Snipped right there. We English are in power. It doesn't matter what you Scotch want to do, we rule you.
This is literally why independence is sadly inevitable. Dripping English arrogance and ignorance and disregard for basic principles of democracy.
Wrong, England does not always get its own way. In 1950, 1964 and February 1974 England voted Tory but got a UK Labour government thanks to Scottish and Welsh Labour MPs.
On current polling the only way Starmer becomes UK PM in 2024 is with the support of Scottish SNP MPs and Welsh Labour MPs, England will almost certainly have a Tory majority still.
So it is not the case England always gets its own way in the UK (England does not even have its own Parliament unlike every other Home Nation), it is the case however that the UK government with a majority in the Commons always gets its own way.
Until 2024 that UK government with a majority in the Commons is a Tory one and it will decide until then and has made clear 2014 was a once in a generation vote when 55% of Scots voted to stay in the UK then
This isn't about governance. This is about the union. If Scotland cannot vote to challenge its place in the union without the agreement of England then the union is no longer based on consent. It becomes impossible for Scotland to leave or renegotiate the terms of union - it is beholden to England. Instead of a mutual union it is annexation.
Interesting that Scottish Nationalists and Labour alike want to line up alongside Jefferson Davis and Robert E. Lee:
'Texas v. White, 74 U.S. (7 Wall.) 700 (1869), was a case argued before the United States Supreme Court in 1869... the court further held that the Constitution did not permit states to unilaterally secede from the United States... "When, therefore, Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. All the obligations of perpetual union, and all the guaranties of republican government in the Union, attached at once to the State. The act which consummated her admission into the Union was something more than a compact; it was the incorporation of a new member into the political body. And it was final. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States."'
Look, we Tories won a majority of 80 in the UK in the Commons in 2019 and under our constitution what a UK government with a majority in the Commons wants goes until the next general election.
It does not matter what happens at Holyrood next month
Snipped right there. We English are in power. It doesn't matter what you Scotch want to do, we rule you.
This is literally why independence is sadly inevitable. Dripping English arrogance and ignorance and disregard for basic principles of democracy.
Wrong, England does not always get its own way. In 1950, 1964 and February 1974 England voted Tory but got a UK Labour government thanks to Scottish and Welsh Labour MPs.
On current polling the only way Starmer becomes UK PM in 2024 is with the support of Scottish SNP MPs and Welsh Labour MPs, England will almost certainly have a Tory majority still.
So it is not the case England always gets its own way in the UK (England does not even have its own Parliament unlike every other Home Nation), it is the case however that the UK government with a majority in the Commons always gets its own way.
Until 2024 that UK government with a majority in the Commons is a Tory one and it will decide until then and has made clear 2014 was a once in a generation vote when 55% of Scots voted to stay in the UK then
This isn't about governance. This is about the union. If Scotland cannot vote to challenge its place in the union without the agreement of England then the union is no longer based on consent. It becomes impossible for Scotland to leave or renegotiate the terms of union - it is beholden to England. Instead of a mutual union it is annexation.
Scotland voted to stay in the UK in 2014 in a once in a generation referendum (more than the Spanish government ever gave Catalonia).
Plus 2 polls today have No still ahead of Yes anyway, what you actually mean is that Scottish Nationalists must be appeased at every opportunity until they get the result they want, completely disrespecting the once in a generation 2014 result.
Scottish Nationalists does not = all Scots
The rationality of what you say is sound. I think that it would be very difficult from a political perspective to deny a vote if the Scots vote in a majority of independence supporting parties that have clearly stated this in their manifestos as their intention.
If this does happen, the sensible thing to do would be for Westminster to set the tone of the process. Ideally there would need to be a confirmatory referendum after a "deal". The problem with this is that this did not happen with the idiotic process that was followed for Brexit, so the precedent for a constitutional bombshell with irreversible consequences and no check an balance has been set.
Look, we Tories won a majority of 80 in the UK in the Commons in 2019 and under our constitution what a UK government with a majority in the Commons wants goes until the next general election.
It does not matter what happens at Holyrood next month
Snipped right there. We English are in power. It doesn't matter what you Scotch want to do, we rule you.
This is literally why independence is sadly inevitable. Dripping English arrogance and ignorance and disregard for basic principles of democracy.
Wrong, England does not always get its own way. In 1950, 1964 and February 1974 England voted Tory but got a UK Labour government thanks to Scottish and Welsh Labour MPs.
On current polling the only way Starmer becomes UK PM in 2024 is with the support of Scottish SNP MPs and Welsh Labour MPs, England will almost certainly have a Tory majority still.
So it is not the case England always gets its own way in the UK (England does not even have its own Parliament unlike every other Home Nation), it is the case however that the UK government with a majority in the Commons always gets its own way.
Until 2024 that UK government with a majority in the Commons is a Tory one and it will decide until then and has made clear 2014 was a once in a generation vote when 55% of Scots voted to stay in the UK then
This isn't about governance. This is about the union. If Scotland cannot vote to challenge its place in the union without the agreement of England then the union is no longer based on consent. It becomes impossible for Scotland to leave or renegotiate the terms of union - it is beholden to England. Instead of a mutual union it is annexation.
Scotland voted to stay in the UK in 2014 in a once in a generation referendum (more than the Spanish government ever gave Catalonia).
And that is why you and yours want to trap them forever into a union that they no longer have any say in.
Boris should use the present ‘enormous goodwill’ from UEFA/FIFA to England, for saving football (see The Times, today) to unite the structures of English and Scottish league football, so the Old Firm can play in the British Prem, and Scotland League 1 feeds in like the English Championship.
This saves Scottish fitba, produces some cracking matches - Celtic-Liverpool!! - reinforces Britishness and UEFA/FIFA are, right now, so grateful to English football they would agree to keeping the four home nations as is. All playing and voting individually
Go for it, Boris.
The issue with that, is by uniting the leagues of England and Scotland, one diminishes their status as separate nations under UEFA and FIFA. There's a lot of grandfather rights that currently allows the UK to enter four teams in international competitions.
How come Cardiff, Swansea and Wrexham play in English leagues, then? Or is it a question of 'custom and practice"? Which suggests an interesting problem if Wrexham become entitled to promotion back into the Football League, as they may well do. Especially as they've a lot of money coming their way!
They are "English clubs" that play in Wales.
Just as the most successful "Welsh club" -- 19 times winner of the Welsh Premier League -- actually plays in England.
The New Saints are the successor to Oswestry Town and they play in Croesoswallt in Shropshire.
I thought The New Siants were a renamed Llansantffraid. Wikipedia says that they subsequently merged with Oswestry Town to get a more suitable ground.
They call themselves TNS....The New Saints(of Oswestry Town) They were originally based in Llansantffraid, about 8 miles over the border from Oswestry, where they subsequently moved. I have reservations as to them still being allowed to play in the LOW, but as a lifelong Cardiff city supporter, playing in the English pyramid, I can hardly complain.
Only British club ever to change their actual name to that of a sponsor?
Looking at the most recent polling for Holyrood I am of the opinion, that the Scottish electorate are being very ‘cannie’ if the polls are to be believed.
It does seem that Salmond is ‘persona non grata’ in Scotland, indeed he is polling worse than Boris, and the electorate look as if they are to indulge in a substantial tactical vote on the list to ensure their second vote goes to green and thereby denies Salmond a place at the table in Holyrood.
At the same time, the Scots like Sturgeon’s brand and are willing to grant her another term, but also are beginning to show signs that they are not as in favour of Independence as the SNP would have you believe, hence todays poll showing No ahead of Yes 48/44
Nicola is far to good a politician to prejudice her legacy by going ‘gung-ho’ on indyref2 and. as she likes power, will use covid to delay indyref 2 as it is not the time
As the next SNP Holyrood administration has to face the day to day job of health, education and a host of other subjects, neglected by the obsession with indyref2, Nicola will have all her work cut out just to keep the SNP popularity onside and I expect indyref2 will be parked until or unless there is a clear majority in Scotland for it.
Now many will have their own opinion, but this is my view leading up to Holyrood 2021
If parties pledged to independence with it clearly in their manifesto get re-elected that IS a clear majority for it. Democracy isn't based on opinion polls, it is based on elections.
You will need to be ready to explain why democracy doesn't really count unless you vote for the thing you believe in. And we all know that you are the arrange marriage to Boris Johnson as Prince Akeem, you believe in whatever he believes in. But you are very good at hopping on one leg whilst barking like a dog, so thats ok.
The colonialists on here want to pretend the SNP is the only independence party and only people who vote SNP are wanting independence. Reality is totally secondary and democracy does not enter into it at all. They just want to keep their colony.
Boris should use the present ‘enormous goodwill’ from UEFA/FIFA to England, for saving football (see The Times, today) to unite the structures of English and Scottish league football, so the Old Firm can play in the British Prem, and Scotland League 1 feeds in like the English Championship.
This saves Scottish fitba, produces some cracking matches - Celtic-Liverpool!! - reinforces Britishness and UEFA/FIFA are, right now, so grateful to English football they would agree to keeping the four home nations as is. All playing and voting individually
Go for it, Boris.
The issue with that, is by uniting the leagues of England and Scotland, one diminishes their status as separate nations under UEFA and FIFA. There's a lot of grandfather rights that currently allows the UK to enter four teams in international competitions.
Cardiff and Swansea play in the English league system. They used to enter the Welsh Cup as a way to qualify for the Cup Winners’ Cup (European police forces loved that!).
That’s the big downside for the old firm. Europe only on merit.
