Disagree on carving up England, though. That's a recipe for the disintegration not merely of the UK, but of England itself.
Possibly, but remember it has been done several times before without such a disaster occurring (there were separate judicial systems in Wales and Yorkshire in the eighteenth century which only reported to London indirectly).
The other logical possibility would be to devolve more power to county councils - but I really can't see that happening, because some of them (e.g. Rutland or Herefordshire) would be far too small to survive as autonomous entities (indeed, Wales is merging its 'principal areas' back together because they are so small). Lancashire or the divers parts of Yorkshire or indeed Kent would be OK.
Mercia Wessex Cornwall Yorkshire Northumbria Sussex Kent Essex East Anglia Cumbria Lancashire ?
Mr. Doethur, we've seen increasing separation, weakness of Britain/British identity and so forth. I see no reason to risk England when the best answer is an English Parliament.
@Pulpstar I think you've misunderstood me. I wasn't thinking in terms of physical size, rather in terms of population size and economic clout. Lancashire would, under a county arrangement, include Manchester, which would be ample. Meanwhile Cumbria is very small and poor due to its scattered population. It's hard to see how it could survive financially as a devolved unit.
Sky News - The Dirty Dozen seats that UKIP internal polling thinks they can win
Great Grimsby, Boston & Skegness, Great Yarmouth, Forest of Dean, Aylesbury, Thurrock, Sittingbourne & Sheppey, North Thanet, South Thanet, Eastleigh, Portsmouth South, East Worthing & Shoreham
Great Grimsby, Boston & Skegness, Great Yarmouth, Thurrock, North Thanet, South Thanet, Portsmouth South
Until a week ago, I lived in the Forest of Dean. If UKIP genuinely thinks they can win the Forest of Dean, their pollsters are on weed. They might just push Labour into third, but that would be the worst of it. The Conservatives are too active, too well funded and their candidate, despite some stupid things he has done, is too personally popular and treads the constituency too well (and is pretty right-wing) for that to be realistic.
I'm guessing a few people around Newent and Coleford are complaining about the FoDDC's inept housing policy and that's inflated the numbers - but there are too many loyal Tory voters in the leafy glades to make a real difference.
I wouldn't say their pollsters are on weed.
I'd say their pollsters are Tory plants, making sure UKIP waste their resources.
Mr. Doethur, we've seen increasing separation, weakness of Britain/British identity and so forth. I see no reason to risk England when the best answer is an English Parliament.
@Morris_Dancer and ordinarily I would agree with you. However, the English parliament option is one that is in itself fraught with dangers to the UK, and I was therefore pointing out why an alternative might be put forward or even adopted, and what it could look like.
The best possible reason for an English parliament of course is that it would infuriate the EU, who would rightly see a united England as an insuperable barrier to their dream of a federal Europe of the regions, because it would be about the equivalent size of a united Spain or Poland. However, I think there are times when even getting on the wick of Jean-Claude Juncker should take second place to national interests.
Mr. G, if audience members are picked at random, it's entirely possible one side will get more supporters picked.
Also, the "If we're better together, why aren't we already better together?" nonsense was pointless. Did it raise an issue of economic, health, education, defence or foreign affairs importance? It was a waste of a question.
Mr. Eagles, interesting certainly, not sure I'd say fun.
Morris , given the polling companies have data on the voting intentions of their panel members and so should be able to pick accurately a mix as required. So I say again it is sour grapes to say that Ipsos Mori rigged the audience.
English MPs vote on English Education matters, not difficult to exclude MPs from Wales & Scotland. What is the point of yet another layer of government other than to provide work for the idle.
The constant talking over each other and the complete failure of the moderator to do anything about it was very frustrating. At the end of the day nothing new came out of it. It appears plan B is to use the pound without a currency union, something that would be absolutely disastrous for our financial services industry. Salmond did not really explain what the problem is supposed to be on the NHS and why English privatisation would have any effect in Scotland. Salmond was by far the better debater on the night but I don't think many votes will have shifted.
Tories try to pretend their puppet did not lose and it will be all right on the night.
Thats such a pathetic made up claim that even you do not believe it. When this is the level of argument you are reduced to then its pretty clear that NO are on a loser.
As for the debate, its broadly meaningless. Since its nothing to do with who will be PM or FM of Scotland the beauty pagent element of it of no account. And now Mr Smithson tells us that the opinion of who gets the sash and tiara is meaningless. A sad unedifying shambles.
Mr. Eagles, Gaul wanted to remain Roman but the tides of fate were against it.
If you introduce political divisions within a state you create an inherent potential for disagreement and conflict, which can widen quickly. Three centuries of union could end in about three weeks after just 17 years of devolution.
Being blasé about that prospect was clearly a mistake, and not one we should hurry to repeat.
Money would be a critical problem. London gets more spending, and contributes more, than anywhere else. Under divided England it may very well feel it gets a rough deal (sending money elsewhere), and the other areas may feel they get a rough deal (less spending per head than London). That won't change and will only lead to rising resentment and bitterness.
The author intended it to be a serious work of historical fiction.
Slash fiction can be pretty remarkable. Many authors pay no attention to silly concepts like plausibility, biology, historical accuracy, or textual evidence.
Pretty pathetic from Roger ''Call me old fashioned but when you put a tax on on the very poorest for having a spare bedroom ''
The spare room is being paid for by taxpayers. Taxpayers, many of them poor taxpayers - with the nerve to actually go out and work for a living, paying for a room for people living off state benefits which claimants do not need - whilst people who do need one find there are none available because they are occupied by selfish benefit claimants. Why should taxpayers pay money to people on benefits for a benefit they do not need.
It's not a matter of trustworthiness, it will be perceived to be a foreign call centre, and a lot of companies make big play of not having foreign call centres.
That is going to have a hell of an impact on the Central Belt... It's a shame no one is willing to discuss it in blunt terms....
English MPs vote on English Education matters, not difficult to exclude MPs from Wales & Scotland. What is the point of yet another layer of government other than to provide work for the idle.
Another option that has sometimes been put forward is for the House of Commons to be a single English Parliament and the House of Lords to be reconstituted as a general Assembly of a Federal United Kingdom.
It might work, but again, making sure the revamped Lords was not invariably swamped by English members would be quite tricky.
Mr. G, if audience members are picked at random, it's entirely possible one side will get more supporters picked.
Also, the "If we're better together, why aren't we already better together?" nonsense was pointless. Did it raise an issue of economic, health, education, defence or foreign affairs importance? It was a waste of a question.
Mr. Eagles, interesting certainly, not sure I'd say fun.
Fun = Profitable for some legal establishments I know.
As someone who knows the Financial Services Industry and media rights quite well, it will be very fun.
One side impact I've heard rumoured is that if Scotland leave its been perceived that the accent may not be considered trustworthy.
So any call centres based in Scotland to emphasis their trustworthiness will rapidly move elsewhere....
It's not a matter of trustworthiness, it will be perceived to be a foreign call centre, and a lot of companies make big play of not having foreign call centres.
"The advent of the new individual savings accounts (NISA) produced a surge in savings in July, according to the British Bankers' Association (BBA). The new ISA, with a higher £15,000 annual limit, was announced in the Budget but came into effect on 1 July. The BBA says an extra £4.9bn was put into NISA accounts offered by its members."
Mr. Eagles, Gaul wanted to remain Roman but the tides of fate were against it.
If you introduce political divisions within a state you create an inherent potential for disagreement and conflict, which can widen quickly. Three centuries of union could end in about three weeks after just 17 years of devolution.
Being blasé about that prospect was clearly a mistake, and not one we should hurry to repeat.
Money would be a critical problem. London gets more spending, and contributes more, than anywhere else. Under divided England it may very well feel it gets a rough deal (sending money elsewhere), and the other areas may feel they get a rough deal (less spending per head than London). That won't change and will only lead to rising resentment and bitterness.
No nation state has a god-given right to survive.
England is brilliant, the Scots begged to join us 300 plus years ago, if the Scot vote for Independence, just like the Jamaicans, they'll be wanting British rule again within a few years.
Mr. G, if audience members are picked at random, it's entirely possible one side will get more supporters picked.
Also, the "If we're better together, why aren't we already better together?" nonsense was pointless. Did it raise an issue of economic, health, education, defence or foreign affairs importance? It was a waste of a question.
Mr. Eagles, interesting certainly, not sure I'd say fun.
Fun = Profitable for some legal establishments I know.
As someone who knows the Financial Services Industry and media rights quite well, it will be very fun.
One side impact I've heard rumoured is that if Scotland leave its been perceived that the accent may not be considered trustworthy.
So any call centres based in Scotland to emphasis their trustworthiness will rapidly move elsewhere....
It's not a matter of trustworthiness, it will be perceived to be a foreign call centre, and a lot of companies make big play of not having foreign call centres.
Utter bollocks
No they are facts.
Suck it up Malcolm, post independence, you will be a foreign country to the rest of the UK, we will act accordingly.
But in MalcolmG world, no companies don't make an issue of not having foreign call centres.
A consumer backlash against foreign call centres has led some companies to return operations to the UK. After all the talk of lower costs, where did it all go wrong?
....The issue has now become such a national bugbear some companies are using their UK-only call centre policy as a marketing tool. Natwest's latest advertising campaign guarantees that customers speak to people in Barnsley or Cardiff, rather than Bombay or Calcutta.
Mr. G, if audience members are picked at random, it's entirely possible one side will get more supporters picked.
Also, the "If we're better together, why aren't we already better together?" nonsense was pointless. Did it raise an issue of economic, health, education, defence or foreign affairs importance? It was a waste of a question.
Mr. Eagles, interesting certainly, not sure I'd say fun.
Fun = Profitable for some legal establishments I know.
As someone who knows the Financial Services Industry and media rights quite well, it will be very fun.
One side impact I've heard rumoured is that if Scotland leave its been perceived that the accent may not be considered trustworthy.
So any call centres based in Scotland to emphasis their trustworthiness will rapidly move elsewhere....
It's not a matter of trustworthiness, it will be perceived to be a foreign call centre, and a lot of companies make big play of not having foreign call centres.