The other thing is sporting merit, having made a big hoo ha about how sporting merit needs to be honoured there's no way the PL would let the Old Firm straight into the PL and there's a couple of PL clubs and a few Championship clubs who would have strenuous objections to that.
If Celtic and Rangers want to join the English football system let them apply for membership of the National League.
EPL teams would brick it , they would be scared of a good thrashing from Old Firm. Unfortunately we see their boring matches up here, most would struggle against the Old Firm.
Weirdly, when they have met English teams in the Champions League that is not the way that it has gone. Scottish football has been destroyed by the power and money of the EPL. Before that Andy Robertson might still have been a full back for Dundee United, as the great Maurice Malpas was before him and Virgil Van Dyke might have stuck around at Celtic.
The Old firm would have the potential to become big clubs in the EPL but it would be a long and painful journey as they tried to catch up the purchasing power of their rivals.
For sure but they would not be out of place and would not be in relegation zone for certain, they would beat a lot of Premier sides.
Boris should use the present ‘enormous goodwill’ from UEFA/FIFA to England, for saving football (see The Times, today) to unite the structures of English and Scottish league football, so the Old Firm can play in the British Prem, and Scotland League 1 feeds in like the English Championship.
This saves Scottish fitba, produces some cracking matches - Celtic-Liverpool!! - reinforces Britishness and UEFA/FIFA are, right now, so grateful to English football they would agree to keeping the four home nations as is. All playing and voting individually
Go for it, Boris.
The issue with that, is by uniting the leagues of England and Scotland, one diminishes their status as separate nations under UEFA and FIFA. There's a lot of grandfather rights that currently allows the UK to enter four teams in international competitions.
Cardiff and Swansea play in the English league system. They used to enter the Welsh Cup as a way to qualify for the Cup Winners’ Cup (European police forces loved that!).
That’s the big downside for the old firm. Europe only on merit.
The other thing is sporting merit, having made a big hoo ha about how sporting merit needs to be honoured there's no way the PL would let the Old Firm straight into the PL and there's a couple of PL clubs and a few Championship clubs who would have strenuous objections to that.
If Celtic and Rangers want to join the English football system let them apply for membership of the National League.
There is a simple reason why this isn't going to happen. If we turn the English leagues into British leagues then we give up our arguments for being separate nations deserving of separate national teams. Frankly a British team would have a far better prospect for chances of footballing success, but would remove the real purposes of international football. Getting drunk and smashing up foreign cities whilst chanting ENG-ER-LUND.
A British team would NOT have a far better chance of success - this is a complete myth. And it’s not going to happen, and nor should it happen. GB/Britain is not a country as such and for that reason the home nations field their own teams in every major team sport - this is not unique to football.
Football and Rugby Union are the only two team sports I can think of where that applies. Hockey has GB teams.
Curling surely.
Are there effective curling teams in GB other than Scotland? I would have thought curling would be like Rugby League; there really aren't any effective National teams in the UK other than England I realise that's not quite the question but without bringing in Wales and possibly Scotland a Rugby League World Championship is akin to World Series Baseball; no-one outside the US can win.
Edited; second thoughts France & Aus/NZ in Rugby League.
Looking at the most recent polling for Holyrood I am of the opinion, that the Scottish electorate are being very ‘cannie’ if the polls are to be believed.
It does seem that Salmond is ‘persona non grata’ in Scotland, indeed he is polling worse than Boris, and the electorate look as if they are to indulge in a substantial tactical vote on the list to ensure their second vote goes to green and thereby denies Salmond a place at the table in Holyrood.
At the same time, the Scots like Sturgeon’s brand and are willing to grant her another term, but also are beginning to show signs that they are not as in favour of Independence as the SNP would have you believe, hence todays poll showing No ahead of Yes 48/44
Nicola is far to good a politician to prejudice her legacy by going ‘gung-ho’ on indyref2 and. as she likes power, will use covid to delay indyref 2 as it is not the time
As the next SNP Holyrood administration has to face the day to day job of health, education and a host of other subjects, neglected by the obsession with indyref2, Nicola will have all her work cut out just to keep the SNP popularity onside and I expect indyref2 will be parked until or unless there is a clear majority in Scotland for it.
Now many will have their own opinion, but this is my view leading up to Holyrood 2021
If parties pledged to independence with it clearly in their manifesto get re-elected that IS a clear majority for it. Democracy isn't based on opinion polls, it is based on elections.
You will need to be ready to explain why democracy doesn't really count unless you vote for the thing you believe in. And we all know that you are the arrange marriage to Boris Johnson as Prince Akeem, you believe in whatever he believes in. But you are very good at hopping on one leg whilst barking like a dog, so thats ok.
The colonialists on here want to pretend the SNP is the only independence party and only people who vote SNP are wanting independence. Reality is totally secondary and democracy does not enter into it at all. They just want to keep their colony.
Reminder todays poll - No 48 yes 44
REminder recent polls and how you spot trends
That tables missing 3 newer polls (two remain, one leave).
Look, we Tories won a majority of 80 in the UK in the Commons in 2019 and under our constitution what a UK government with a majority in the Commons wants goes until the next general election.
It does not matter what happens at Holyrood next month
Snipped right there. We English are in power. It doesn't matter what you Scotch want to do, we rule you.
This is literally why independence is sadly inevitable. Dripping English arrogance and ignorance and disregard for basic principles of democracy.
Wrong, England does not always get its own way. In 1950, 1964 and February 1974 England voted Tory but got a UK Labour government thanks to Scottish and Welsh Labour MPs.
On current polling the only way Starmer becomes UK PM in 2024 is with the support of Scottish SNP MPs and Welsh Labour MPs, England will almost certainly have a Tory majority still.
So it is not the case England always gets its own way in the UK (England does not even have its own Parliament unlike every other Home Nation), it is the case however that the UK government with a majority in the Commons always gets its own way.
Until 2024 that UK government with a majority in the Commons is a Tory one and it will decide until then and has made clear 2014 was a once in a generation vote when 55% of Scots voted to stay in the UK then
1974 = 47 years ago. Half a lifetime.
Actually technically in 2010 and 2017 England elected a majority of Tory MPs too but got a hung Parliament across the UK thanks to Scottish and Welsh MPs.
So actually only 4 and 11 years ago did England not get the Tory majority it voted for
Doesn'rt count, as the Scots and Welsh didn't get what they voted for either.
The Scots and Welsh also had their own Parliament, unlike in England.
If Starmer gets in as UK PM in 2024 thanks to Scottish SNP and Welsh Labour MPs but the Tories win a majority in England again the West Lothian question will be back as a major issue
Boris should use the present ‘enormous goodwill’ from UEFA/FIFA to England, for saving football (see The Times, today) to unite the structures of English and Scottish league football, so the Old Firm can play in the British Prem, and Scotland League 1 feeds in like the English Championship.
This saves Scottish fitba, produces some cracking matches - Celtic-Liverpool!! - reinforces Britishness and UEFA/FIFA are, right now, so grateful to English football they would agree to keeping the four home nations as is. All playing and voting individually
Go for it, Boris.
The issue with that, is by uniting the leagues of England and Scotland, one diminishes their status as separate nations under UEFA and FIFA. There's a lot of grandfather rights that currently allows the UK to enter four teams in international competitions.
Cardiff and Swansea play in the English league system. They used to enter the Welsh Cup as a way to qualify for the Cup Winners’ Cup (European police forces loved that!).
That’s the big downside for the old firm. Europe only on merit.
The other thing is sporting merit, having made a big hoo ha about how sporting merit needs to be honoured there's no way the PL would let the Old Firm straight into the PL and there's a couple of PL clubs and a few Championship clubs who would have strenuous objections to that.
If Celtic and Rangers want to join the English football system let them apply for membership of the National League.
EPL teams would brick it , they would be scared of a good thrashing from Old Firm. Unfortunately we see their boring matches up here, most would struggle against the Old Firm.
The harsh light of day for football is that there are too many professional clubs competing for too few fans. If teams were happy playing in the Vanarama league then that wouldn't be a problem. But money corrupts and they all want to be MASSIVE.
Growing up in Rochdale we had a team. As did Oldham. Bury. Bolton. Wigan. And every other small town in Lancashire. Small teams dream big - which is great! Its when they think they actually are big that we have a problem. My brother is an Oldham fan, and a few seasons in the top flight started a "lets spend" trend which after a succession of crap owners now has the brink of folding like Bury did. Blackburn built a massive stadium that they could only fill if the whole town paid to watch. Its genuinely absurd - so I can understand why owners looked at somewhere like Milton Keynes and said "lets move" even though it was a disaster from a fans perspective.
Add in big teams from Scotland and all that will happen is that teams on both sides of the border will fold. Doesn't bother me, but would the fans who think that every club has the right to exist regardless of finance or sanity. They don't.
If old firm go it would likely benefit rest of Scottish football. They would be only ones though and what was left would be better for sure.
Looking at the most recent polling for Holyrood I am of the opinion, that the Scottish electorate are being very ‘cannie’ if the polls are to be believed.
It does seem that Salmond is ‘persona non grata’ in Scotland, indeed he is polling worse than Boris, and the electorate look as if they are to indulge in a substantial tactical vote on the list to ensure their second vote goes to green and thereby denies Salmond a place at the table in Holyrood.
At the same time, the Scots like Sturgeon’s brand and are willing to grant her another term, but also are beginning to show signs that they are not as in favour of Independence as the SNP would have you believe, hence todays poll showing No ahead of Yes 48/44
Nicola is far to good a politician to prejudice her legacy by going ‘gung-ho’ on indyref2 and. as she likes power, will use covid to delay indyref 2 as it is not the time
As the next SNP Holyrood administration has to face the day to day job of health, education and a host of other subjects, neglected by the obsession with indyref2, Nicola will have all her work cut out just to keep the SNP popularity onside and I expect indyref2 will be parked until or unless there is a clear majority in Scotland for it.
Now many will have their own opinion, but this is my view leading up to Holyrood 2021
If parties pledged to independence with it clearly in their manifesto get re-elected that IS a clear majority for it. Democracy isn't based on opinion polls, it is based on elections.
You will need to be ready to explain why democracy doesn't really count unless you vote for the thing you believe in. And we all know that you are the arrange marriage to Boris Johnson as Prince Akeem, you believe in whatever he believes in. But you are very good at hopping on one leg whilst barking like a dog, so thats ok.
The colonialists on here want to pretend the SNP is the only independence party and only people who vote SNP are wanting independence. Reality is totally secondary and democracy does not enter into it at all. They just want to keep their colony.
Reminder todays poll - No 48 yes 44
REminder recent polls and how you spot trends
Yes down from 55% last year to just 49% now with Mori?
Including don't knows Yes on just 45% with Comres ie zero change from 2014
Another example of the government only pursuing headlines and having no interest in the policy announced. Last year they launched the "Pick for Britain" campaign to recruit a domestic workforce to pick fruit and vegetables. Not a total success in terms of numbers but ticked all the boxes - a patriotic name, jobs for us not foreigners, support Brexit.
The scheme has been scrapped. Which means that farms will go back to importing literal coachloads of eastern Europeans to do the harvest.
Why does it matter? A significant driver for Brexit in eastern England is the "invasion" of people from eastern Europe to work in the food and agriculture sector. These are jobs that British people do not want to do. So the government make a lot of noise about removing migrants in favour of patriotic jobs for plucky locals, and once the headlines are gained and the policy weaved into knowledge, it gets withdrawn.
Which means that despite the policy of continuing migration of labour, the government will get the credit for ending it. Its smart politics, but I can't see how the lie holds beyond the immediate - the foreigner workforce will still be here.
Boris should use the present ‘enormous goodwill’ from UEFA/FIFA to England, for saving football (see The Times, today) to unite the structures of English and Scottish league football, so the Old Firm can play in the British Prem, and Scotland League 1 feeds in like the English Championship.
This saves Scottish fitba, produces some cracking matches - Celtic-Liverpool!! - reinforces Britishness and UEFA/FIFA are, right now, so grateful to English football they would agree to keeping the four home nations as is. All playing and voting individually
Go for it, Boris.
The issue with that, is by uniting the leagues of England and Scotland, one diminishes their status as separate nations under UEFA and FIFA. There's a lot of grandfather rights that currently allows the UK to enter four teams in international competitions.
Cardiff and Swansea play in the English league system. They used to enter the Welsh Cup as a way to qualify for the Cup Winners’ Cup (European police forces loved that!).
That’s the big downside for the old firm. Europe only on merit.
The other thing is sporting merit, having made a big hoo ha about how sporting merit needs to be honoured there's no way the PL would let the Old Firm straight into the PL and there's a couple of PL clubs and a few Championship clubs who would have strenuous objections to that.
If Celtic and Rangers want to join the English football system let them apply for membership of the National League.
There is a simple reason why this isn't going to happen. If we turn the English leagues into British leagues then we give up our arguments for being separate nations deserving of separate national teams. Frankly a British team would have a far better prospect for chances of footballing success, but would remove the real purposes of international football. Getting drunk and smashing up foreign cities whilst chanting ENG-ER-LUND.
A British team would NOT have a far better chance of success - this is a complete myth. And it’s not going to happen, and nor should it happen. GB/Britain is not a country as such and for that reason the home nations field their own teams in every major team sport - this is not unique to football.
Football and Rugby Union are the only two team sports I can think of where that applies. Hockey has GB teams.
Cricket is a hybrid mixture - England+Wales / Scotland / All-Ireland
Nobody calls it England and Wales though, it’s England. There should be a Wales team: it would be competitive and command support.
The European Commission is getting ready to launch legal proceedings against vaccine producer AstraZeneca, according to five EU diplomats.
The Commission raised the matter at a meeting of ambassadors Wednesday, during which the majority of EU countries said they would support suing the company over complaints it massively failed to deliver pledged doses to the bloc.
One diplomat clarified that the point of the legal proceedings is to make it mandatory for AstraZeneca to provide the doses set out in its EU contract.
GB is used by the primarily olympic sports. Athletics, cycling, swimming, eventing. Home nations for major team (Football) Some team exceptions are cricket (England & Wales together); Rugby League uses both Rugby Union primarily uses home nations but foreign tours are done by a British & Irish team. Golf and netball home nations.
Boris should use the present ‘enormous goodwill’ from UEFA/FIFA to England, for saving football (see The Times, today) to unite the structures of English and Scottish league football, so the Old Firm can play in the British Prem, and Scotland League 1 feeds in like the English Championship.
This saves Scottish fitba, produces some cracking matches - Celtic-Liverpool!! - reinforces Britishness and UEFA/FIFA are, right now, so grateful to English football they would agree to keeping the four home nations as is. All playing and voting individually
Go for it, Boris.
You really don't know anything about football.
No way anyone in the EPL or English football wants Rangers and Celtic in the PL
Which two clubs are going to make way for them, as the PL doesn't have the scope in the calendar for a 22 club PL.
Surely it would be a sacrifice worth making to see the Rangers support doing a tour of English football grounds and cities?
Plus Glasgow would get to play host to a different firm of English casuals every weekend. A great boost for the city.
Oh come on. How much damage could they do? And how could we tell?
Standard subsample warnings, but Street apparently leads every borough bar Birmingham.
Street's net approval at +31 (15% strongly approve, against 4% strongly disproving).
They key thing that I think may punters have overlooked are the other elections on the same day - every district of West Midlands County *bar* the City of Birmingham also have Metro borough elections happening. So turnout in the most strongly Labour area is likely to be lower, whereas no such effect should be present in the Tory boroughs. In 2017 no metro boroughs had elections.
Street at 4/11 at WH looks to be strong value to me.
Makes you think how on earth can he not win? On pretty much every measure he is highly thought of and respected across the political spectrum.
Yeah, I think that he's a shoo-in.
The only thing going against him are headline macro trends - when he won in 2017 the Tories were 19% ahead, and won by 0.8%, now they're only 8% ahead, but all signs are that the WM has disproportionally swung towards Con. In 2017 Cons won the wider West Midlands region by 6.5% (2.4% national lead), but in 2019 won it by 20% (NL 12.5%). But add in no Birmingham elections, no GE coming up and all that and I think it'd be a decent shock to see him lose.
Starmer must be relieved at the good Welsh polling, between that and the WoE Mayor he should have enough things he can sell as wins to draw focus away from Hartlepool, Teeside, and West Midlands.
Ventilators were needed and from this call to arms tens of thousands were delivered.
Not by Dyson. Here is Dyson's statement. £20 million was spent developing a new ventilator but none were delivered. Statement from James Dyson: "Dyson people welcomed the Government’s challenge and, working round the clock, developed an entirely new ventilator in 30 days. Mercifully, they are not now required in the UK but we don’t regret our contribution to the national effort for one moment. I have some hope that our ventilator may yet help the response in other countries but that requires further time and investigation. Dyson has spent around £20m on this project to date, I will be funding this and we will not be accepting any public money. The team have worked 24/7 to design and manufacture a sophisticated ventilator in a very short timeframe – I pay to tribute to their exceptional expertise and commitment and hope they can spend this weekend with their families who will not have seen them for weeks." https://www.dyson.co.uk/newsroom/overview/update/ventilator-update
The most recent polls showing divergence away from independence (today 48/44) must be as a result of the focus on it in he Holyrood election
If it is focussing minds, as seems to be the case, I still expect the SNP to have a majority but conversely a majority of Scots still want to remain in the Union
These two positions are not contradictory, but just the Scots being pragmatic and sensible.
Ventilators were needed and from this call to arms tens of thousands were delivered.
She isn't wrong about no devices being supplied by Dyson - the point that she made. She IS wrong about your point that ventilators were supplied by someone else, but as thats your point and not hers it doesn't matter.
Ventilators were needed and from this call to arms tens of thousands were delivered.
Delivered by Dyson?
Delivered by the ventilator challenge scheme, of which Dyson was a part of.
Dyson were only told they weren't needed much later once Mercedes ones had been delivered.
The vaccine taskforce and the ventilator challenge both followed the same principle: get as many as possible on the same thing, take the ones that work first, don't worry about those that don't.
This isn't Mercer's first individualistic outburst of this kind. i really don't understand how someone who makes so much of their military background can possibly display such little party discipline, and so publicly. There needs to be space for MPs to criticise their party, but it seems as though he all too often goes too far, and is flirting with the line between asset and liability.
Look, we Tories won a majority of 80 in the UK in the Commons in 2019 and under our constitution what a UK government with a majority in the Commons wants goes until the next general election.
It does not matter what happens at Holyrood next month
Snipped right there. We English are in power. It doesn't matter what you Scotch want to do, we rule you.
This is literally why independence is sadly inevitable. Dripping English arrogance and ignorance and disregard for basic principles of democracy.
Wrong, England does not always get its own way. In 1950, 1964 and February 1974 England voted Tory but got a UK Labour government thanks to Scottish and Welsh Labour MPs.
On current polling the only way Starmer becomes UK PM in 2024 is with the support of Scottish SNP MPs and Welsh Labour MPs, England will almost certainly have a Tory majority still.