Utter bollocks
No they are facts.
Suck it up Malcolm, post independence, you will be a foreign country to the rest of the UK, we will act accordingly.
But in MalcolmG world, no companies don't make an issue of not having foreign call centres.
A consumer backlash against foreign call centres has led some companies to return operations to the UK. After all the talk of lower costs, where did it all go wrong?
....The issue has now become such a national bugbear some companies are using their UK-only call centre policy as a marketing tool. Natwest's latest advertising campaign guarantees that customers speak to people in Barnsley or Cardiff, rather than Bombay or Calcutta.
You Tory fan boys get ever more desperate. Next you will be telling me that you will be stopping English air and English clouds from being used in Scotland. Grow up and try to act like an adult, we are perfectly capable of managing our own affairs and the pathetic whinging from you southern Tories shows exactly why we should not have you making our decisions.
English MPs vote on English Education matters, not difficult to exclude MPs from Wales & Scotland. What is the point of yet another layer of government other than to provide work for the idle.
Seems reasonable enough to me, as long as the English MPs reflect England's wishes and we do not end up with 35% of voters dictating how things should pan out for everyone. Were that to happen the regionalism Morris fears would inevitably become much more pronounced.
Mr. Eagles, Gaul wanted to remain Roman but the tides of fate were against it.
If you introduce political divisions within a state you create an inherent potential for disagreement and conflict, which can widen quickly. Three centuries of union could end in about three weeks after just 17 years of devolution.
Being blasé about that prospect was clearly a mistake, and not one we should hurry to repeat.
Money would be a critical problem. London gets more spending, and contributes more, than anywhere else. Under divided England it may very well feel it gets a rough deal (sending money elsewhere), and the other areas may feel they get a rough deal (less spending per head than London). That won't change and will only lead to rising resentment and bitterness.
No nation state has a god-given right to survive.
England is brilliant, the Scots begged to join us 300 plus years ago, if the Scot vote for Independence, just like the Jamaicans, they'll be wanting British rule again within a few years.
Mr. G, if audience members are picked at random, it's entirely possible one side will get more supporters picked.
Also, the "If we're better together, why aren't we already better together?" nonsense was pointless. Did it raise an issue of economic, health, education, defence or foreign affairs importance? It was a waste of a question.
Mr. Eagles, interesting certainly, not sure I'd say fun.
Fun = Profitable for some legal establishments I know.
As someone who knows the Financial Services Industry and media rights quite well, it will be very fun.
One side impact I've heard rumoured is that if Scotland leave its been perceived that the accent may not be considered trustworthy.
So any call centres based in Scotland to emphasis their trustworthiness will rapidly move elsewhere....
It's not a matter of trustworthiness, it will be perceived to be a foreign call centre, and a lot of companies make big play of not having foreign call centres.
Utter bollocks
No they are facts.
Suck it up Malcolm, post independence, you will be a foreign country to the rest of the UK, we will act accordingly.
But in MalcolmG world, no companies don't make an issue of not having foreign call centres.
A consumer backlash against foreign call centres has led some companies to return operations to the UK. After all the talk of lower costs, where did it all go wrong?
....The issue has now become such a national bugbear some companies are using their UK-only call centre policy as a marketing tool. Natwest's latest advertising campaign guarantees that customers speak to people in Barnsley or Cardiff, rather than Bombay or Calcutta.
You Tory fan boys get ever more desperate. Next you will be telling me that you will be stopping English air and English clouds from being used in Scotland. Grow up and try to act like an adult, we are perfectly capable of managing our own affairs and the pathetic whinging from you southern Tories shows exactly why we should not have you making our decisions.
Thus, the English should not have the Scots helping to make English-only decisions.
@TheScreamingEagles@malcolmg actually, I have some sympathy for both points of view. As I am rather hard of hearing although not yet officially classified as deaf, my chief problem with Indian or Nepalese call centres was that they spoke with rather heavy accents that I wasn't familiar with. It made them very difficult to understand, particularly as due to the pressure they were under, they had to speak very fast. However, when I speak to call centre workers in Scotland (I think my power firm has one in Edinburgh) they have a lovely, gentle accent that's very easy to follow and they speak at a nice, steady pace so I can follow what they are saying. And that, of course, will not change after independence as the dominant language in Scotland would remain English.
I would be very sorry indeed if post-independence the call centres were moved from Scotland to say, Manchester, which is an almost impossible accent for me to understand over a phone wire, because for me it's always been about the accent, not the location.
English MPs vote on English Education matters, not difficult to exclude MPs from Wales & Scotland. What is the point of yet another layer of government other than to provide work for the idle.
Seems reasonable enough to me, as long as the English MPs reflect England's wishes and we do not end up with 35% of voters dictating how things should pan out for everyone. Were that to happen the regionalism Morris fears would inevitably become much more pronounced.
That argument wasn't made too often when labour would/could get majorities on 35% of the vote, but your point is correct.
Mr. G, if audience members are picked at random, it's entirely possible one side will get more supporters picked.
Also, the "If we're better together, why aren't we already better together?" nonsense was pointless. Did it raise an issue of economic, health, education, defence or foreign affairs importance? It was a waste of a question.
Mr. Eagles, interesting certainly, not sure I'd say fun.
Fun = Profitable for some legal establishments I know.
As someone who knows the Financial Services Industry and media rights quite well, it will be very fun.
One side impact I've heard rumoured is that if Scotland leave its been perceived that the accent may not be considered trustworthy.
So any call centres based in Scotland to emphasis their trustworthiness will rapidly move elsewhere....
It's not a matter of trustworthiness, it will be perceived to be a foreign call centre, and a lot of companies make big play of not having foreign call centres.
Utter bollocks
No they are facts.
Suck it up Malcolm, post independence, you will be a foreign country to the rest of the UK, we will act accordingly.
But in MalcolmG world, no companies don't make an issue of not having foreign call centres.
A consumer backlash against foreign call centres has led some companies to return operations to the UK. After all the talk of lower costs, where did it all go wrong?
....The issue has now become such a national bugbear some companies are using their UK-only call centre policy as a marketing tool. Natwest's latest advertising campaign guarantees that customers speak to people in Barnsley or Cardiff, rather than Bombay or Calcutta.
You Tory fan boys get ever more desperate. Next you will be telling me that you will be stopping English air and English clouds from being used in Scotland. Grow up and try to act like an adult, we are perfectly capable of managing our own affairs and the pathetic whinging from you southern Tories shows exactly why we should not have you making our decisions.
Southern Tory? Little Englander?
You really are a turnip aren't you. I'm neither Southern, nor a little Englander.
Next you'll be calling me a racist far right extremist.
Mr. G, if audience members are picked at random, it's entirely possible one side will get more supporters picked.
Also, the "If we're better together, why aren't we already better together?" nonsense was pointless. Did it raise an issue of economic, health, education, defence or foreign affairs importance? It was a waste of a question.
Mr. Eagles, interesting certainly, not sure I'd say fun.
Fun = Profitable for some legal establishments I know.
As someone who knows the Financial Services Industry and media rights quite well, it will be very fun.
One side impact I've heard rumoured is that if Scotland leave its been perceived that the accent may not be considered trustworthy.
So any call centres based in Scotland to emphasis their trustworthiness will rapidly move elsewhere....
It's not a matter of trustworthiness, it will be perceived to be a foreign call centre, and a lot of companies make big play of not having foreign call centres.
Utter bollocks
No they are facts.
Suck it up Malcolm, post independence, you will be a foreign country to the rest of the UK, we will act accordingly.
You Tory fan boys get ever more desperate. Next you will be telling me that you will be stopping English air and English clouds from being used in Scotland. Grow up and try to act like an adult, we are perfectly capable of managing our own affairs and the pathetic whinging from you southern Tories shows exactly why we should not have you making our decisions.
Thus, the English should not have the Scots helping to make English-only decisions.
There are only a very few decisions made in Westminster that only affect England and only the Tories little helpers Labour are involved. Man up and have your own parliament in that case and give Scotland its own powers on Scottish decisions , rather than England making 100% of the decisions on Scotland. Maybe if you were remotely as clever as you think you are you would realise that England make 100% of Scotland's decisions.
On Sunday I had lunch with an executive of SITA-Aero and his family who are on holiday in the UK from Rome, Italy.
We were discussing salaries and living costs, when he told me tht his friend and family who recently moved from Rome to London (to work for Amadeus Capital), had found that notwithstanding the higher rental costs in London, that they were better off due to far lower taxes and lower day-to-day living costs.
So perhaps London as well as having become little-Paris, will now become little-Rome as well.
Mr. G, maybe. Maybe it sounds like someone who's been a long term critic of debates pointing yet more problems with them regarding a balanced and fair picture, and the way a small number of individuals can have a dramatic impact on the perceptions of how they debate went or is going.
Mr. G, if audience members are picked at random, it's entirely possible one side will get more supporters picked.
Also, the "If we're better together, why aren't we already better together?" nonsense was pointless. Did it raise an issue of economic, health, education, defence or foreign affairs importance? It was a waste of a question.
Mr. Eagles, interesting certainly, not sure I'd say fun.
Fun = Profitable for some legal establishments I know.
As someone who knows the Financial Services Industry and media rights quite well, it will be very fun.
One side impact I've heard rumoured is that if Scotland leave its been perceived that the accent may not be considered trustworthy.
So any call centres based in Scotland to emphasis their trustworthiness will rapidly move elsewhere....
It's not a matter of trustworthiness, it will be perceived to be a foreign call centre, and a lot of companies make big play of not having foreign call centres.
Utter bollocks
No they are facts.
Suck it up Malcolm, post independence, you will be a foreign country to the rest of the UK, we will act accordingly.
But in MalcolmG world, no companies don't make an issue of not having foreign call centres.
You Tory fan boys get ever more desperate. Next you will be telling me that you will be stopping English air and English clouds from being used in Scotland. Grow up and try to act like an adult, we are perfectly capable of managing our own affairs and the pathetic whinging from you southern Tories shows exactly why we should not have you making our decisions.
Southern Tory? Little Englander?
You really are a turnip aren't you. I'm neither Southern, nor a little Englander.