So it is not the case England always gets its own way in the UK (England does not even have its own Parliament unlike every other Home Nation), it is the case however that the UK government with a majority in the Commons always gets its own way.
Until 2024 that UK government with a majority in the Commons is a Tory one and it will decide until then and has made clear 2014 was a once in a generation vote when 55% of Scots voted to stay in the UK then
This isn't about governance. This is about the union. If Scotland cannot vote to challenge its place in the union without the agreement of England then the union is no longer based on consent. It becomes impossible for Scotland to leave or renegotiate the terms of union - it is beholden to England. Instead of a mutual union it is annexation.
Interesting that Scottish Nationalists and Labour alike want to line up alongside Jefferson Davis and Robert E. Lee:
'Texas v. White, 74 U.S. (7 Wall.) 700 (1869), was a case argued before the United States Supreme Court in 1869... the court further held that the Constitution did not permit states to unilaterally secede from the United States... "When, therefore, Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. All the obligations of perpetual union, and all the guaranties of republican government in the Union, attached at once to the State. The act which consummated her admission into the Union was something more than a compact; it was the incorporation of a new member into the political body. And it was final. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States."'
I'm not sure that the comparison holds up due to the different legal system. England and Scotland both passed laws to form a union of those two states. No government can bind the hands of its successor, all laws can be amended revised or repealed. We have repealed older laws than this.
I can't see how the lie holds beyond the immediate
The one lesson BoZo learned from Brexit is that it doesn't have to.
The campaign lies he told didn't survive beyond the end of the count.
Tomorrow's headline is the event horizon.
That doesn't hold water. People have a genuine problem with the supposed transformation of their communities from English to not-English. In somewhere like Boston 71% voted for Brexit to stop and reverse that. Unless it is stopped and reversed they are not going to be happy.
GB is used by the primarily olympic sports. Athletics, cycling, swimming, eventing. Home nations for major team (Football) Some team exceptions are cricket (England & Wales together); Rugby League uses both Rugby Union primarily uses home nations but foreign tours are done by a British & Irish team. Golf and netball home nations.
Miss Vance, it was a few months ago but I saw some polling that had the UK and Brazil top with about 80% (January, I think) willing to take the vaccine.
Ventilators were needed and from this call to arms tens of thousands were delivered.
Delivered by Dyson?
Delivered by the ventilator challenge scheme, of which Dyson was a part of.
Dyson were only told they weren't needed much later once Mercedes ones had been delivered.
The vaccine taskforce and the ventilator challenge both followed the same principle: get as many as possible on the same thing, take the ones that work first, don't worry about those that don't.
So was BJ giving personal access & tax help to all the ventilator suppliers or just the one that didn't in fact supply ventilators?
Ventilators were needed and from this call to arms tens of thousands were delivered.
Delivered by Dyson?
Delivered by the ventilator challenge scheme, of which Dyson was a part of.
Dyson were only told they weren't needed much later once Mercedes ones had been delivered.
The vaccine taskforce and the ventilator challenge both followed the same principle: get as many as possible on the same thing, take the ones that work first, don't worry about those that don't.
Simply wrong. Dyson were not part of the https://www.ventilatorchallengeuk.com/ scheme. Have a look. Do you see their name? No - they were doing their own thing and were going to develop a new machine out of their existing technology. The consortium knew that they had to use existing designs.
Ventilators were needed and from this call to arms tens of thousands were delivered.
Delivered by Dyson?
Delivered by the ventilator challenge scheme, of which Dyson was a part of.
Dyson were only told they weren't needed much later once Mercedes ones had been delivered.
The vaccine taskforce and the ventilator challenge both followed the same principle: get as many as possible on the same thing, take the ones that work first, don't worry about those that don't.
So was BJ giving personal access & tax help to all the ventilator suppliers or just the one that didn't in fact supply ventilators?
All.
The 90 day exemption applied to all who were working on ventilators.
Ventilators were needed and from this call to arms tens of thousands were delivered.
Delivered by Dyson?
Delivered by the ventilator challenge scheme, of which Dyson was a part of.
Dyson were only told they weren't needed much later once Mercedes ones had been delivered.
The vaccine taskforce and the ventilator challenge both followed the same principle: get as many as possible on the same thing, take the ones that work first, don't worry about those that don't.
Simply wrong. Dyson were not part of the https://www.ventilatorchallengeuk.com/ scheme. Have a look. Do you see their name? No - they were doing their own thing and were going to develop a new machine out of their existing technology. The consortium knew that they had to use existing designs.
You're simply wrong. The ventilator challenge was what Matt Hancock said.
The ventilator challenge consortium was one response to Hancock's challenge, but not the only one.
I can't see how the lie holds beyond the immediate
The one lesson BoZo learned from Brexit is that it doesn't have to.
The campaign lies he told didn't survive beyond the end of the count.
Tomorrow's headline is the event horizon.
Out of interest, what lies did he tell?
No customs border in the Irish Sea? Protection for army veterans against vexatious prosecutions? Both manifesto pledges. Lioar even went to the DUP conference to state his NI pledge.
Thats just two. How about "I did not shag that musician Carrie"...?
Ventilators were needed and from this call to arms tens of thousands were delivered.
Delivered by Dyson?
Delivered by the ventilator challenge scheme, of which Dyson was a part of.
Dyson were only told they weren't needed much later once Mercedes ones had been delivered.
The vaccine taskforce and the ventilator challenge both followed the same principle: get as many as possible on the same thing, take the ones that work first, don't worry about those that don't.
Simply wrong. Dyson were not part of the https://www.ventilatorchallengeuk.com/ scheme. Have a look. Do you see their name? No - they were doing their own thing and were going to develop a new machine out of their existing technology. The consortium knew that they had to use existing designs.
You're simply wrong. The ventilator challenge was what Matt Hancock said.
The ventilator challenge consortium was one response to Hancock's challenge, but not the only one.
Look, we Tories won a majority of 80 in the UK in the Commons in 2019 and under our constitution what a UK government with a majority in the Commons wants goes until the next general election.
It does not matter what happens at Holyrood next month
Snipped right there. We English are in power. It doesn't matter what you Scotch want to do, we rule you.
This is literally why independence is sadly inevitable. Dripping English arrogance and ignorance and disregard for basic principles of democracy.
Wrong, England does not always get its own way. In 1950, 1964 and February 1974 England voted Tory but got a UK Labour government thanks to Scottish and Welsh Labour MPs.
On current polling the only way Starmer becomes UK PM in 2024 is with the support of Scottish SNP MPs and Welsh Labour MPs, England will almost certainly have a Tory majority still.
So it is not the case England always gets its own way in the UK (England does not even have its own Parliament unlike every other Home Nation), it is the case however that the UK government with a majority in the Commons always gets its own way.
Until 2024 that UK government with a majority in the Commons is a Tory one and it will decide until then and has made clear 2014 was a once in a generation vote when 55% of Scots voted to stay in the UK then
This isn't about governance. This is about the union. If Scotland cannot vote to challenge its place in the union without the agreement of England then the union is no longer based on consent. It becomes impossible for Scotland to leave or renegotiate the terms of union - it is beholden to England. Instead of a mutual union it is annexation.
Interesting that Scottish Nationalists and Labour alike want to line up alongside Jefferson Davis and Robert E. Lee:
'Texas v. White, 74 U.S. (7 Wall.) 700 (1869), was a case argued before the United States Supreme Court in 1869... the court further held that the Constitution did not permit states to unilaterally secede from the United States... "When, therefore, Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. All the obligations of perpetual union, and all the guaranties of republican government in the Union, attached at once to the State. The act which consummated her admission into the Union was something more than a compact; it was the incorporation of a new member into the political body. And it was final. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States."'
I'm not sure that the comparison holds up due to the different legal system. England and Scotland both passed laws to form a union of those two states. No government can bind the hands of its successor, all laws can be amended revised or repealed. We have repealed older laws than this.
You said that 'if Scotland cannot vote to challenge its place in the union without the agreement of England than the union is no longer based on consent.' Likewise, it would be impossible for any US state to challenge its place in the union without the consent of the other states. Each of the US states passed laws in their state legislatures to either form or join the Union, as England and Scotland did. Just as in the UK, all laws in the United States can be amended, revised or repealed - but the requirements for doing so are much more onerous, placing a much higher burden on the individual state (2/3 majority in both the House of Representatives and the Senate, rather than 50% + 1 in the Lords and Commons, plus the additional hurdle of 75% of state legislatures).
So do you choose the intellectually consistent approach of arguing that the United States is not a union based on consent, and line up with slaveholding Confederates and many white nationalists who came after them? Or should we follow the settled law of the 1707 Act of Union and the 1998 Scotland Act that the UK Parliament continues to be the sole body with authority to legislate on constitutional affairs?
I can't see how the lie holds beyond the immediate
The one lesson BoZo learned from Brexit is that it doesn't have to.
The campaign lies he told didn't survive beyond the end of the count.
Tomorrow's headline is the event horizon.
Out of interest, what lies did he tell?
No customs border in the Irish Sea? Protection for army veterans against vexatious prosecutions? Both manifesto pledges. Lioar even went to the DUP conference to state his NI pledge.
Thats just two. How about "I did not shag that musician Carrie"...?
You are you indulging in misogyny and abuse to Carrie again
I just do not understand why you feel a need to be this way
I can't see how the lie holds beyond the immediate
The one lesson BoZo learned from Brexit is that it doesn't have to.
The campaign lies he told didn't survive beyond the end of the count.
Tomorrow's headline is the event horizon.
Out of interest, what lies did he tell?
No customs border in the Irish Sea? Protection for army veterans against vexatious prosecutions? Both manifesto pledges. Lioar even went to the DUP conference to state his NI pledge.
Thats just two. How about "I did not shag that musician Carrie"...?
I don't think that was a manifesto commitment...
Although I suspect it would be popular with all women who see Boris as a slimeball but lose the votes of those hoping a few quick (probably unsatisfactory) bonks would provide easy access to some government grant money.
Look, we Tories won a majority of 80 in the UK in the Commons in 2019 and under our constitution what a UK government with a majority in the Commons wants goes until the next general election.
It does not matter what happens at Holyrood next month
Snipped right there. We English are in power. It doesn't matter what you Scotch want to do, we rule you.
This is literally why independence is sadly inevitable. Dripping English arrogance and ignorance and disregard for basic principles of democracy.
Wrong, England does not always get its own way. In 1950, 1964 and February 1974 England voted Tory but got a UK Labour government thanks to Scottish and Welsh Labour MPs.
On current polling the only way Starmer becomes UK PM in 2024 is with the support of Scottish SNP MPs and Welsh Labour MPs, England will almost certainly have a Tory majority still.
So it is not the case England always gets its own way in the UK (England does not even have its own Parliament unlike every other Home Nation), it is the case however that the UK government with a majority in the Commons always gets its own way.
Until 2024 that UK government with a majority in the Commons is a Tory one and it will decide until then and has made clear 2014 was a once in a generation vote when 55% of Scots voted to stay in the UK then
This isn't about governance. This is about the union. If Scotland cannot vote to challenge its place in the union without the agreement of England then the union is no longer based on consent. It becomes impossible for Scotland to leave or renegotiate the terms of union - it is beholden to England. Instead of a mutual union it is annexation.
Interesting that Scottish Nationalists and Labour alike want to line up alongside Jefferson Davis and Robert E. Lee:
'Texas v. White, 74 U.S. (7 Wall.) 700 (1869), was a case argued before the United States Supreme Court in 1869... the court further held that the Constitution did not permit states to unilaterally secede from the United States... "When, therefore, Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. All the obligations of perpetual union, and all the guaranties of republican government in the Union, attached at once to the State. The act which consummated her admission into the Union was something more than a compact; it was the incorporation of a new member into the political body. And it was final. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States."'
I'm not sure that the comparison holds up due to the different legal system. England and Scotland both passed laws to form a union of those two states. No government can bind the hands of its successor, all laws can be amended revised or repealed. We have repealed older laws than this.
You said that 'if Scotland cannot vote to challenge its place in the union without the agreement of England than the union is no longer based on consent.' Likewise, it would be impossible for any US state to challenge its place in the union without the consent of the other states. Just as in the UK, all laws in the United States can be amended, revised or repealed - but the requirements for doing so are much more onerous, placing a much higher burden on the individual state (2/3 majority in both the House of Representatives and the Senate, rather than 50% + 1 in the Lords and Commons, plus the additional hurdle of 75% of state legislatures).
So do you choose the intellectually consistent approach of arguing that the United States is not a union based on consent, and line up with slaveholding Confederates and many white nationalists who came after them? Or should we follow the settled law of the 1707 Act of Union and the 1998 Scotland Act that the UK Parliament continues to be the sole body with authority to legislate on constitutional affairs?
The US union is not a union based on consent. The USA is a single country - England, Scotland etc are meant to be countries in a union.
This is interesting. @DominicRaab - asked if government was planning on holding a debate & vote on its decision to cut overseas aid spending to 0.5% of national income from 0.7% - signals HMG is not but says backbench MPs are free to debate and vote on "anything they wish" https://twitter.com/haynesdeborah/status/1385178739940724738
This is interesting. @DominicRaab - asked if government was planning on holding a debate & vote on its decision to cut overseas aid spending to 0.5% of national income from 0.7% - signals HMG is not but says backbench MPs are free to debate and vote on "anything they wish" https://twitter.com/haynesdeborah/status/1385178739940724738
I posted yesterday that our PM is widely held to be a rogue, but for many people a lovable one. Once the 'lovable' goes his fall may well be swift, long and hard.
Look, we Tories won a majority of 80 in the UK in the Commons in 2019 and under our constitution what a UK government with a majority in the Commons wants goes until the next general election.
It does not matter what happens at Holyrood next month
Snipped right there. We English are in power. It doesn't matter what you Scotch want to do, we rule you.
This is literally why independence is sadly inevitable. Dripping English arrogance and ignorance and disregard for basic principles of democracy.
Wrong, England does not always get its own way. In 1950, 1964 and February 1974 England voted Tory but got a UK Labour government thanks to Scottish and Welsh Labour MPs.
On current polling the only way Starmer becomes UK PM in 2024 is with the support of Scottish SNP MPs and Welsh Labour MPs, England will almost certainly have a Tory majority still.
So it is not the case England always gets its own way in the UK (England does not even have its own Parliament unlike every other Home Nation), it is the case however that the UK government with a majority in the Commons always gets its own way.
Until 2024 that UK government with a majority in the Commons is a Tory one and it will decide until then and has made clear 2014 was a once in a generation vote when 55% of Scots voted to stay in the UK then
This isn't about governance. This is about the union. If Scotland cannot vote to challenge its place in the union without the agreement of England then the union is no longer based on consent. It becomes impossible for Scotland to leave or renegotiate the terms of union - it is beholden to England. Instead of a mutual union it is annexation.
Interesting that Scottish Nationalists and Labour alike want to line up alongside Jefferson Davis and Robert E. Lee:
'Texas v. White, 74 U.S. (7 Wall.) 700 (1869), was a case argued before the United States Supreme Court in 1869... the court further held that the Constitution did not permit states to unilaterally secede from the United States... "When, therefore, Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. All the obligations of perpetual union, and all the guaranties of republican government in the Union, attached at once to the State. The act which consummated her admission into the Union was something more than a compact; it was the incorporation of a new member into the political body. And it was final. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States."'
I'm not sure that the comparison holds up due to the different legal system. England and Scotland both passed laws to form a union of those two states. No government can bind the hands of its successor, all laws can be amended revised or repealed. We have repealed older laws than this.
You said that 'if Scotland cannot vote to challenge its place in the union without the agreement of England than the union is no longer based on consent.' Likewise, it would be impossible for any US state to challenge its place in the union without the consent of the other states. Just as in the UK, all laws in the United States can be amended, revised or repealed - but the requirements for doing so are much more onerous, placing a much higher burden on the individual state (2/3 majority in both the House of Representatives and the Senate, rather than 50% + 1 in the Lords and Commons, plus the additional hurdle of 75% of state legislatures).
So do you choose the intellectually consistent approach of arguing that the United States is not a union based on consent, and line up with slaveholding Confederates and many white nationalists who came after them? Or should we follow the settled law of the 1707 Act of Union and the 1998 Scotland Act that the UK Parliament continues to be the sole body with authority to legislate on constitutional affairs?
Texas was a Republic that chose its annexation into the USA as a state. Scotland was a country which chose to join with another country (England) to form a new country. The legal systems and statuses are not the same.
As for your latter point, its is legally correct that a 1998 Act of the UK protects constitutional affairs as being within Westminster's control. It is also legally correct that the Union with England Act of 1706 remains an active act of Scottish law. Amendment, revision and repeal of this act is possible - indeed the amendments made to it by the Scotland Act 1998 are listed: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/aosp/1707/7/contents
What you and HYUFD argue is that the Union with England Act is no longer the business of the Scottish law it legally applies to but can only be amended by the English it does not apply to.
Look, we Tories won a majority of 80 in the UK in the Commons in 2019 and under our constitution what a UK government with a majority in the Commons wants goes until the next general election.
It does not matter what happens at Holyrood next month
Snipped right there. We English are in power. It doesn't matter what you Scotch want to do, we rule you.
This is literally why independence is sadly inevitable. Dripping English arrogance and ignorance and disregard for basic principles of democracy.
Wrong, England does not always get its own way. In 1950, 1964 and February 1974 England voted Tory but got a UK Labour government thanks to Scottish and Welsh Labour MPs.
On current polling the only way Starmer becomes UK PM in 2024 is with the support of Scottish SNP MPs and Welsh Labour MPs, England will almost certainly have a Tory majority still.
So it is not the case England always gets its own way in the UK (England does not even have its own Parliament unlike every other Home Nation), it is the case however that the UK government with a majority in the Commons always gets its own way.
Until 2024 that UK government with a majority in the Commons is a Tory one and it will decide until then and has made clear 2014 was a once in a generation vote when 55% of Scots voted to stay in the UK then
This isn't about governance. This is about the union. If Scotland cannot vote to challenge its place in the union without the agreement of England then the union is no longer based on consent. It becomes impossible for Scotland to leave or renegotiate the terms of union - it is beholden to England. Instead of a mutual union it is annexation.
Scotland voted to stay in the UK in 2014 in a once in a generation referendum (more than the Spanish government ever gave Catalonia).
And that is why you and yours want to trap them forever into a union that they no longer have any say in.
Let's find some common ground. I think we can agree that the UK should be a voluntary union (which weirdly, is pretty unusual in the world, but still). Thus, any part which wants to secede can. But there has to be a bar of reasonableness - we probably wouldn't want to have a situation where we get Handforth seceding because the parish council had worked itself up about something. So we have the tool of a referendum. But we don't want to be in a position where we are having constant referendums until the right answer is received. Independence would be a fairly momentous change. We wouldn't want to get into a hokey-cokey situation. I think therefore we can agree that 'nevermore' is too seldom for a referendum on independence, and every year is too often. What is the right frequency to ask the question? I would argue 'once a generation' is correct, albeit that the term 'generation' is deliberately vague. I'd certainly say any more often than once every fifteen years brings about a state of permanent referendum campaign, which is pretty unhealthy. I wouldn't mind a bar on referenda more often than that. But I certainly wouldn't want a bar on referenda more often than say, once every forty years. So my view is once a generation is correct. With 'a generation' being somewhere between fifteen and forty years.