Next you'll be calling me a racist far right extremist.
If the cap fits wear it and to me you are a southern jessie. You may count your self as northern England but since your geography is not too good , Manchester is far south of Scotland. Trying to be a smart arse does not suit you, you are not very good at it.
PS: Trying to play the pathetic racist card was cheap
@TheScreamingEagles@malcolmg actually, I have some sympathy for both points of view. As I am rather hard of hearing although not yet officially classified as deaf, my chief problem with Indian or Nepalese call centres was that they spoke with rather heavy accents that I wasn't familiar with. It made them very difficult to understand, particularly as due to the pressure they were under, they had to speak very fast. However, when I speak to call centre workers in Scotland (I think my power firm has one in Edinburgh) they have a lovely, gentle accent that's very easy to follow and they speak at a nice, steady pace so I can follow what they are saying. And that, of course, will not change after independence as the dominant language in Scotland would remain English.
I would be very sorry indeed if post-independence the call centres were moved from Scotland to say, Manchester, which is an almost impossible accent for me to understand over a phone wire, because for me it's always been about the accent, not the location.
My problem with foreign call centres is that they read from a script, and don't deviate from it.
Whereas as UK based ones, have a bit more flexibility, is why I was with Cellnet/o2 for sixteen years, they had UK based call centres.
Re accents, having called EE a lot recently, the accent I struggle with the most is the North Eastern one.
Mr. G, if audience members are picked at random, it's entirely possible one side will get more supporters picked.
Also, the "If we're better together, why aren't we already better together?" nonsense was pointless. Did it raise an issue of economic, health, education, defence or foreign affairs importance? It was a waste of a question.
Mr. Eagles, interesting certainly, not sure I'd say fun.
Fun = Profitable for some legal establishments I know.
As someone who knows the Financial Services Industry and media rights quite well, it will be very fun.
One side impact I've heard rumoured is that if Scotland leave its been perceived that the accent may not be considered trustworthy.
So any call centres based in Scotland to emphasis their trustworthiness will rapidly move elsewhere....
It's not a matter of trustworthiness, it will be perceived to be a foreign call centre, and a lot of companies make big play of not having foreign call centres.
Utter bollocks
No they are facts.
Suck it up Malcolm, post independence, you will be a foreign country to the rest of the UK, we will act accordingly.
You Tory fan boys get ever more desperate. Next you will be telling me that you will be stopping English air and English clouds from being used in Scotland. Grow up and try to act like an adult, we are perfectly capable of managing our own affairs and the pathetic whinging from you southern Tories shows exactly why we should not have you making our decisions.
Thus, the English should not have the Scots helping to make English-only decisions.
There are only a very few decisions made in Westminster that only affect England and only the Tories little helpers Labour are involved. Man up and have your own parliament in that case and give Scotland its own powers on Scottish decisions , rather than England making 100% of the decisions on Scotland. Maybe if you were remotely as clever as you think you are you would realise that England make 100% of Scotland's decisions.
If you feel that way why do you want the Bank of England controlling the currency in your newly foreign country? Man up indeed.
Mr. G, if audience members are picked at random, it's entirely possible one side will get more supporters picked.
Also, the "If we're better together, why aren't we already better together?" nonsense was pointless. Did it raise an issue of economic, health, education, defence or foreign affairs importance? It was a waste of a question.
Mr. Eagles, interesting certainly, not sure I'd say fun.
Fun = Profitable for some legal establishments I know.
As someone who knows the Financial Services Industry and media rights quite well, it will be very fun.
One side impact I've heard rumoured is that if Scotland leave its been perceived that the accent may not be considered trustworthy.
So any call centres based in Scotland to emphasis their trustworthiness will rapidly move elsewhere....
It's not a matter of trustworthiness, it will be perceived to be a foreign call centre, and a lot of companies make big play of not having foreign call centres.
Utter bollocks
No they are facts.
Suck it up Malcolm, post independence, you will be a foreign country to the rest of the UK, we will act accordingly.
But in MalcolmG world, no companies don't make an issue of not having foreign call centres.
You Tory fan boys get ever more desperate. Next you will be telling me that you will be stopping English air and English clouds from being used in Scotland. Grow up and try to act like an adult, we are perfectly capable of managing our own affairs and the pathetic whinging from you southern Tories shows exactly why we should not have you making our decisions.
Southern Tory? Little Englander?
You really are a turnip aren't you. I'm neither Southern, nor a little Englander.
Next you'll be calling me a racist far right extremist.
If the cap fits wear it and to me you are a southern jessie. You may count your self as northern England but since your geography is not too good , Manchester is far south of Scotland. Trying to be a smart arse does not suit you, you are not very good at it.
Well by your logic, a Tory in Newcastle is a Southern Tory.
I see you've not been able to repudiate the facts and links I've posted, but when it comes to being an arse, I shall bow down to your brilliance, perhaps one day, you'll engage with the arguments and leave out the insults.
Mr. G, maybe. Maybe it sounds like someone who's been a long term critic of debates pointing yet more problems with them regarding a balanced and fair picture, and the way a small number of individuals can have a dramatic impact on the perceptions of how they debate went or is going.
MD, that is fine , but as they witter constantly on here about the probity of the polling companies, it is a bit rich that on the first occasion their fan boy gets thrashed that suddenly the polling company rigged the audience , the presenter picked the wrong type of people etc. Why not just accept their man was shit and got a real drubbing. Poor losers.
I am so looking forward to the post-referendum period. It has gone on too long.
I would like to think that the likely No vote will put the issue to bed for a good number of years - and thus see a reduction in the number of aggressive posts on here that this topic as generated. But I fear it won't.
In many ways, the SNP need No to win. With a Yes vote, their reason for existing is rather diminished. After all, when you exist to gain independence - you do rather need to reinvent yourself if that ever happens.
Having finally watched the debate, if we are going to have Prime Ministerial debates next year, can we please make sure the audiences are seen but not heard.
It wasn't really edifying at all.
Salmond was Scipio Africanus, whereas Darling was like Hannibal.
Darling was clearly affected by the vociferous level of support Salmond received in the hall. It was extraordinary how often the moderator managed to pick out Yes supporters to comment. I am sure he did not do it on purpose, so either it was a case of ComRes getting the balance wrong, a lot of instant conversions or No supporters being less willing to make their points. I suspect the latter and a touch of the former.
I think it could be more that the Nats are more motivated and vociferous than Unionists.
It's exactly that. The No side is undoubtedly less vociferous and motivated. Given that and given the support Salmond was receiving last night it's no great surprise the moderator struggled to pick out No supporters for comments. That was my precise point.
But as Shadsy pointed out last week, Ron Paul's supporters are pretty vociferous and motivated but that doesn't necessarily translate to winning the election/primary.
True. I think Yes will win because it's Scotland's chance to stick two fingers up at Westminster, just as most voters across the whole UK wish to do. I believe that when they do they'll find out they've actually put their faith in something just as cynical and self-serving, but then it will all be done.
We're going to find out in a little over three weeks.
Whatever the outcome, it is going to be an exciting time.
Time for a federal UK.
I'd like to see Governors.
I quite like the title of Governor of England, or Governor of Yorkshire.
I was reading Nevil Shute's In the Wet recently. It was written in the 1950s and is about Britain in the 1980s. Australia has a one-man-7-votes system based on what you put in; UK has a OMOV system, is rabidly socialist and still has rationing. The Queen gets so fed up she appoints a Governor-General of Britain between herself and the Labour PM so she won't have to have anything to do with him.
Both ideas - up to 7 votes if you contribute versus one if you only take out, and a Governor General of the UK - seem like quite good wheezes to me.
English MPs vote on English Education matters, not difficult to exclude MPs from Wales & Scotland. What is the point of yet another layer of government other than to provide work for the idle.
Seems reasonable enough to me, as long as the English MPs reflect England's wishes and we do not end up with 35% of voters dictating how things should pan out for everyone. Were that to happen the regionalism Morris fears would inevitably become much more pronounced.
That argument wasn't made too often when labour would/could get majorities on 35% of the vote, but your point is correct.
I have always made it. As I say lower down the thread, when Scotland votes Yes we get the chance for a new rUK constitutional settlement. Unfortunately, it's highly likely that what we'll end up with is a short-term partisan slanging match followed by the imposition of a system that will be constantly altered as parties swap power. This will only cause further alienation from Westminster and will lead to increased calls for much more power to be devolved to English regions and metropolitan areas.
On Sunday I had lunch with an executive of SITA-Aero and his family who are on holiday in the UK from Rome, Italy.
We were discussing salaries and living costs, when he told me tht his friend and family who recently moved from Rome to London (to work for Amadeus Capital), had found that notwithstanding the higher rental costs in London, that they were better off due to far lower taxes and lower day-to-day living costs.
So perhaps London as well as having become little-Paris, will now become little-Rome as well.
And perhaps little-Edinburgh when the more intelligent Scots move south in the event of independence.
Mr. G, if audience members are picked at random, it's entirely possible one side will get more supporters picked.
Also, the "If we're better together, why aren't we already better together?" nonsense was pointless. Did it raise an issue of economic, health, education, defence or foreign affairs importance? It was a waste of a question.
Mr. Eagles, interesting certainly, not sure I'd say fun.
Fun = Profitable for some legal establishments I know.
As someone who knows the Financial Services Industry and media rights quite well, it will be very fun.
One side impact I've heard rumoured is that if Scotland leave its been perceived that the accent may not be considered trustworthy.
So any call centres based in Scotland to emphasis their trustworthiness will rapidly move elsewhere....
It's not a matter of trustworthiness, it will be perceived to be a foreign call centre, and a lot of companies make big play of not having foreign call centres.
Utter bollocks
No they are facts.
Suck it up Malcolm, post independence, you will be a foreign country to the rest of the UK, we will act accordingly.
But in MalcolmG world, no companies don't make an issue of not having foreign call centres.
A consumer backlash against foreign call centres has led some companies to return operations to the UK. After all the talk of lower costs, where did it all go wrong?