I don't buy, by the way, the 'they no longer have any say' argument. That only holds true if ALL of Scotland have one view, and ALL of rUK (or even all of England) hold the opposite view. Voters in all parts of the country have a roughly equal democratic say, setting apart arguments about efficiency of voting systems. You could, following that logic, say that voters in Norfolk will always be outvoted by the rest of England, so Norfolk ought to be independent. Or that voters in my house will always be outvoted by the rest of the country, so my family ought to be independent.
All that said, I'm increasingly of the opinion that devolution has been a disaster. There is no constitutional settlement which works evenly apart from treating the UK as one state or complete separation. Allowing a system where Nicola Sturgeon has a veto on everything cannot work, not least because her main political objective is to break up the UK so it is in her interests to be as difficult as possible. And as there seems no appetite in Scotland for the single state solution, sadly only way ahead is independence.
(My own preference would be a single state, but with more power devolved to the county level. I don't want to open the can of worms about what counties should look like, apart from to say 'units of about one or two million people, give or take whatever is workable'. So, say, thirty odd 'counties; in England, two or three in Wales, five or six in Scotland, one or two in NI. Though while that suits me in terms of 'fairness', I'm genuinely not sure what advantage it brings, say, Greater Manchester to be able to dictate its own health policy.)
This is interesting. @DominicRaab - asked if government was planning on holding a debate & vote on its decision to cut overseas aid spending to 0.5% of national income from 0.7% - signals HMG is not but says backbench MPs are free to debate and vote on "anything they wish" https://twitter.com/haynesdeborah/status/1385178739940724738
Again another very popular policy
That really is mean-spirited. Sorry, but it is. Especially when national income seems to be declining a little.
I can't see how the lie holds beyond the immediate
The one lesson BoZo learned from Brexit is that it doesn't have to.
The campaign lies he told didn't survive beyond the end of the count.
Tomorrow's headline is the event horizon.
Out of interest, what lies did he tell?
No customs border in the Irish Sea? Protection for army veterans against vexatious prosecutions? Both manifesto pledges. Lioar even went to the DUP conference to state his NI pledge.
Thats just two. How about "I did not shag that musician Carrie"...?
You are you indulging in misogyny and abuse to Carrie again
I just do not understand why you feel a need to be this way
I was asked to state what lies he told. That he didn't have an affair whilst Carrie is pregnant is one. How on earth is that abuse to Carrie - she is the victim here and has my sympathy.
Jaguar Land Rover (JLR) has revealed that production at two of its UK manufacturing plants is to be suspended due to a shortage of parts.
The company said operations at the Castle Bromwich (Birmingham) and Halewood (Liverpool) sites would be affected through a "limited period" of non-production from next Monday.
It blamed a COVID-19 crisis issue of semi-conductor shortages, widely flagged by the industry as a whole and blamed for disruption to schedules among rivals and at other firms which rely on computer chips.
JLR's UK plants, including this one in Solihull, employ 40,000 people. The shortage of computer chips is not affecting output at Solihull
JLR - which has the UK's largest car manufacturing operation - said it was unclear how long the stoppages would last but it insisted production at the Solihull plant would continue as normal.
Its statement said: "Like other automotive manufacturers, we are currently experiencing some COVID-19 supply chain disruption, including the global availability of semi-conductors, which is having an impact on our production schedules and our ability to meet global demand for some of our vehicles.
"As a result, we have adjusted production schedules for certain vehicles which means that our Castle Bromwich and Halewood manufacturing plants will be operating a limited period of non-production from Monday 26th April.
I can't see how the lie holds beyond the immediate
The one lesson BoZo learned from Brexit is that it doesn't have to.
The campaign lies he told didn't survive beyond the end of the count.
Tomorrow's headline is the event horizon.
Out of interest, what lies did he tell?
No customs border in the Irish Sea? Protection for army veterans against vexatious prosecutions? Both manifesto pledges. Lioar even went to the DUP conference to state his NI pledge.
Thats just two. How about "I did not shag that musician Carrie"...?
I don't think that was a manifesto commitment...
Although I suspect it would be popular with all women who see Boris as a slimeball but lose the votes of those hoping a few quick (probably unsatisfactory) bonks would provide easy access to some government grant money.
Page 44:
Northern Ireland will enjoy the full economic benefits of Brexit including new free trade agreements with the rest of the world. We will ensure that Northern Ireland’s businesses and producers enjoy unfettered access to the rest of the UK and that in the implementation of our Brexit deal, we maintain and strengthen the integrity and smooth operation of our internal market.
Boris should use the present ‘enormous goodwill’ from UEFA/FIFA to England, for saving football (see The Times, today) to unite the structures of English and Scottish league football, so the Old Firm can play in the British Prem, and Scotland League 1 feeds in like the English Championship.
This saves Scottish fitba, produces some cracking matches - Celtic-Liverpool!! - reinforces Britishness and UEFA/FIFA are, right now, so grateful to English football they would agree to keeping the four home nations as is. All playing and voting individually
Go for it, Boris.
The issue with that, is by uniting the leagues of England and Scotland, one diminishes their status as separate nations under UEFA and FIFA. There's a lot of grandfather rights that currently allows the UK to enter four teams in international competitions.
How come Cardiff, Swansea and Wrexham play in English leagues, then? Or is it a question of 'custom and practice"? Which suggests an interesting problem if Wrexham become entitled to promotion back into the Football League, as they may well do. Especially as they've a lot of money coming their way!
They are "English clubs" that play in Wales.
Just as the most successful "Welsh club" -- 19 times winner of the Welsh Premier League -- actually plays in England.
The New Saints are the successor to Oswestry Town and they play in Croesoswallt in Shropshire.
I thought The New Siants were a renamed Llansantffraid. Wikipedia says that they subsequently merged with Oswestry Town to get a more suitable ground.
They call themselves TNS....The New Saints(of Oswestry Town) They were originally based in Llansantffraid, about 8 miles over the border from Oswestry, where they subsequently moved. I have reservations as to them still being allowed to play in the LOW, but as a lifelong Cardiff city supporter, playing in the English pyramid, I can hardly complain.
Only British club ever to change their actual name to that of a sponsor?
Airbus UK?
Coventry City wanted to change their name to "Coventry Talbot" at one point. They had a kit that was basically the Talbot cars logo.
This is interesting. @DominicRaab - asked if government was planning on holding a debate & vote on its decision to cut overseas aid spending to 0.5% of national income from 0.7% - signals HMG is not but says backbench MPs are free to debate and vote on "anything they wish" https://twitter.com/haynesdeborah/status/1385178739940724738
Again another very popular policy
That really is mean-spirited. Sorry, but it is. Especially when national income seems to be declining a little.
This is interesting. @DominicRaab - asked if government was planning on holding a debate & vote on its decision to cut overseas aid spending to 0.5% of national income from 0.7% - signals HMG is not but says backbench MPs are free to debate and vote on "anything they wish" https://twitter.com/haynesdeborah/status/1385178739940724738
Again another very popular policy
That really is mean-spirited. Sorry, but it is. Especially when national income seems to be declining a little.
Maybe but it is widely supported
Maybe that's why the Tories. (not, by any means, the Conservatives/)
I can't see how the lie holds beyond the immediate
The one lesson BoZo learned from Brexit is that it doesn't have to.
The campaign lies he told didn't survive beyond the end of the count.
Tomorrow's headline is the event horizon.
Out of interest, what lies did he tell?
No customs border in the Irish Sea? Protection for army veterans against vexatious prosecutions? Both manifesto pledges. Lioar even went to the DUP conference to state his NI pledge.
Thats just two. How about "I did not shag that musician Carrie"...?
You are you indulging in misogyny and abuse to Carrie again
I just do not understand why you feel a need to be this way
I was asked to state what lies he told. That he didn't have an affair whilst Carrie is pregnant is one. How on earth is that abuse to Carrie - she is the victim here and has my sympathy.
It is the way you express yourself at times and your posts are important and would improve immeasurably if you were maybe a little less school boyish
That's a really bad poll for the Tories. Either it is an outlier or the trends we have been seeing in the national polling have been significantly reversed in Wales. It seems not that long ago we were speculating that the Tories might get more votes in Wales than Labour.
I can't see how the lie holds beyond the immediate
The one lesson BoZo learned from Brexit is that it doesn't have to.
The campaign lies he told didn't survive beyond the end of the count.
Tomorrow's headline is the event horizon.
Out of interest, what lies did he tell?
No customs border in the Irish Sea? Protection for army veterans against vexatious prosecutions? Both manifesto pledges. Lioar even went to the DUP conference to state his NI pledge.
Thats just two. How about "I did not shag that musician Carrie"...?
You are you indulging in misogyny and abuse to Carrie again
I just do not understand why you feel a need to be this way
I was asked to state what lies he told. That he didn't have an affair whilst Carrie is pregnant is one. How on earth is that abuse to Carrie - she is the victim here and has my sympathy.
That's a really bad poll for the Tories. Either it is an outlier or the trends we have been seeing in the national polling have been significantly reversed in Wales. It seems not that long ago we were speculating that the Tories might get more votes in Wales than Labour.
Look, we Tories won a majority of 80 in the UK in the Commons in 2019 and under our constitution what a UK government with a majority in the Commons wants goes until the next general election.