....The issue has now become such a national bugbear some companies are using their UK-only call centre policy as a marketing tool. Natwest's latest advertising campaign guarantees that customers speak to people in Barnsley or Cardiff, rather than Bombay or Calcutta.
You Tory fan boys get ever more desperate. Next you will be telling me that you will be stopping English air and English clouds from being used in Scotland. Grow up and try to act like an adult, we are perfectly capable of managing our own affairs and the pathetic whinging from you southern Tories shows exactly why we should not have you making our decisions.
Southern Tory? Little Englander?
You really are a turnip aren't you. I'm neither Southern, nor a little Englander.
Next you'll be calling me a racist far right extremist.
TSE
More like a neep than a turnip. Not sure whether he is a swede or a turnip and so mashed up and confused that its true identity has to be masked by gravy.
Mr. G, if audience members are picked at random, it's entirely possible one side will get more supporters picked.
Also, the "If we're better together, why aren't we already better together?" nonsense was pointless. Did it raise an issue of economic, health, education, defence or foreign affairs importance? It was a waste of a question.
Mr. Eagles, interesting certainly, not sure I'd say fun.
Fun = Profitable for some legal establishments I know.
As someone who knows the Financial Services Industry and media rights quite well, it will be very fun.
One side impact I've heard rumoured is that if Scotland leave its been perceived that the accent may not be considered trustworthy.
So any call centres based in Scotland to emphasis their trustworthiness will rapidly move elsewhere....
It's not a matter of trustworthiness, it will be perceived to be a foreign call centre, and a lot of companies make big play of not having foreign call centres.
Utter bollocks
No they are facts.
Suck it up Malcolm, post independence, you will be a foreign country to the rest of the UK, we will act accordingly.
Mr. G, if audience members are picked at random, it's entirely possible one side will get more supporters picked.
Also, the "If we're better together, why aren't we already better together?" nonsense was pointless. Did it raise an issue of economic, health, education, defence or foreign affairs importance? It was a waste of a question.
Mr. Eagles, interesting certainly, not sure I'd say fun.
Fun = Profitable for some legal establishments I know.
As someone who knows the Financial Services Industry and media rights quite well, it will be very fun.
One side impact I've heard rumoured is that if Scotland leave its been perceived that the accent may not be considered trustworthy.
So any call centres based in Scotland to emphasis their trustworthiness will rapidly move elsewhere....
It's not a matter of trustworthiness, it will be perceived to be a foreign call centre, and a lot of companies make big play of not having foreign call centres.
Utter bollocks
No they are facts.
Suck it up Malcolm, post independence, you will be a foreign country to the rest of the UK, we will act accordingly.
But in MalcolmG world, no companies don't make an issue of not having foreign call centres.
You Tory fan boys get ever more desperate. Next you will be telling me that you will be stopping English air and English clouds from being used in Scotland. Grow up and try to act like an adult, we are perfectly capable of managing our own affairs and the pathetic whinging from you southern Tories shows exactly why we should not have you making our decisions.
Southern Tory? Little Englander?
You really are a turnip aren't you. I'm neither Southern, nor a little Englander.
Next you'll be calling me a racist far right extremist.
If the cap fits wear it and to me you are a southern jessie. You may count your self as northern England but since your geography is not too good , Manchester is far south of Scotland. Trying to be a smart arse does not suit you, you are not very good at it.
PS: Trying to play the pathetic racist card was cheap
You live south of Easterross, what's it like to be a southern jessie ? ;-)
I am so looking forward to the post-referendum period. It has gone on too long.
I would like to think that the likely No vote will put the issue to bed for a good number of years - and thus see a reduction in the number of aggressive posts on here that this topic as generated. But I fear it won't.
In many ways, the SNP need No to win. With a Yes vote, their reason for existing is rather diminished. After all, when you exist to gain independence - you do rather need to reinvent yourself if that ever happens.
Utter bollocks, you must be really stupid to come up with that drivel. Schools still on holiday down south.
On Sunday I had lunch with an executive of SITA-Aero and his family who are on holiday in the UK from Rome, Italy.
We were discussing salaries and living costs, when he told me tht his friend and family who recently moved from Rome to London (to work for Amadeus Capital), had found that notwithstanding the higher rental costs in London, that they were better off due to far lower taxes and lower day-to-day living costs.
So perhaps London as well as having become little-Paris, will now become little-Rome as well.
And perhaps little-Edinburgh when the more intelligent Scots move south in the event of independence.
Mr. G, if audience members are picked at random, it's entirely possible one side will get more supporters picked.
Also, the "If we're better together, why aren't we already better together?" nonsense was pointless. Did it raise an issue of economic, health, education, defence or foreign affairs importance? It was a waste of a question.
Mr. Eagles, interesting certainly, not sure I'd say fun.
Fun = Profitable for some legal establishments I know.
As someone who knows the Financial Services Industry and media rights quite well, it will be very fun.
One side impact I've heard rumoured is that if Scotland leave its been perceived that the accent may not be considered trustworthy.
So any call centres based in Scotland to emphasis their trustworthiness will rapidly move elsewhere....
It's not a matter of trustworthiness, it will be perceived to be a foreign call centre, and a lot of companies make big play of not having foreign call centres.
Utter bollocks
So the three senior project managers working on their company's contingency plans are a figment of my imagination.
I must have looked very strange at dinner on Saturday. Although looking at the bill the waiters at the restaurant were equally confused...
Mr. G, if audience members are picked at random, it's entirely possible one side will get more supporters picked.
Also, the "If we're better together, why aren't we already better together?" nonsense was pointless. Did it raise an issue of economic, health, education, defence or foreign affairs importance? It was a waste of a question.
Mr. Eagles, interesting certainly, not sure I'd say fun.
Fun = Profitable for some legal establishments I know.
As someone who knows the Financial Services Industry and media rights quite well, it will be very fun.
One side impact I've heard rumoured is that if Scotland leave its been perceived that the accent may not be considered trustworthy.
So any call centres based in Scotland to emphasis their trustworthiness will rapidly move elsewhere....
It's not a matter of trustworthiness, it will be perceived to be a foreign call centre, and a lot of companies make big play of not having foreign call centres.
Utter bollocks
No they are facts.
Suck it up Malcolm, post independence, you will be a foreign country to the rest of the UK, we will act accordingly.
Mr. G, if audience members are picked at random, it's entirely possible one side will get more supporters picked.
Also, the "If we're better together, why aren't we already better together?" nonsense was pointless. Did it raise an issue of economic, health, education, defence or foreign affairs importance? It was a waste of a question.
Mr. Eagles, interesting certainly, not sure I'd say fun.
Fun = Profitable for some legal establishments I know.
As someone who knows the Financial Services Industry and media rights quite well, it will be very fun.
One side impact I've heard rumoured is that if Scotland leave its been perceived that the accent may not be considered trustworthy.
So any call centres based in Scotland to emphasis their trustworthiness will rapidly move elsewhere....
It's not a matter of trustworthiness, it will be perceived to be a foreign call centre, and a lot of companies make big play of not having foreign call centres.
Utter bollocks
No they are facts.
Suck it up Malcolm, post independence, you will be a foreign country to the rest of the UK, we will act accordingly.
But in MalcolmG world, no companies don't make an issue of not having foreign call centres.
You Tory fan boys get ever more desperate. Next you will be telling me that you will be stopping English air and English clouds from being used in Scotland. Grow up and try to act like an adult, we are perfectly capable of managing our own affairs and the pathetic whinging from you southern Tories shows exactly why we should not have you making our decisions.
Southern Tory? Little Englander?
You really are a turnip aren't you. I'm neither Southern, nor a little Englander.
Next you'll be calling me a racist far right extremist.
If the cap fits wear it and to me you are a southern jessie. You may count your self as northern England but since your geography is not too good , Manchester is far south of Scotland. Trying to be a smart arse does not suit you, you are not very good at it.
PS: Trying to play the pathetic racist card was cheap
You live south of Easterross, what's it like to be a southern jessie ? ;-)
It is wonderful Alan. The level of debate on here continues to plummet. Tory fannies trying to scare us by saying we will be foreigners, what is new in that.
On Sunday I had lunch with an executive of SITA-Aero and his family who are on holiday in the UK from Rome, Italy.
We were discussing salaries and living costs, when he told me tht his friend and family who recently moved from Rome to London (to work for Amadeus Capital), had found that notwithstanding the higher rental costs in London, that they were better off due to far lower taxes and lower day-to-day living costs.
So perhaps London as well as having become little-Paris, will now become little-Rome as well.
And perhaps little-Edinburgh when the more intelligent Scots move south in the event of independence.
For sure you will not be in that group
Indeed, not being cursed by Scottish birth, or residence.
I am so looking forward to the post-referendum period. It has gone on too long.
I would like to think that the likely No vote will put the issue to bed for a good number of years - and thus see a reduction in the number of aggressive posts on here that this topic as generated. But I fear it won't.
In many ways, the SNP need No to win. With a Yes vote, their reason for existing is rather diminished. After all, when you exist to gain independence - you do rather need to reinvent yourself if that ever happens.
Utter bollocks, you must be really stupid to come up with that drivel. Schools still on holiday down south.
This rather proves my point. The bitter bile that comes from certain posters poisons the debate.
Personally I would be happy to see an independent Scotland. But that does not seem to be the way things are heading.
But an end to Referendum discussion on here will still be very welcome.
Spoke with a number of people this morning following the debate and the main comment was not who won but the embarrassment felt. This was not the kind welcoming Scotland we pride ourselves on but a petty bitter argumentative country. If Independence comes then we can look forward to this for years to come.
So many key questions were not asked and so few answers given. Darling looked nervous and missed many good opportunities. The crowd was aggressive and the lady who laid into Darling shows just why so many good people will quit Scotland if independence comes.
The event certainly did not convince me or anyone at our company to switch votes. I think the battle lines have been set and today the voting starts. I predict turnout will be high which will help the no campaign.
@Bond_James_Bond That's a good book. If you read Slide Rule it explains in detail why he hated politicians in general and socialists in particular, summed up by this waspish remark: 'To me, a politician or a civil servant is still an arrogant fool until he is proved otherwise'. Also contains some very interesting accounts of his attempt to start an aircraft manufacturing company and the difficulties he had, particularly with banks but also with the RAF.
I always thought multiple voting sounded a good wheeze as well (in fact, due to a loophole I had two votes myself for some years) but in this country it became associated with the rich elites via the university vote and the landlord votes. That's probably why the UNDHR states that all votes for all people must be equal in value.
Does seem a bit strange and perverse though that Tristram Hunt, Michael Gove and I have the same voting power despite the great disparity in our intellects. However, since under the Shute system that would remain the same - after all, on paper they are almost as qualified and experienced as I am, as well as rather richer - I suppose it doesn't matter a lot in practice.
Before I disappear, the main thing I took from last night's debate, an Independent Scotland's first act if it doesn't get a currency union will be to default on its liabilities.
As Sir Humphrey would say, that's a very courageous thing to do, and the money markets will reward an Independent Scotland for such courage.
Mr. G, if audience members are picked at random, it's entirely possible one side will get more supporters picked.
Also, the "If we're better together, why aren't we already better together?" nonsense was pointless. Did it raise an issue of economic, health, education, defence or foreign affairs importance? It was a waste of a question.
Mr. Eagles, interesting certainly, not sure I'd say fun.
Fun = Profitable for some legal establishments I know.
As someone who knows the Financial Services Industry and media rights quite well, it will be very fun.
One side impact I've heard rumoured is that if Scotland leave its been perceived that the accent may not be considered trustworthy.
So any call centres based in Scotland to emphasis their trustworthiness will rapidly move elsewhere....
It's not a matter of trustworthiness, it will be perceived to be a foreign call centre, and a lot of companies make big play of not having foreign call centres.
Utter bollocks
So the three senior project managers working on their company's contingency plans are a figment of my imagination.
I must have looked very strange at dinner on Saturday. Although looking at the bill the waiters at the restaurant were equally confused...
Dear Dear, were they wearing stripes on their shoulders. Big deal , 3 fannies trying to make out they were important. You missed all the one's planning to move the other way to get out of a foreign country. Take less drink the next time you are out and as you spent your time eavesdropping , try to get a friend and have company when you go for a meal so that you can have a discussion and not have to spend your time earwigging and misunderstanding others conversations. Sad loner mishears conversation in restaurant and gets 2+2 =5
"Pancreatic cancer sufferers in Wales will be at a disadvantage to their English counterparts if a new drug is only partially approved for use on the Welsh NHS, campaigners have warned.
Abraxane, which will help to extend the lives of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer, will be made available free to patients in England following a decision by the Cancer Drugs Fund to add the drug to its list.
But it is feared the All Wales Medical Strategy Group’s (AWMSG) will only partially recommended the treatment – in combination with another drug called gemcitabine – which means hundreds of sufferers in Wales could miss out.
Currently, pancreatic cancer is the fifth most common cancer killer in the UK with almost 8,800 people diagnosed each year."
On Sunday I had lunch with an executive of SITA-Aero and his family who are on holiday in the UK from Rome, Italy.
We were discussing salaries and living costs, when he told me tht his friend and family who recently moved from Rome to London (to work for Amadeus Capital), had found that notwithstanding the higher rental costs in London, that they were better off due to far lower taxes and lower day-to-day living costs.
So perhaps London as well as having become little-Paris, will now become little-Rome as well.
And perhaps little-Edinburgh when the more intelligent Scots move south in the event of independence.
For sure you will not be in that group
Indeed, not being cursed by Scottish birth, or residence.
But obviously cursed with being stupid nonetheless, one out of three is enough
Mr. G, if audience members are picked at random, it's entirely possible one side will get more supporters picked.
Also, the "If we're better together, why aren't we already better together?" nonsense was pointless. Did it raise an issue of economic, health, education, defence or foreign affairs importance? It was a waste of a question.
Mr. Eagles, interesting certainly, not sure I'd say fun.
Fun = Profitable for some legal establishments I know.
As someone who knows the Financial Services Industry and media rights quite well, it will be very fun.
One side impact I've heard rumoured is that if Scotland leave its been perceived that the accent may not be considered trustworthy.
So any call centres based in Scotland to emphasis their trustworthiness will rapidly move elsewhere....
It's not a matter of trustworthiness, it will be perceived to be a foreign call centre, and a lot of companies make big play of not having foreign call centres.
Utter bollocks
No they are facts.
Suck it up Malcolm, post independence, you will be a foreign country to the rest of the UK, we will act accordingly.
Spoke with a number of people this morning following the debate and the main comment was not who won but the embarrassment felt. This was not the kind welcoming Scotland we pride ourselves on but a petty bitter argumentative country. If Independence comes then we can look forward to this for years to come.
So many key questions were not asked and so few answers given. Darling looked nervous and missed many good opportunities. The crowd was aggressive and the lady who laid into Darling shows just why so many good people will quit Scotland if independence comes.
The event certainly did not convince me or anyone at our company to switch votes. I think the battle lines have been set and today the voting starts. I predict turnout will be high which will help the no campaign.
LOL, Tory shocked, shocked I tell you , those damn peasants did not tug their forelocks. You are obviously a joke astroturfer.
Dear Dear, were they wearing stripes on their shoulders. Big deal , 3 fannies trying to make out they were important. You missed all the one's planning to move the other way to get out of a foreign country. Take less drink the next time you are out and as you spent your time eavesdropping , try to get a friend and have company when you go for a meal so that you can have a discussion and not have to spend your time earwigging and misunderstanding others conversations. Sad loner mishears conversation in restaurant and gets 2+2 =5
Sad loner was very surprised at exactly how much will be moving south of the border. It is far more than I would deem necessary....
Put it this way, the North East and Yorkshire will be boomville if Scotland votes Yes...
Before I disappear, the main thing I took from last night's debate, an Independent Scotland's first act if it doesn't get a currency union will be to default on its liabilities.
As Sir Humphrey would say, that's a very courageous thing to do, and the money markets will reward an Independent Scotland for such courage.
You really are not too bright then. If you had listened he clearly said if you keep all the assets you obviously keep all the liabilities. Basic economics for dummies.
Sky News - The Dirty Dozen seats that UKIP internal polling thinks they can win
Great Grimsby, Boston & Skegness, Great Yarmouth, Forest of Dean, Aylesbury, Thurrock, Sittingbourne & Sheppey, North Thanet, South Thanet, Eastleigh, Portsmouth South, East Worthing & Shoreham
We must hope that the good people of these places refute the low opinion of them that UKIP have drawn up.
Sky News - The Dirty Dozen seats that UKIP internal polling thinks they can win
Great Grimsby, Boston & Skegness, Great Yarmouth, Forest of Dean, Aylesbury, Thurrock, Sittingbourne & Sheppey, North Thanet, South Thanet, Eastleigh, Portsmouth South, East Worthing & Shoreham
Great Grimsby, Boston & Skegness, Great Yarmouth, Thurrock, North Thanet, South Thanet, Portsmouth South
Are the best chances amongst those
I'm starting to suspect that UKIP has a deeply misinformed understanding of what the term "marginal constituency" actually means.
The common definition of marginal is along the lines of "a seat where two or sometimes three parties are in close contention". UKIP's understanding of marginal seems to be "a seat anyone can win, even us".
Nothing else would explain as well why UKIP could possibly consider these seats "best chances".
Here are the 2010 results for those seats including UKIP:
Name MP CON LAB LIB UKIP Great Grimsby Austin Mitchell 10063 10777 7388 2043 Boston and Skegness Mark Simmonds 21325 8899 6371 4081 Great Yarmouth Brandon Lewis 18571 14295 6188 2066 Thurrock Jackie Doyle-Price 16869 16777 4901 3390 Thanet North Roger Gale 22826 9298 8400 2819 Thanet South Laura Sandys 22043 14426 6935 2529 Portsmouth South Mike Hancock 13721 5640 18921 876
In all cases note how UKIP came last, came in farcically far behind the winner, and in most cases was also miles behind the third-placed party. The least-worst effort was Thurrock, where they were only 1,800 votes behind the third-placed player, but this should be scant comfort because they were nearly 14,000 votes behind the winner.
To be a UKIPper optimistic about Portsmouth South is to be clinically delusional. From 876 votes in 2010, they're going to overturn an LD vote of nearly 19,000? They don't seem to have noticed that they're hated.
I actually agree with the comment that UKIP are being duped by their cannier enemies here. What is going on is IMHO a sort of Tory Operation Fortitude, where the UKIP mugs are being fooled into defending the Pas de Calais while the real action is in Normandy. They truly are a children's crusade.
Mr. G, if audience members are picked at random, it's entirely possible one side will get more supporters picked.
Also, the "If we're better together, why aren't we already better together?" nonsense was pointless. Did it raise an issue of economic, health, education, defence or foreign affairs importance? It was a waste of a question.
Mr. Eagles, interesting certainly, not sure I'd say fun.
Fun = Profitable for some legal establishments I know.
As someone who knows the Financial Services Industry and media rights quite well, it will be very fun.
One side impact I've heard rumoured is that if Scotland leave its been perceived that the accent may not be considered trustworthy.
So any call centres based in Scotland to emphasis their trustworthiness will rapidly move elsewhere....
It's not a matter of trustworthiness, it will be perceived to be a foreign call centre, and a lot of companies make big play of not having foreign call centres.
Utter bollocks
No they are facts.
Suck it up Malcolm, post independence, you will be a foreign country to the rest of the UK, we will act accordingly.
Before I disappear, the main thing I took from last night's debate, an Independent Scotland's first act if it doesn't get a currency union will be to default on its liabilities.
As Sir Humphrey would say, that's a very courageous thing to do, and the money markets will reward an Independent Scotland for such courage.
You really are not too bright then. If you had listened he clearly said if you keep all the assets you obviously keep all the liabilities. Basic economics for dummies.
Which is a default.
Perhaps you should stick to talking about turnips, so you don't embarrass yourself any further.
Mr. G, if audience members are picked at random, it's entirely possible one side will get more supporters picked.
Also, the "If we're better together, why aren't we already better together?" nonsense was pointless. Did it raise an issue of economic, health, education, defence or foreign affairs importance? It was a waste of a question.