It does not matter what happens at Holyrood next month
Snipped right there. We English are in power. It doesn't matter what you Scotch want to do, we rule you.
This is literally why independence is sadly inevitable. Dripping English arrogance and ignorance and disregard for basic principles of democracy.
Wrong, England does not always get its own way. In 1950, 1964 and February 1974 England voted Tory but got a UK Labour government thanks to Scottish and Welsh Labour MPs.
On current polling the only way Starmer becomes UK PM in 2024 is with the support of Scottish SNP MPs and Welsh Labour MPs, England will almost certainly have a Tory majority still.
So it is not the case England always gets its own way in the UK (England does not even have its own Parliament unlike every other Home Nation), it is the case however that the UK government with a majority in the Commons always gets its own way.
Until 2024 that UK government with a majority in the Commons is a Tory one and it will decide until then and has made clear 2014 was a once in a generation vote when 55% of Scots voted to stay in the UK then
This isn't about governance. This is about the union. If Scotland cannot vote to challenge its place in the union without the agreement of England then the union is no longer based on consent. It becomes impossible for Scotland to leave or renegotiate the terms of union - it is beholden to England. Instead of a mutual union it is annexation.
Scotland voted to stay in the UK in 2014 in a once in a generation referendum (more than the Spanish government ever gave Catalonia).
And that is why you and yours want to trap them forever into a union that they no longer have any say in.
Let's find some common ground. I think we can agree that the UK should be a voluntary union (which weirdly, is pretty unusual in the world, but still). Thus, any part which wants to secede can. But there has to be a bar of reasonableness - we probably wouldn't want to have a situation where we get Handforth seceding because the parish council had worked itself up about something. So we have the tool of a referendum. But we don't want to be in a position where we are having constant referendums until the right answer is received. Independence would be a fairly momentous change. We wouldn't want to get into a hokey-cokey situation. I think therefore we can agree that 'nevermore' is too seldom for a referendum on independence, and every year is too often. What is the right frequency to ask the question? I would argue 'once a generation' is correct, albeit that the term 'generation' is deliberately vague. I'd certainly say any more often than once every fifteen years brings about a state of permanent referendum campaign, which is pretty unhealthy. I wouldn't mind a bar on referenda more often than that. But I certainly wouldn't want a bar on referenda more often than say, once every forty years. So my view is once a generation is correct. With 'a generation' being somewhere between fifteen and forty years.
I don't buy, by the way, the 'they no longer have any say' argument. That only holds true if ALL of Scotland have one view, and ALL of rUK (or even all of England) hold the opposite view. Voters in all parts of the country have a roughly equal democratic say, setting apart arguments about efficiency of voting systems. You could, following that logic, say that voters in Norfolk will always be outvoted by the rest of England, so Norfolk ought to be independent. Or that voters in my house will always be outvoted by the rest of the country, so my family ought to be independent.
All that said, I'm increasingly of the opinion that devolution has been a disaster. There is no constitutional settlement which works evenly apart from treating the UK as one state or complete separation. Allowing a system where Nicola Sturgeon has a veto on everything cannot work, not least because her main political objective is to break up the UK so it is in her interests to be as difficult as possible. And as there seems no appetite in Scotland for the single state solution, sadly only way ahead is independence.
(My own preference would be a single state, but with more power devolved to the county level. I don't want to open the can of worms about what counties should look like, apart from to say 'units of about one or two million people, give or take whatever is workable'. So, say, thirty odd 'counties; in England, two or three in Wales, five or six in Scotland, one or two in NI. Though while that suits me in terms of 'fairness', I'm genuinely not sure what advantage it brings, say, Greater Manchester to be able to dictate its own health policy.)
I am a federalist so I am not advocating a case for Scottish independence. What I am arguing is for the democratic right of the people of the Nation of Scotland to express that preference. Election of a Scottish government committed to independence is the "will of the people" to use the Brexit language - as we know the will of the people has to be obeyed.
Unless of course it is the will of the Scottish people. They are now being told that they can vote for anything they like, but that unless England agrees with them they cannot have it. Handforth or Norfolk are not comparable as Handforth or Norfolk are not nations within the British state - Scotland is.
Repeated referenda benefit no-one. But if that is what the people of Scotland vote for that is what they want. What you describe as a "voluntary union" is literally what was created when Scotland was left with a separate legal system in which its act of union remains law subject to amendment and repeal.
This is interesting. @DominicRaab - asked if government was planning on holding a debate & vote on its decision to cut overseas aid spending to 0.5% of national income from 0.7% - signals HMG is not but says backbench MPs are free to debate and vote on "anything they wish" https://twitter.com/haynesdeborah/status/1385178739940724738
Again another very popular policy
That really is mean-spirited. Sorry, but it is. Especially when national income seems to be declining a little.
No it really isn't. Not when the UK is still a leading aid donor around the globe. There is no point us pissing our money away as part of a penis measuring contest to stroke our own egos and show how good we are, while other nations refuse to do the same.
If the money is needed in recipient nations we should be giving what is needed, in accordance with the other rich nations, not based upon our own GNI. Doing it as a percentage of the GNI shows that's about us - not about them or what they need.
I can't see how the lie holds beyond the immediate
The one lesson BoZo learned from Brexit is that it doesn't have to.
The campaign lies he told didn't survive beyond the end of the count.
Tomorrow's headline is the event horizon.
Out of interest, what lies did he tell?
No customs border in the Irish Sea? Protection for army veterans against vexatious prosecutions? Both manifesto pledges. Lioar even went to the DUP conference to state his NI pledge.
Thats just two. How about "I did not shag that musician Carrie"...?
You are you indulging in misogyny and abuse to Carrie again
I just do not understand why you feel a need to be this way
I was asked to state what lies he told. That he didn't have an affair whilst Carrie is pregnant is one. How on earth is that abuse to Carrie - she is the victim here and has my sympathy.
It is the way you express yourself at times and your posts are important and would improve immeasurably if you were maybe a little less school boyish
The NATION would improve immeasurably is this amoral bumbling liar wasn't running it. The Conservative Party used to have basic principles and decency. I am arguing for a return to these basic standards.
Comments
I do remember though, in 1962 watching Rochdale, then of the Fourth Division, play and beat Blackburn Rovers, then of the top division and with at least one international in the side, in the League Cup semi final. Biggest crowd I ever saw at Spotland.
They were originally based in Llansantffraid, about 8 miles over the border from Oswestry, where they subsequently moved. I have reservations as to them still being allowed to play in the LOW, but as a lifelong Cardiff city supporter, playing in the English pyramid, I can hardly complain.
They can achieve herd immunity in a couple of months at that rate.
An organisation, whether a company, a charity or a political movement is only as strong or as good as it's values. Johnson and his cronies have debased the Conservative Party, and his apologists simply say "ooh, look at the polls, haha, ya boo sucks". What goes around comes around. The fat little egotist populist will eventually get his comeuppance. It may take a while, but it will happen. I only hope Mercer does not leave the party.
My nephew was seriously injured in an accident and was paralysed (sadly he has since died) but the family followed Aberdeen but also Man Utd when Alex went to the club
I wrote to Alex explaining about how seriously ill my nephew was and I received a personal letter from Alex to him, lots of autographs of the players and club souvenirs
When my brother in law read the letter to him he asked his son what he thought about the letter and who was his favourite player
A smile came across his face and he said 'Eric Cantona'
This was his first emotional expression and words he had spoken following his dreadful accident a couple of years previously
Truly a highly emotional moment and confirmation of just how Alex won the hearts and minds of so many
Because of the way TV money is split the Premiership is remarkably even - all teams receive enough money to field a half decent team that has a chance of beating the other sides.
It's hard to see any other leagues in Europe that have anything like the same depth.
https://twitter.com/DeborahMeaden/status/1385158415585058816?s=20
I realise that's not quite the question but without bringing in Wales and possibly Scotland a Rugby League World Championship is akin to World Series Baseball; no-one outside the US can win.
Edited; second thoughts France & Aus/NZ in Rugby League.
Plus 2 polls today have No still ahead of Yes anyway, what you actually mean is that Scottish Nationalists must be appeased at every opportunity until they get the result they want, completely disrespecting the once in a generation 2014 result.
Scottish Nationalists does not = all Scots
So actually only 4 and 11 years ago did England not get the Tory majority it voted for
Home nations:
Football
Cricket
Rugby Union
Rugby League
Golf
Netball
Hockey (mostly, outside the Olympics)
Pretty much every major sport.
Team GB is generally reserved for sports which nobody cares about and/or are won by sitting down.
Ventilators were needed and from this call to arms tens of thousands were delivered.
'Texas v. White, 74 U.S. (7 Wall.) 700 (1869), was a case argued before the United States Supreme Court in 1869... the court further held that the Constitution did not permit states to unilaterally secede from the United States... "When, therefore, Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. All the obligations of perpetual union, and all the guaranties of republican government in the Union, attached at once to the State. The act which consummated her admission into the Union was something more than a compact; it was the incorporation of a new member into the political body. And it was final. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States."'
If this does happen, the sensible thing to do would be for Westminster to set the tone of the process. Ideally there would need to be a confirmatory referendum after a "deal". The problem with this is that this did not happen with the idiotic process that was followed for Brexit, so the precedent for a constitutional bombshell with irreversible consequences and no check an balance has been set.
I guess you were having a lie in this morning Philip! Have a good day at your office.
https://twitter.com/JimMFelton/status/1385164510256840706?s=20
Not many curling facilites in England for one.
In Scotland there is a big base in local clubs.