Mr. Eagles, interesting certainly, not sure I'd say fun.
Fun = Profitable for some legal establishments I know.
As someone who knows the Financial Services Industry and media rights quite well, it will be very fun.
One side impact I've heard rumoured is that if Scotland leave its been perceived that the accent may not be considered trustworthy.
So any call centres based in Scotland to emphasis their trustworthiness will rapidly move elsewhere....
It's not a matter of trustworthiness, it will be perceived to be a foreign call centre, and a lot of companies make big play of not having foreign call centres.
Utter bollocks
No they are facts.
Suck it up Malcolm, post independence, you will be a foreign country to the rest of the UK, we will act accordingly.
Before I disappear, the main thing I took from last night's debate, an Independent Scotland's first act if it doesn't get a currency union will be to default on its liabilities.
As Sir Humphrey would say, that's a very courageous thing to do, and the money markets will reward an Independent Scotland for such courage.
You really are not too bright then. If you had listened he clearly said if you keep all the assets you obviously keep all the liabilities. Basic economics for dummies.
The really basic thing is that for there to be a successful negotiation both sides have to agree. Why would the rUK agree to Scotland walking away from its share of the debt? And how does Scotland prevent the rUK from levying tariffs on the 70% of Scotland's exports that go to the rUK? Sadly for the Scots the divorce negotiations will be very unequal. Scotland has no leverage. The cards are all stacked in rUK's favour.
Sky News - The Dirty Dozen seats that UKIP internal polling thinks they can win
Great Grimsby, Boston & Skegness, Great Yarmouth, Forest of Dean, Aylesbury, Thurrock, Sittingbourne & Sheppey, North Thanet, South Thanet, Eastleigh, Portsmouth South, East Worthing & Shoreham
Great Grimsby, Boston & Skegness, Great Yarmouth, Thurrock, North Thanet, South Thanet, Portsmouth South
Are the best chances amongst those
I'm starting to suspect that UKIP has a deeply misinformed understanding of what the term "marginal constituency" actually means.
The common definition of marginal is along the lines of "a seat where two or sometimes three parties are in close contention". UKIP's understanding of marginal seems to be "a seat anyone can win, even us".
Nothing else would explain as well why UKIP could possibly consider these seats "best chances".
Here are the 2010 results for those seats including UKIP:
Name MP CON LAB LIB UKIP Great Grimsby Austin Mitchell 10063 10777 7388 2043 Boston and Skegness Mark Simmonds 21325 8899 6371 4081 Great Yarmouth Brandon Lewis 18571 14295 6188 2066 Thurrock Jackie Doyle-Price 16869 16777 4901 3390 Thanet North Roger Gale 22826 9298 8400 2819 Thanet South Laura Sandys 22043 14426 6935 2529 Portsmouth South Mike Hancock 13721 5640 18921 876
In all cases note how UKIP came last, came in farcically far behind the winner, and in most cases was also miles behind the third-placed party. The least-worst effort was Thurrock, where they were only 1,800 votes behind the third-placed player, but this should be scant comfort because they were nearly 14,000 votes behind the winner.
To be a UKIPper optimistic about Portsmouth South is to be clinically delusional. From 876 votes in 2010, they're going to overturn an LD vote of nearly 19,000? They don't seem to have noticed that they're hated.
I actually agree with the comment that UKIP are being duped by their cannier enemies here. What is going on is IMHO a sort of Tory Operation Fortitude, where the UKIP mugs are being fooled into defending the Pas de Calais while the real action is in Normandy. They truly are a children's crusade.
Mr. G, if audience members are picked at random, it's entirely possible one side will get more supporters picked.
Also, the "If we're better together, why aren't we already better together?" nonsense was pointless. Did it raise an issue of economic, health, education, defence or foreign affairs importance? It was a waste of a question.
Mr. Eagles, interesting certainly, not sure I'd say fun.
Fun = Profitable for some legal establishments I know.
As someone who knows the Financial Services Industry and media rights quite well, it will be very fun.
One side impact I've heard rumoured is that if Scotland leave its been perceived that the accent may not be considered trustworthy.
So any call centres based in Scotland to emphasis their trustworthiness will rapidly move elsewhere....
It's not a matter of trustworthiness, it will be perceived to be a foreign call centre, and a lot of companies make big play of not having foreign call centres.
Utter bollocks
No they are facts.
Suck it up Malcolm, post independence, you will be a foreign country to the rest of the UK, we will act accordingly.
Mr. G, if audience members are picked at random, it's entirely possible one side will get more supporters picked.
Also, the "If we're better together, why aren't we already better together?" nonsense was pointless. Did it raise an issue of economic, health, education, defence or foreign affairs importance? It was a waste of a question.
Mr. Eagles, interesting certainly, not sure I'd say fun.
Fun = Profitable for some legal establishments I know.
As someone who knows the Financial Services Industry and media rights quite well, it will be very fun.
One side impact I've heard rumoured is that if Scotland leave its been perceived that the accent may not be considered trustworthy.
So any call centres based in Scotland to emphasis their trustworthiness will rapidly move elsewhere....
It's not a matter of trustworthiness, it will be perceived to be a foreign call centre, and a lot of companies make big play of not having foreign call centres.
Utter bollocks
No they are facts.
Suck it up Malcolm, post independence, you will be a foreign country to the rest of the UK, we will act accordingly.
Before I disappear, the main thing I took from last night's debate, an Independent Scotland's first act if it doesn't get a currency union will be to default on its liabilities.
As Sir Humphrey would say, that's a very courageous thing to do, and the money markets will reward an Independent Scotland for such courage.
You really are not too bright then. If you had listened he clearly said if you keep all the assets you obviously keep all the liabilities. Basic economics for dummies.
Which is a default.
Perhaps you should stick to talking about turnips, so you don't embarrass yourself any further.
Before I disappear, the main thing I took from last night's debate, an Independent Scotland's first act if it doesn't get a currency union will be to default on its liabilities.
As Sir Humphrey would say, that's a very courageous thing to do, and the money markets will reward an Independent Scotland for such courage.
You really are not too bright then. If you had listened he clearly said if you keep all the assets you obviously keep all the liabilities. Basic economics for dummies.
The really basic thing is that for there to be a successful negotiation both sides have to agree. Why would the rUK agree to Scotland walking away from its share of the debt? And how does Scotland prevent the rUK from levying tariffs on the 70% of Scotland's exports that go to the rUK? Sadly for the Scots the divorce negotiations will be very unequal. Scotland has no leverage. The cards are all stacked in rUK's favour.
SO , I agree it will be interesting but I do not think it will be as one sided as you believe. The world will be watching and they will need to be careful they don't spook the markets, it will not be all big tough George giving out orders for sure. There are some big ticket items that will not be easy.
Mr. G, if audience members are picked at random, it's entirely possible one side will get more supporters picked.
Also, the "If we're better together, why aren't we already better together?" nonsense was pointless. Did it raise an issue of economic, health, education, defence or foreign affairs importance? It was a waste of a question.
Mr. Eagles, interesting certainly, not sure I'd say fun.
Fun = Profitable for some legal establishments I know.
As someone who knows the Financial Services Industry and media rights quite well, it will be very fun.
One side impact I've heard rumoured is that if Scotland leave its been perceived that the accent may not be considered trustworthy.
So any call centres based in Scotland to emphasis their trustworthiness will rapidly move elsewhere....
It's not a matter of trustworthiness, it will be perceived to be a foreign call centre, and a lot of companies make big play of not having foreign call centres.
Utter bollocks
No they are facts.
Suck it up Malcolm, post independence, you will be a foreign country to the rest of the UK, we will act accordingly.
Malc, there will be no currency union. The UK party leaders have made it perfectly clear it's not happening and even assuming they were lying it would need to be put to referendum with rest of the UK and they would have the good sense to veto it.
Currency union is dead in the water.
You can have your own little currency and call it the Pound if you wish (you could call in the dollar, Euro, or whatever you want) But it won't be the GBP.
Can we move the debate on because it's getting boring TBH.
Before I disappear, the main thing I took from last night's debate, an Independent Scotland's first act if it doesn't get a currency union will be to default on its liabilities.
As Sir Humphrey would say, that's a very courageous thing to do, and the money markets will reward an Independent Scotland for such courage.
You really are not too bright then. If you had listened he clearly said if you keep all the assets you obviously keep all the liabilities. Basic economics for dummies.
The really basic thing is that for there to be a successful negotiation both sides have to agree. Why would the rUK agree to Scotland walking away from its share of the debt? And how does Scotland prevent the rUK from levying tariffs on the 70% of Scotland's exports that go to the rUK? Sadly for the Scots the divorce negotiations will be very unequal. Scotland has no leverage. The cards are all stacked in rUK's favour.
SO , I agree it will be interesting but I do not think it will be as one sided as you believe. The world will be watching and they will need to be careful they don't spook the markets, it will not be all big tough George giving out orders for sure.
I agree on spooking the markets. That's why I expect a currency union that involves Westminster signing off on Scotland's monetary and fiscal policy. Clearly Salmond does too. No wonder he does not want to get into detail!
On Sunday I had lunch with an executive of SITA-Aero and his family who are on holiday in the UK from Rome, Italy.
We were discussing salaries and living costs, when he told me tht his friend and family who recently moved from Rome to London (to work for Amadeus Capital), had found that notwithstanding the higher rental costs in London, that they were better off due to far lower taxes and lower day-to-day living costs.
So perhaps London as well as having become little-Paris, will now become little-Rome as well.
And perhaps little-Edinburgh when the more intelligent Scots move south in the event of independence.
They already have. The demos for the referendum is the losers without the gumption to have got out before now.
Before I disappear, the main thing I took from last night's debate, an Independent Scotland's first act if it doesn't get a currency union will be to default on its liabilities.
As Sir Humphrey would say, that's a very courageous thing to do, and the money markets will reward an Independent Scotland for such courage.
You really are not too bright then. If you had listened he clearly said if you keep all the assets you obviously keep all the liabilities. Basic economics for dummies.
The really basic thing is that for there to be a successful negotiation both sides have to agree. Why would the rUK agree to Scotland walking away from its share of the debt? And how does Scotland prevent the rUK from levying tariffs on the 70% of Scotland's exports that go to the rUK? Sadly for the Scots the divorce negotiations will be very unequal. Scotland has no leverage. The cards are all stacked in rUK's favour.
SO , I agree it will be interesting but I do not think it will be as one sided as you believe. The world will be watching and they will need to be careful they don't spook the markets, it will not be all big tough George giving out orders for sure. There are some big ticket items that will not be easy.
Hmmmm
got to say malc currently the PB Nat debate is a one man show and sort of has been from the first debate. The usual suspects Divvie, Stuart, Carnryx etc. are leaving you to it.
Mr. G, if audience members are picked at random, it's entirely possible one side will get more supporters picked.
Also, the "If we're better together, why aren't we already better together?" nonsense was pointless. Did it raise an issue of economic, health, education, defence or foreign affairs importance? It was a waste of a question.
Mr. Eagles, interesting certainly, not sure I'd say fun.
Fun = Profitable for some legal establishments I know.
As someone who knows the Financial Services Industry and media rights quite well, it will be very fun.
One side impact I've heard rumoured is that if Scotland leave its been perceived that the accent may not be considered trustworthy.
So any call centres based in Scotland to emphasis their trustworthiness will rapidly move elsewhere....
It's not a matter of trustworthiness, it will be perceived to be a foreign call centre, and a lot of companies make big play of not having foreign call centres.
Utter bollocks
No they are facts.
Suck it up Malcolm, post independence, you will be a foreign country to the rest of the UK, we will act accordingly.
Before I disappear, the main thing I took from last night's debate, an Independent Scotland's first act if it doesn't get a currency union will be to default on its liabilities.
As Sir Humphrey would say, that's a very courageous thing to do, and the money markets will reward an Independent Scotland for such courage.
You really are not too bright then. If you had listened he clearly said if you keep all the assets you obviously keep all the liabilities. Basic economics for dummies.
The really basic thing is that for there to be a successful negotiation both sides have to agree. Why would the rUK agree to Scotland walking away from its share of the debt? And how does Scotland prevent the rUK from levying tariffs on the 70% of Scotland's exports that go to the rUK? Sadly for the Scots the divorce negotiations will be very unequal. Scotland has no leverage. The cards are all stacked in rUK's favour.
SO , I agree it will be interesting but I do not think it will be as one sided as you believe. The world will be watching and they will need to be careful they don't spook the markets, it will not be all big tough George giving out orders for sure. There are some big ticket items that will not be easy.
Could you imagine what would happen if say Italy left the EU, but wanted to keep the Euro and European central bank (ECB) as lender of last resort. The EU told Italy this was not going to happen and that they would need to have their own currency. Italy then refused to repay any liabilities to the ECB. Italy would be turned into a basket case.
Mr. G, if audience members are picked at random, it's entirely possible one side will get more supporters picked.
Also, the "If we're better together, why aren't we already better together?" nonsense was pointless. Did it raise an issue of economic, health, education, defence or foreign affairs importance? It was a waste of a question.
Mr. Eagles, interesting certainly, not sure I'd say fun.
Fun = Profitable for some legal establishments I know.
As someone who knows the Financial Services Industry and media rights quite well, it will be very fun.
One side impact I've heard rumoured is that if Scotland leave its been perceived that the accent may not be considered trustworthy.
So any call centres based in Scotland to emphasis their trustworthiness will rapidly move elsewhere....
It's not a matter of trustworthiness, it will be perceived to be a foreign call centre, and a lot of companies make big play of not having foreign call centres.
Utter bollocks
No they are facts.
Suck it up Malcolm, post independence, you will be a foreign country to the rest of the UK, we will act accordingly.
Best quotes of the night: Audience member: "If we are Better Together, why are we not already Better Together?" Salmond: "When times are hard, we don't take it out on people with disabilities"
Those smug and oversimplifying quips show the abysmal level to which the debate fell.
Poor diddums, the truth hurts, not happy that you are shown up as cruel self seeking greedy barstewards.
I'm not asking much: I just would just occasionally like to see the muse of logic poking her head over the parapet. But maybe that's asking too much here. Actually, I'm not quite sure who "won" the debate.
Anyway, I look forward to wearing my "turnip" tee shirt with pride.
Before I disappear, the main thing I took from last night's debate, an Independent Scotland's first act if it doesn't get a currency union will be to default on its liabilities.
As Sir Humphrey would say, that's a very courageous thing to do, and the money markets will reward an Independent Scotland for such courage.
You really are not too bright then. If you had listened he clearly said if you keep all the assets you obviously keep all the liabilities. Basic economics for dummies.
The really basic thing is that for there to be a successful negotiation both sides have to agree. Why would the rUK agree to Scotland walking away from its share of the debt? And how does Scotland prevent the rUK from levying tariffs on the 70% of Scotland's exports that go to the rUK? Sadly for the Scots the divorce negotiations will be very unequal. Scotland has no leverage. The cards are all stacked in rUK's favour.
SO , I agree it will be interesting but I do not think it will be as one sided as you believe. The world will be watching and they will need to be careful they don't spook the markets, it will not be all big tough George giving out orders for sure. There are some big ticket items that will not be easy.
Could you imagine what would happen if say Italy left the EU, but wanted to keep the Euro and European central bank (ECB) as lender of last resort. The EU told Italy this was not going to happen and that they would need to have their own currency. Italy then refused to repay any liabilities to the ECB. Italy would be turned into a basket case.
Making up an imaginary completely different situation to try and support your mistaken opinion does not cut it. Answer this, If you take all the assets should you also take the liabilities, YES or NO. Scotland have offered to pay part of the UK's debts if they get a share of the assets, very fair indeed of them given it is the UK's debts. Greedy old UK want help with their debts and want to keep all the assets , is this fair.
Before I disappear, the main thing I took from last night's debate, an Independent Scotland's first act if it doesn't get a currency union will be to default on its liabilities.
As Sir Humphrey would say, that's a very courageous thing to do, and the money markets will reward an Independent Scotland for such courage.
Imagine on day 1 the Scots use the pound anyway - Sterlingisation. Having just concluded (or not) a bitter set of negotiations and refused to commit to the rUK it will pay its share of the debt service. So....on day one where is actual money coming from to pay Scottish public sector dues? Who is funding Scottish pensions or salaries? Certainly not the rUK Treasury. How long would it take a new Scotland to set up, collect, disburse actual wonga? From whom could it borrow money? This is an insurmountable practical obstacle. Debt share denial would lead to an overnight end of actual cashflows. It's a vacuous empty threat. 'If you won't let me rely on your taxpayers to back my banking system I will make Scottish public sector staff and pensioners and my whole country destitute in retaliation'. Good luck with that.
Mr. G, if audience members are picked at random, it's entirely possible one side will get more supporters picked.
Mr. Eagles, interesting certainly, not sure I'd say fun.
One side impact I've heard rumoured is that if Scotland leave its been perceived that the accent may not be considered trustworthy.
So any call centres based in Scotland to emphasis their trustworthiness will rapidly move elsewhere....
It's not a matter of trustworthiness, it will be perceived to be a foreign call centre, and a lot of companies make big play of not having foreign call centres.
Utter bollocks
No they are facts.
Suck it up Malcolm, post independence, you will be a foreign country to the rest of the UK, we will act accordingly.
Thus, the English should not have the Scots helping to make English-only decisions.
Maybe if you were remotely as clever as you think you are you would realise that England make 100% of Scotland's decisions.
If you feel that way why do you want the Bank of England controlling the currency in your newly foreign country? Man up indeed.
Monica, away and play with your dolls, this is grown ups talking
Bank of England, Malcolm. The clue is in the name.
Not too bright are we Monica, I live near Moscow but I am not Russian, it is all in the name.
You've lost me there. Are you feeling well?
Yes and as I thought your knowledge of Scotland and capability to think are not up to the task. Try harder, it is in the name.
Your joke would work if the Bank of England weren't in England. The clue's in the name.
OK, so you are stupid and unlikely to comprehend. It is the UK central bank belonging to Scotland , Northern Ireland , Wales and England. Is that simple enough for you. I know you think England = UK = Britain , but when you grow up you will find out that your geography is a bit iffy.
My tuppence worth - the debate last night did no one any credit. From the participants who just shouted at each other, to the broadcaster who got the tone wrong, the questions wrong, and the audience wrong.
TV debates are starting to grate. I'm going to back David Cameron if he scuttles any pre GE debates.
And post independence Scotland *will* use sterling whatever Better Off Together thinks. Darling may have got his hit in in debate 1, but focusing on that last night was a mistake. He should have gone for the hearts of those thinking of voting Yes instead.
Comments
The other logical possibility would be to devolve more power to county councils - but I really can't see that happening, because some of them (e.g. Rutland or Herefordshire) would be far too small to survive as autonomous entities (indeed, Wales is merging its 'principal areas' back together because they are so small). Lancashire or the divers parts of Yorkshire or indeed Kent would be OK.
Mercia
Wessex
Cornwall
Yorkshire
Northumbria
Sussex
Kent
Essex
East Anglia
Cumbria
Lancashire ?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-28934213
Some soldiers captured crossed the border by mistake.
I did the same thing the other week. I wondered why my clothes were soaking wet and everyone was speaking French. It was very embarrassing.
Are the best chances amongst those
I'd say their pollsters are Tory plants, making sure UKIP waste their resources.
Nothing will split England.
There is no risk to England.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-28933070
Against Islamist militias, it seems. Perhaps they could help out bombing ISIS too?
The best possible reason for an English parliament of course is that it would infuriate the EU, who would rightly see a united England as an insuperable barrier to their dream of a federal Europe of the regions, because it would be about the equivalent size of a united Spain or Poland. However, I think there are times when even getting on the wick of Jean-Claude Juncker should take second place to national interests.
So I say again it is sour grapes to say that Ipsos Mori rigged the audience.
How could I forget!
Or maybe we could talk about plants and how they would thrive in the Forest?!