If Starmer gets in as UK PM in 2024 thanks to Scottish SNP and Welsh Labour MPs but the Tories win a majority in England again the West Lothian question will be back as a major issue
Including don't knows Yes on just 45% with Comres ie zero change from 2014
The scheme has been scrapped. Which means that farms will go back to importing literal coachloads of eastern Europeans to do the harvest.
Why does it matter? A significant driver for Brexit in eastern England is the "invasion" of people from eastern Europe to work in the food and agriculture sector. These are jobs that British people do not want to do. So the government make a lot of noise about removing migrants in favour of patriotic jobs for plucky locals, and once the headlines are gained and the policy weaved into knowledge, it gets withdrawn.
Which means that despite the policy of continuing migration of labour, the government will get the credit for ending it. Its smart politics, but I can't see how the lie holds beyond the immediate - the foreigner workforce will still be here.
The European Commission is getting ready to launch legal proceedings against vaccine producer AstraZeneca, according to five EU diplomats.
The Commission raised the matter at a meeting of ambassadors Wednesday, during which the majority of EU countries said they would support suing the company over complaints it massively failed to deliver pledged doses to the bloc.
One diplomat clarified that the point of the legal proceedings is to make it mandatory for AstraZeneca to provide the doses set out in its EU contract.
https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-preparing-legal-case-against-astrazeneca-over-vaccine-shortfalls/
The campaign lies he told didn't survive beyond the end of the count.
Tomorrow's headline is the event horizon.
Home nations for major team (Football)
Some team exceptions are cricket (England & Wales together); Rugby League uses both
Rugby Union primarily uses home nations but foreign tours are done by a British & Irish team.
Golf and netball home nations.
The only thing going against him are headline macro trends - when he won in 2017 the Tories were 19% ahead, and won by 0.8%, now they're only 8% ahead, but all signs are that the WM has disproportionally swung towards Con. In 2017 Cons won the wider West Midlands region by 6.5% (2.4% national lead), but in 2019 won it by 20% (NL 12.5%). But add in no Birmingham elections, no GE coming up and all that and I think it'd be a decent shock to see him lose.
Starmer must be relieved at the good Welsh polling, between that and the WoE Mayor he should have enough things he can sell as wins to draw focus away from Hartlepool, Teeside, and West Midlands.
Statement from James Dyson:
"Dyson people welcomed the Government’s challenge and, working round the clock, developed an entirely new ventilator in 30 days. Mercifully, they are not now required in the UK but we don’t regret our contribution to the national effort for one moment. I have some hope that our ventilator may yet help the response in other countries but that requires further time and investigation. Dyson has spent around £20m on this project to date, I will be funding this and we will not be accepting any public money. The team have worked 24/7 to design and manufacture a sophisticated ventilator in a very short timeframe – I pay to tribute to their exceptional expertise and commitment and hope they can spend this weekend with their families who will not have seen them for weeks."
https://www.dyson.co.uk/newsroom/overview/update/ventilator-update
If it is focussing minds, as seems to be the case, I still expect the SNP to have a majority but conversely a majority of Scots still want to remain in the Union
These two positions are not contradictory, but just the Scots being pragmatic and sensible.
Well - 59%
Badly - 34%
https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1385172206959927298?s=20
Dyson were only told they weren't needed much later once Mercedes ones had been delivered.
The vaccine taskforce and the ventilator challenge both followed the same principle: get as many as possible on the same thing, take the ones that work first, don't worry about those that don't.
UK: 89%
Germany: 67%
France: 58%
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/international/articles-reports/2021/01/12/covid-19-willingness-be-vaccinated
The 90 day exemption applied to all who were working on ventilators.
The ventilator challenge consortium was one response to Hancock's challenge, but not the only one.
Thats just two. How about "I did not shag that musician Carrie"...?
Explore the data from Opinium and the @TheBFPG in full here: https://www.opinium.com/resource-center/introducing-britains-four-foreign-policy-tribes/ https://twitter.com/OpiniumResearch/status/1385176731804446722/photo/1
A large proportion of the Patriots are over 65 and retired. They are most commonly found outside of urban areas in the South, Midlands and Wales.
The Patriots voted heavily for the Conservatives (68%) at the last election, and 80% voted for Leave in 2016.
So do you choose the intellectually consistent approach of arguing that the United States is not a union based on consent, and line up with slaveholding Confederates and many white nationalists who came after them? Or should we follow the settled law of the 1707 Act of Union and the 1998 Scotland Act that the UK Parliament continues to be the sole body with authority to legislate on constitutional affairs?
I just do not understand why you feel a need to be this way
Although I suspect it would be popular with all women who see Boris as a slimeball but lose the votes of those hoping a few quick (probably unsatisfactory) bonks would provide easy access to some government grant money.
That's the difference.
https://twitter.com/haynesdeborah/status/1385178739940724738
As for your latter point, its is legally correct that a 1998 Act of the UK protects constitutional affairs as being within Westminster's control. It is also legally correct that the Union with England Act of 1706 remains an active act of Scottish law. Amendment, revision and repeal of this act is possible - indeed the amendments made to it by the Scotland Act 1998 are listed: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/aosp/1707/7/contents
What you and HYUFD argue is that the Union with England Act is no longer the business of the Scottish law it legally applies to but can only be amended by the English it does not apply to.
Britain Elects
@BritainElects
·
1h
Welsh parliament VI:
Constituency:
LAB: 35% (+3)
CON: 24% (-6)
PC: 24% (+1)
REFUK: 4% (+1)
ABOL: 3% (-)
GRN: 3% (+1)
LDEM: 3% (-2)
List:
LAB: 33% (+2)
PC: 23% (+1)
CON: 22% (-6)
ABOL: 7% (-)
GRN: 5% (+2)
LDEM: 4% (-)
REFUK: 2% (+1)
via
@YouGov
, 18 - 21 Apr
Chgs. w/ last month
I think therefore we can agree that 'nevermore' is too seldom for a referendum on independence, and every year is too often. What is the right frequency to ask the question? I would argue 'once a generation' is correct, albeit that the term 'generation' is deliberately vague. I'd certainly say any more often than once every fifteen years brings about a state of permanent referendum campaign, which is pretty unhealthy. I wouldn't mind a bar on referenda more often than that. But I certainly wouldn't want a bar on referenda more often than say, once every forty years.
So my view is once a generation is correct. With 'a generation' being somewhere between fifteen and forty years.
I don't buy, by the way, the 'they no longer have any say' argument. That only holds true if ALL of Scotland have one view, and ALL of rUK (or even all of England) hold the opposite view. Voters in all parts of the country have a roughly equal democratic say, setting apart arguments about efficiency of voting systems. You could, following that logic, say that voters in Norfolk will always be outvoted by the rest of England, so Norfolk ought to be independent. Or that voters in my house will always be outvoted by the rest of the country, so my family ought to be independent.
All that said, I'm increasingly of the opinion that devolution has been a disaster. There is no constitutional settlement which works evenly apart from treating the UK as one state or complete separation. Allowing a system where Nicola Sturgeon has a veto on everything cannot work, not least because her main political objective is to break up the UK so it is in her interests to be as difficult as possible. And as there seems no appetite in Scotland for the single state solution, sadly only way ahead is independence.
(My own preference would be a single state, but with more power devolved to the county level. I don't want to open the can of worms about what counties should look like, apart from to say 'units of about one or two million people, give or take whatever is workable'. So, say, thirty odd 'counties; in England, two or three in Wales, five or six in Scotland, one or two in NI. Though while that suits me in terms of 'fairness', I'm genuinely not sure what advantage it brings, say, Greater Manchester to be able to dictate its own health policy.)
Jaguar Land Rover (JLR) has revealed that production at two of its UK manufacturing plants is to be suspended due to a shortage of parts.
The company said operations at the Castle Bromwich (Birmingham) and Halewood (Liverpool) sites would be affected through a "limited period" of non-production from next Monday.
It blamed a COVID-19 crisis issue of semi-conductor shortages, widely flagged by the industry as a whole and blamed for disruption to schedules among rivals and at other firms which rely on computer chips.
JLR's UK plants, including this one in Solihull, employ 40,000 people. The shortage of computer chips is not affecting output at Solihull
JLR - which has the UK's largest car manufacturing operation - said it was unclear how long the stoppages would last but it insisted production at the Solihull plant would continue as normal.
Its statement said: "Like other automotive manufacturers, we are currently experiencing some COVID-19 supply chain disruption, including the global availability of semi-conductors, which is having an impact on our production schedules and our ability to meet global demand for some of our vehicles.
"As a result, we have adjusted production schedules for certain vehicles which means that our Castle Bromwich and Halewood manufacturing plants will be operating a limited period of non-production from Monday 26th April.
Northern Ireland will enjoy the full economic benefits of Brexit including new free trade agreements with the rest of the world. We will ensure that Northern Ireland’s businesses and producers enjoy unfettered access to the rest of the UK and that in the implementation of our Brexit deal, we maintain and strengthen the integrity and smooth operation of our internal market.
Unless of course it is the will of the Scottish people. They are now being told that they can vote for anything they like, but that unless England agrees with them they cannot have it. Handforth or Norfolk are not comparable as Handforth or Norfolk are not nations within the British state - Scotland is.
Repeated referenda benefit no-one. But if that is what the people of Scotland vote for that is what they want. What you describe as a "voluntary union" is literally what was created when Scotland was left with a separate legal system in which its act of union remains law subject to amendment and repeal.
Plenty of non-UK nationals get UK state pensions.
If the money is needed in recipient nations we should be giving what is needed, in accordance with the other rich nations, not based upon our own GNI. Doing it as a percentage of the GNI shows that's about us - not about them or what they need.