If you introduce political divisions within a state you create an inherent potential for disagreement and conflict, which can widen quickly. Three centuries of union could end in about three weeks after just 17 years of devolution.
Being blasé about that prospect was clearly a mistake, and not one we should hurry to repeat.
Money would be a critical problem. London gets more spending, and contributes more, than anywhere else. Under divided England it may very well feel it gets a rough deal (sending money elsewhere), and the other areas may feel they get a rough deal (less spending per head than London). That won't change and will only lead to rising resentment and bitterness.
No nation state has a god-given right to survive.
Slash fiction can be pretty remarkable. Many authors pay no attention to silly concepts like plausibility, biology, historical accuracy, or textual evidence.
''Call me old fashioned but when you put a tax on on the very poorest for having a spare bedroom ''
The spare room is being paid for by taxpayers. Taxpayers, many of them poor taxpayers - with the nerve to actually go out and work for a living, paying for a room for people living off state benefits which claimants do not need - whilst people who do need one find there are none available because they are occupied by selfish benefit claimants.
Why should taxpayers pay money to people on benefits for a benefit they do not need.
Mr. G, if one side are louder and, by chance, get picked more often by the moderator it gives a misleading picture.
Next, they will convince Farage to stand against Boris in Uxbridge.
It might work, but again, making sure the revamped Lords was not invariably swamped by English members would be quite tricky.
"The advent of the new individual savings accounts (NISA) produced a surge in savings in July, according to the British Bankers' Association (BBA). The new ISA, with a higher £15,000 annual limit, was announced in the Budget but came into effect on 1 July. The BBA says an extra £4.9bn was put into NISA accounts offered by its members."
http://www.thestar.com/news/world/2011/06/29/most_residents_think_jamaica_better_off_as_a_british_colony_poll_suggests.html
Suck it up Malcolm, post independence, you will be a foreign country to the rest of the UK, we will act accordingly.
But in MalcolmG world, no companies don't make an issue of not having foreign call centres.
A consumer backlash against foreign call centres has led some companies to return operations to the UK. After all the talk of lower costs, where did it all go wrong?
....The issue has now become such a national bugbear some companies are using their UK-only call centre policy as a marketing tool. Natwest's latest advertising campaign guarantees that customers speak to people in Barnsley or Cardiff, rather than Bombay or Calcutta.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/6353491.stm
Grow up and try to act like an adult, we are perfectly capable of managing our own affairs and the pathetic whinging from you southern Tories shows exactly why we should not have you making our decisions.
75%+ 1.88
70-75% 3.65
65-70% 6.4
20 bar
I would be very sorry indeed if post-independence the call centres were moved from Scotland to say, Manchester, which is an almost impossible accent for me to understand over a phone wire, because for me it's always been about the accent, not the location.
Salmond needed to win the debate though, Darling didn't.
Hopefully a close "No" result.
55-45 is how I think it might end up at the moment.
You really are a turnip aren't you. I'm neither Southern, nor a little Englander.
Next you'll be calling me a racist far right extremist.
Maybe if you were remotely as clever as you think you are you would realise that England make 100% of Scotland's decisions.
On Sunday I had lunch with an executive of SITA-Aero and his family who are on holiday in the UK from Rome, Italy.
We were discussing salaries and living costs, when he told me tht his friend and family who recently moved from Rome to London (to work for Amadeus Capital), had found that notwithstanding the higher rental costs in London, that they were better off due to far lower taxes and lower day-to-day living costs.
So perhaps London as well as having become little-Paris, will now become little-Rome as well.
Trying to be a smart arse does not suit you, you are not very good at it.
PS: Trying to play the pathetic racist card was cheap
Whereas as UK based ones, have a bit more flexibility, is why I was with Cellnet/o2 for sixteen years, they had UK based call centres.
Re accents, having called EE a lot recently, the accent I struggle with the most is the North Eastern one.
Anyway, I'm rather pathetically contributing-
Faisal Islam said last night that wordwide data suggests a 12% swing to the status quo in the last weeks of a indy ref campaign...
I see you've not been able to repudiate the facts and links I've posted, but when it comes to being an arse, I shall bow down to your brilliance, perhaps one day, you'll engage with the arguments and leave out the insults.
I would like to think that the likely No vote will put the issue to bed for a good number of years - and thus see a reduction in the number of aggressive posts on here that this topic as generated. But I fear it won't.
In many ways, the SNP need No to win. With a Yes vote, their reason for existing is rather diminished. After all, when you exist to gain independence - you do rather need to reinvent yourself if that ever happens.
Both ideas - up to 7 votes if you contribute versus one if you only take out, and a Governor General of the UK - seem like quite good wheezes to me.
More like a neep than a turnip. Not sure whether he is a swede or a turnip and so mashed up and confused that its true identity has to be masked by gravy.
I must have looked very strange at dinner on Saturday. Although looking at the bill the waiters at the restaurant were equally confused...
Personally I would be happy to see an independent Scotland. But that does not seem to be the way things are heading.
But an end to Referendum discussion on here will still be very welcome.
So many key questions were not asked and so few answers given. Darling looked nervous and missed many good opportunities. The crowd was aggressive and the lady who laid into Darling shows just why so many good people will quit Scotland if independence comes.
The event certainly did not convince me or anyone at our company to switch votes. I think the battle lines have been set and today the voting starts. I predict turnout will be high which will help the no campaign.
I always thought multiple voting sounded a good wheeze as well (in fact, due to a loophole I had two votes myself for some years) but in this country it became associated with the rich elites via the university vote and the landlord votes. That's probably why the UNDHR states that all votes for all people must be equal in value.
Does seem a bit strange and perverse though that Tristram Hunt, Michael Gove and I have the same voting power despite the great disparity in our intellects. However, since under the Shute system that would remain the same - after all, on paper they are almost as qualified and experienced as I am, as well as rather richer - I suppose it doesn't matter a lot in practice.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebec_referendum,_1995#Opinion_Polling
As Sir Humphrey would say, that's a very courageous thing to do, and the money markets will reward an Independent Scotland for such courage.
Take less drink the next time you are out and as you spent your time eavesdropping , try to get a friend and have company when you go for a meal so that you can have a discussion and not have to spend your time earwigging and misunderstanding others conversations.
Sad loner mishears conversation in restaurant and gets 2+2 =5
"Pancreatic cancer sufferers in Wales will be at a disadvantage to their English counterparts if a new drug is only partially approved for use on the Welsh NHS, campaigners have warned.
Abraxane, which will help to extend the lives of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer, will be made available free to patients in England following a decision by the Cancer Drugs Fund to add the drug to its list.
But it is feared the All Wales Medical Strategy Group’s (AWMSG) will only partially recommended the treatment – in combination with another drug called gemcitabine – which means hundreds of sufferers in Wales could miss out.
Currently, pancreatic cancer is the fifth most common cancer killer in the UK with almost 8,800 people diagnosed each year."
http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/local-news/could-pancreatic-cancer-sufferers-wales-7666831
Must be an outlier...
Put it this way, the North East and Yorkshire will be boomville if Scotland votes Yes...
Basic economics for dummies.
The common definition of marginal is along the lines of "a seat where two or sometimes three parties are in close contention". UKIP's understanding of marginal seems to be "a seat anyone can win, even us".
Nothing else would explain as well why UKIP could possibly consider these seats "best chances".
Here are the 2010 results for those seats including UKIP:
Name MP CON LAB LIB UKIP
Great Grimsby Austin Mitchell 10063 10777 7388 2043
Boston and Skegness Mark Simmonds 21325 8899 6371 4081
Great Yarmouth Brandon Lewis 18571 14295 6188 2066
Thurrock Jackie Doyle-Price 16869 16777 4901 3390
Thanet North Roger Gale 22826 9298 8400 2819
Thanet South Laura Sandys 22043 14426 6935 2529
Portsmouth South Mike Hancock 13721 5640 18921 876
In all cases note how UKIP came last, came in farcically far behind the winner, and in most cases was also miles behind the third-placed party. The least-worst effort was Thurrock, where they were only 1,800 votes behind the third-placed player, but this should be scant comfort because they were nearly 14,000 votes behind the winner.
To be a UKIPper optimistic about Portsmouth South is to be clinically delusional. From 876 votes in 2010, they're going to overturn an LD vote of nearly 19,000? They don't seem to have noticed that they're hated.
I actually agree with the comment that UKIP are being duped by their cannier enemies here. What is going on is IMHO a sort of Tory Operation Fortitude, where the UKIP mugs are being fooled into defending the Pas de Calais while the real action is in Normandy. They truly are a children's crusade.
Perhaps you should stick to talking about turnips, so you don't embarrass yourself any further.
Currency union is dead in the water.
You can have your own little currency and call it the Pound if you wish (you could call in the dollar, Euro, or whatever you want) But it won't be the GBP.
Can we move the debate on because it's getting boring TBH.
got to say malc currently the PB Nat debate is a one man show and sort of has been from the first debate. The usual suspects Divvie, Stuart, Carnryx etc. are leaving you to it.
Could you imagine what would happen if say Italy left the EU, but wanted to keep the Euro and European central bank (ECB) as lender of last resort. The EU told Italy this was not going to happen and that they would need to have their own currency. Italy then refused to repay any liabilities to the ECB. Italy would be turned into a basket case.
Anyway, I look forward to wearing my "turnip" tee shirt with pride.
The chart above has been revised. YES price now back to pre-debate level on Betfair.
Answer this, If you take all the assets should you also take the liabilities, YES or NO.
Scotland have offered to pay part of the UK's debts if they get a share of the assets, very fair indeed of them given it is the UK's debts.
Greedy old UK want help with their debts and want to keep all the assets , is this fair.
Fingers crossed we'll have a say in 'Should we have a currency union with an independent Scotland?'
Is that simple enough for you.
I know you think England = UK = Britain , but when you grow up you will find out that your geography is a bit iffy.
TV debates are starting to grate. I'm going to back David Cameron if he scuttles any pre GE debates.
And post independence Scotland *will* use sterling whatever Better Off Together thinks. Darling may have got his hit in in debate 1, but focusing on that last night was a mistake. He should have gone for the hearts of those thinking of voting Yes instead.